The gamecock. (Columbia, S.C.) 1908-2006, October 23, 1972, Page Page 2, Image 2
'Ian and
BY BOB CRAFT "Tommy" i
fell short.
Really don't mind if you sit this one out However,
My words but a whisper, your deafness a SHOUT. piece was p
I may make you feel, but I can't make you think... ordinary roc
Ian Anderson For the fii
"Thick As A Brick" to represeni
Those are the opening lines to the gargantuan song, but power u
"Thick As A Brick" done by Jethro Tull. The guiding for a purpc
genius behind Tull is Ian Anderson, a man who is music, powc
addicted to swallow tailed coats and scratching his end unto its
crotch on stage. This powe
For all of you who don't know Jethro Tull was a will define
gentleman farmer and agricultural innovator who derson's v<
lived in England during the early eighteenth century. acoustic, fiI
He invented the first practical seed drill on his farm ends with s
at Crowmarsh in Berkshire between the years 1699 more clear
and 1709. He is called by some the father of the strings in I
agricultural revolution. failing run
So away from Restoration plows and back to music. The who]
When I first heard the album 'Thick As A Brick' presentatioi
and thought about it, I came to the conclusion that a firm hanc
Anderson had closed the gap between rock and The lyrics
serious music. I had the reaction that this finished the packagi
the work started by Lennon in "Sgt. Pepper" many was a tour-c
moons ago. Stones unzil
There had been some feeble attempts, Pink Floyd's So I was
Atom Heart Mother Suite for example, and The Who's represented
Polanski shows Eliz
love of blood and '
BYis most evident in the violence of
BY DAID SIPSONthe film. Bodies are decapitated,
The presentation of children brutally murdered, blood
hespresntdation th flows freely, and Macbeth's head is
Shakespearean drama onuthe waved through the air on a pike.
screen has always been a touchy TeEiaehnpro a
subject. Most often, such films are voe aboya vi d not
directed by aspiring directors or
ones who feel they have reached just receive a flesh wound from a
enough stature to attempt such a sword with a four inch blade.
limit. This year, we have Macbeth,
directed by the famed Polish [ _film review
director, Roman Polanski, con
sisting of the madness and violence Whether or not it is too violent,
that so captivates him. Polanski however is up to the individual.
dominates the film, initiating some Jon Finch, although not an out
good points but also some bad. It is standing Shakespearean actor,
a curious film and one worth seeing manages to convey the transitions
if you are at all interested in from loyalty to murder and
Shakespeare and-or Polanski. madness quite well. Whatever
It is evident from the beginning shortcomings he expresses in the
that Polanski went to great pains in beginning as the doubtful lord
perfecting the locale, sets, and aspiring to become king, he
props. It is a well produced film, overcomes as the ruthless ruler
beautifully photographed amid the determined to keep his kingdom
rolling hills and castles of the even though he must d iend it
British Isles. Polanski undoubtably alone. He expresses great force in
strives for realism in the film. This his character in the latter part of
Monday N1aig
Stuent Specod;avitmdi o
Ustciv aClehoe Sfroma
Whe herior nof otais tovlet
JonFinh,alaug noan ut
WadnesssqiAedwelllWhateve
shotcoing hersA ses inVthe
beginnig UMsAh SOU TH lor
the Rabbi
nd Jesus Christ, Superstar," to do it. All
the consistancy and the way in which the
resented convinced me that this was no
k album, but a work of art.
at time, I heard electric music presented
power, not blind power like Mountain,
ed as an artistic tool. Power that is used
;e, power that is used to enhance the
r that is used as a means and not as an
elf.
r was alternated with acoustic, which I
as the flute, acoustic guitar, and An
ice. These two factions, power and
ht with each other, until as it begins, it
coustic dominance. This is made even
with the entrance of the orchestrated
he final moments, and the desparate,
f power against the strings.
e development of theme, method of
and technical excellent assured me that
was at the helm.
were actually worth serious reading and
ig of the album, in that bogus newspaper
e-force that has not been done since the
ped "Sticky Fingers."
looking forward to seeing Tull. They
music in a genre that has had a tendency
abethan
iolence
the play.
Lady Macbeth's charac
terization, however, lacks the
depth and smoothness found in
Macbeth's. It seems that Polanski
is not as concerned with this
character as he is with Macbeth.
Thus, Lady Macbeth does not
appear as dominant as she should
in convincing Macbeth to kill
Duncan, the king. Her descent to
madness seems all too sudden, and
with no transition, as we see her
unconsciously trying to rub
imaginary blood from her hands.
In "Macbeth", Polanski has
introduced some new ideas. He has
made the two main characters
young, for aggression is far more
prevalent in youth. He has also
brought out the violence that the
Elizabethans so loved to see in the
theatre of that day. Although there
are some major flaws, the film is
good. It is handled with the care
and precision that is so often
lacking in the cinema today.
it
lal
Reservations N
Please 1
IVE POINTS
;AROLUNA 29205
t Suit'
to slip into noise.
The half hour to set up finally passed and Tull came
on stage and started into "Thick As A Brick."
About ten minutes into the piece I found that my
ears were hurting from the volume of the amplifiers,
it was breaking my concentration on the music. For
the next day and half, in fact, my ears would ring and
buzz from the homicidal onslaught of Tull's amps.
Then I started to wonder, is the musical excellance
of a band worth having your hearing faculties
assaulted and perhaps damaged?
For in the strictest sense, your ears are also
musical instruments, and without them music is
meaningless. And what sort of band would try to
cripple their audience?
Well, I tried making some adjustments, like putting
my. hand over my stageside ear.
I settled down and tried to listen to some music.
Then the threatrics started.
Actually, they had been there all along, but I was
too worried about going deaf. It really got bad in the
halfway point of the piece. There was Ian Anderson
parading about the stage in a white rabbit suit.
It was too much. Alice Cooper, I can understand
because he has nothing musically to offer his
audience, but Tull, why? Anderson has proven again
and again his musical ability, why this? Why the low
brow jokes? Why John Evan, the Keyboard man, in a
Gorilla suit throwing banana peels into the audience?
Why?
As the concert goers fought each other for the
banana peels, as they screamed "Pig! Pig!" at a
policeman during one of the important passages of
the piece, I understood.
The average concert-goer is not there for music, he
is there to be "turned on."
Alice Cooper's problems started because they no
longer faced hostile audiences but audiences who
desired to be grossed out.
The entire concert was geared around Anderson
telling the audience to go to hell and the audience was '1
too stupid to notice it.
Every time he scratched his crotch, every time he
shot a gig, it was not the action of a comrade, but of
someone who was insulting you but you weren't quite
sure he was.
The theatrics seems to say, "Sure we could play the
music better, but why should we? "Jethro Tull made
fools out of everyone in that auditorium and all the
audience could say, was, "Wow what a good con
cert."
You allow banalities to play the music loud.
You allow bullshit to cloud the music. You allow it
and so it happens.
The plebian sense of the average person who goes
to rock concerts stays the same. "I went to Tull and I
was so stoned, I don't remember a thing."
And so, because he has to face puerile jerks, who
don't know anything, the artist eventually is faced
with corruption because there is no one to keep him
on his toes.
So you get ripped and go to Tull, and you still don't
know what music is and to top it, you don't even know
when you're being spit on.
ri OpeninHy
~erde -bhrbor -eg
ev Us ed ant~dt1busec7