BRAIN TUBA: A Day In The Life
Jesse Jarnow
2001-05-21
1. Rock and Roll The morning jabbed harshly at my eyelids. The night before had been a ginseng and marijuana-fueled orgy of guitar playing, improv theater, and general lunacy during which I ricocheted back and forth across campus, ending with a sunrise listening to "American Beauty" in the kitchen of my house. Rock and roll, baby. I only say this because the last thing I did before passing into a half-sleep at around 8 was to set my alarm clock for 11, so I could get up for a free ride and ticket to the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and Museum at noon. The irony wasn't lost on me. I accidentally set the alarm for 10, though, and - after it went off - I lay in bed, unable to fall back asleep, and feeling like absolute shit. My eyes traced the sunlight pouring into the room through the high windows. On my ceiling, I noticed a rainbow over my desk -- not a prism, but a full-on, arced rainbow. I stared for a while in disbelief. Not knowing what phenomenon of nature might be causing it, I drowsily grabbed for my Polaroid, which happened to be sitting on the bookshelf next to my bed, and took a picture. I marveled at the rainbow for a while longer and waited for the photo to develop. The rainbow didn't come out. By that point, some of the magic of the situation had worn off and curiosity had kicked in. The rainbow hadn't moved, so it was obviously coming from a somewhat stable source besides the sunlight. I padded over to the spot and looked around. I quickly found the culprit: a CD lying upside down atop my ZIP drive. I flipped the CD over to see what it was. The Disco Biscuits: March 27, 1999. My first encounter with the show, a year and a half ago, involved seeing a magnificent double rainbow reveal itself over the industrial wilds of New Jersey while we stood in the parking lot of a shopping mall and listened to Magellan. This was not an insignificant encounter and the version became known to us as "the Rainbow Magellan.” The coincidence startled me, and I slumped into my desk chair to write an email to my friend about it. Before I did so, I instinctively clicked on "get mail." One of the first pieces I received was a two-line email from the same friend, wishing Magellan a happy birthday -- the Biscuits had premiered two years ago on that very day, April 22nd. Strange things were afoot, and - theoretically - I was prepared. 2. Tropical Hot Dog Night The first thing I saw when I walked into the Rock and Hall of Fame and Museum, hanging from the ceiling in front of the entryway, was the Phish hot dog. The hot dog was used by the band on December 31, 1994 and again on December 31, 1999 as part of their New Year's Eve celebrations. On the first occasion, at the old Boston Garden, the band climbed into the hot dog with their instruments and played Auld Lang Syne as the hot dog lifted off the stage and flew over the crowd. On the second occasion, just before midnight at the Big Cypress Indian Reservation in Florida, the band rode from the back of the crowd in a giant replica of an airboat (whose image had been used extensively in advance promotion of the event). As they got closer to the stage, the sides of the airboat suddenly fell away to reveal the hot dog underneath. Predictably, the crowd went berserk. It was a moment of history relived for those who had missed it the first time as well as for those who had been there in 1994.
The hot dog itself was undoubtedly a symbol of Phish's history, often invoked in arguments between heads, but it was one without a fixed meaning. For people who claimed that the band was losing its sense of humor, the hot dog became the benchmark of pranksterdom, with many arguing that the things the band had done after that never lived up to it. For others, the hot dog was symbolic of the band's increasing visibility, and an omen of things to come so far as the scale of things went. Pretty much all of these interpretations were utterly ignored by the Rock Hall -- which is really perfectly okay. Sometimes a hot dog is just a hot dog, even if four grown men do climb into it from time to time and play phallic instruments. By its placement in a museum context, though, it has become indisputably something more than a silly stunt the band pulled. Just as Phishheads claim the hot dog for their historical needs, so does the - er - "official" institution of rock and roll. 3. Liberation Station I hadn't been to the Rock Hall in about two years. My initial impressions of the place were negative, though probably for no more articulate a reason than because it seemed the sensible position to hold. This time around - the trip was with a history seminar about museums and the construction of knowledge - my discontent was a little more realized. In short: the Rock and Hall of Fame should be laughed at by any serious historian. The museum is clearly aimed towards fans, though the steep ticket price (over $15) is undoubtedly a deterrent. Once inside, one enters a controlled chaos. Though rock certainly has the power to move large groups of people, the experience is still ultimately personal and intimate. Except at one or two overcrowded kiosks, some live footage of Jimi Hendrix, and the John Lennon exhibit (see below), I don't think one has the opportunity to listen to an entire song. The constant bombardment of sounds and images prevents the visitor from latching onto one narrative, either emotional or linear. A typical display is packed ridiculously tight with artifacts. As one inspects them, no less than half a dozen monitors and speakers constantly loop, attempting to draw the viewer to them. There is hardly time or space for the viewer to contemplate and digest what he is seeing. The idea that there is any thought put into any of the music is quite absent. Throughout the museum, the curators attempt to create a narrative of liberation. It is the overriding theme in the label copy and presentation method. There is something undoubtedly rebellious about rock and roll. The items presented in the Rock Hall are then supposed to be interpreted as such: deviations from the norm. Rock's rebellions, like most art forms, come in waves. The presentation of these waves was far more about spectacle than any explanation of why the forms were dissident. For example, an exploration of sexual meanings is something that has long been apparent in rock, from the early criticism of the Beatles' long hair as feminine (as if it were a bad thing) to serious gender bending on the parts of people like David Bowie, Lou Reed, and Mick Jagger. Of these, at least Bowie and Jagger's costumes lie behind glass cases in various spots - celebrated, for sure - but there is no serious exploration of the deviation. Why, precisely, is this rebellious? What does it mean? Or is it just the superficial glamour of it all? The keynote was struck quite well by two short films that one watches immediately upon entrance to the first level of exhibits. Each equated early rock and roll with rebellion, but did so superficially, giving no more detail or evidence than typically ironic footage of '50s households. Nor does the Rock Hall acknowledge that rock's act of rebellion is, by definition, incomplete. Punk, for example, was a rebellion against the perceived failure and subsequent institutionalization of hippie idealism -- a connection left virtually unexplored in the museum's nostalgia trip. Allowing that the waves are somehow connected in terms of cause and effect results in a more complex (and historically accurate) picture. If the existence of the Rock Hall itself isn't enough to suggest an institutionalization (and commodification) of rebellion, then it is further proved by the fact that the bulk of the items exhibited were donated by the musicians themselves. David Bowie, for example, wasn't represented before he donated a series of costumes. Likewise, several undoubtedly important figures who didn't actively sanction the Hall's program (such as Bob Dylan) are nearly absent. Does this automatically ban "true" rebels who refuse to even acknowledge a system of interpretation? Likewise, what does it say that the musicians, in a sense, get to choose what it is represented?
4. Imagine The centerpiece exhibit on John Lennon might not have literally been curated by Yoko Ono, but it could've been. It seemed that every item on display came from Yoko (and therefore concentrated mostly on Lennon's post-Beatles career). Likewise, the exhibit smacked of the John/Yoko aesthetic: clean off-white walls with breathing room between the artifacts, peace and love, and a mildly pranksterish sense of humor. This was, perhaps, the only exhibit in the museum to employ one solid narrative voice. This provokes the question of whether or not it's better to have one strong voice or one which represents a multiplicity of viewpoints. In the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and Museum, employing Yoko's voice and seeing it through was perfectly refreshing. In what can only be called the shrine room, filled with handwritten lyrics and bathed in a soothing angelic light, entire songs played at comfortable volumes. Because it only presented one side of the story, though, it also disregarded a significant part of the story: the fact that John Lennon spent the bulk of the 1970s a paranoid alcoholic. Perhaps that's not the point. Two items, both placed near the entrance to the exhibit, create a sense of the whole Lennon piece as well as the strongest impressions in the entirety of the Rock Hall. The first is the Yoko Phone. On top of a white table, next to a white chair, is a white phone (keypad covered with a white panel). The copy reads "when phone rings, please pick up receiver and talk to Yoko." Apparently, Yoko Ono has a direct line to the phone and calls every now and again. A guard told me that she will talk for as long as whoever picks up the phone wants to. The other item, right before the Yoko Phone, is the most powerful thing I have ever seen in a museum. It is contained within a tall, monolithic display case. One must lean in to see what is inside. What he sees is a bag labeled "New York City Police Department." The label copy, by Yoko, indicates that the bag contains the clothing that Lennon was wearing when he was murdered by Mark David Chapman outside the Dakota in New York City on December 8, 1980. In a smaller window next to the bag are Lennon's glasses, streaked with his blood. I should explain that I pretty much have only one recurring nightmare: seeing John Lennon get shot. When the dream occurs, and it's surfaced maybe five or six times in the past five years, it happens in a loop. In one version, I knew it was coming and ran away, only to see it happen simultaneously on every street corner in sight. The shudder that ran through me when I saw the glasses might be the most purely visceral experience I've ever had -- subconscious crashing to the surface and gasping for air. 5. Get Back The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame is not a museum in the intellectual sense, though it may promote a sense of wonderment for those who have already been affected profoundly and abstractly by the music. What does it accomplish, then? If anything, the unfinished song clips left me hugely unsatisfied -- making me want to charge out and, if nothing else, listen to music (it's convenient that the escalator down to the main floor dumps one right into the woefully pathetic and bloody expensive gift-cum-record shop). More simply, though, I wanted some time alone with the music. While celebrating rock's historical legacy, the museum neglected to discuss listener reception, nor did it even really ever consider the listener to actually be a listener, as opposed to a consumer. I'm not fundamentally opposed to the idea of a museum dedicated to rock and roll. If done right - and, in some ways, the Lennon exhibit was done right because it was done without apparent compromise - it can lead the visitor to a better understanding of the art. The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and Museum only reinforces rock's worst bombastic qualities without their effects, either sociologically or individually. I've gotta say: Graceland does it better. Epilogue. Mystery Train A few days later, I was in my housemate's room. We were listening to "Beggar's Banquet" by the Rolling Stones. Or maybe it was "Let It Bleed." One of the country albums. I marveled at what it might've been like to have been a Stones' fan in the late '60s, or a music fan in general. The rock press barely existed, and where it did it was still devoted far more to myth making than myth breaking. Rock itself still held the promise of rebellion. The sense of community around rock and roll, I think, was quite different. People liked music, not so much specific bands. There was no Internet and the amount of information available about a given group was scarce. What would it have been like to know nothing about a group other than what could be derived from new records released once or twice a year? "During the time of Sgt. Pepper," David Bowman writes in "This Must Be The Place," "publicity photographs... showed the Beatles playing brass instruments. Many American suburbanites, both children and their parents, assumed that these photographs were for real, that the Beatles were so gifted they actually played all the instruments that were recorded on their psychedelic albums. We hadn't yet heard of studio musicians (Bowman 21).” With 30 years of hindsight, that's hilarious. There's something quaint about it: to know nothing about the music other than what one can infer from the jacket or second-hand knowledge. Wonderment, baby. It also reinforces the idea of rock and roll as fantasy. I remember listening to "Beggar's Banquet" when I was in junior high school and deriving creation myths for the songs, fictional stories as to why Mick had done this and why Keith had done that.
In some ways, being able to go up and talk to a musician after a show - as one can do at most jamband gigs - is nice, but it also removes a layer of personality one can impose on the music. Knowing only the music, one must make up the rest: meaning, circumstance, and reception. Seeing a gigantic rock concert can be liberating because one is free to make up stories, to speculate. Somewhat paradoxically, the music can become even more personal.
What does the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and Museum do in all of this? The worst possible thing: it reinforces myth without wonderment. Jesse Jarnow just doesn't know anymore. --
Back to Jarnow |