Reading:
- Steve Waksman (1999) “Black Sound, Black Body: Jimi Hendrix, the Electric Guitar and the Meanings of Blackness,” Popular Music and Society. Focus especially on second half of article.
Listening:
- Jimi Hendrix tracks, “Star-Spangled Banner” (Woodstock version); "Voodoo Child (Slight Return);" or any others posted on Blackboard
- The "Voodoo Chile" track that Waksman mentions is the video above
10 comments:
Question: We have discussed the idea of artists being transgressive extensively in class. I think we can all agree that Hendrix was a transgressive artist. However, was it his own radical interpretation of blues or any other then-current genre of music that violated then-current standards or was it his race?
Artifact discussion:
To be honest, I hadn’t heard a lot of Jimi Hendrix or knew a whole lot about his music prior to reading the Waksman article or listening to his tracks. My first impression of Hendrix is that he is extremely radical and it seems to me that he would take a pleasure in taking his audience to another world through his play on stereophonics and radical performances. After listening to “Voodoo Child (Slight Return),” I found this play on the stereophonics to induce a dizzy, psychedelic effect. In my opinion, Hendrix is trying to transport the audience into his mind – one that always bustling with music, among other things, as discussed in the Waksman article. Moreover, the Woodstock version of the “Star-Spangled Banner” was completely radical and was such a crazy perspective on a song that was known to millions at the time.
With reference to the “Star-Spangled Banner,” it is very inspirational to see an artist try to put their perspective on something that has been established for so long. I feel this is what made Hendrix the focus on hypersexuality and hypermasculinity. Many people wanted to see what made Hendrix have the drive and bravery to challenge social, cultural, and musical norms and it seems like academics have agreed on making Hendrix superhuman. This would explain why so much focus has been on his prodigious features and stamina; and his ostentatious and flamboyant performances. Ultimately, as Waksman states, we will never know what would have happened if Hendrix were alive today. However, we do know for sure that if he were still his imagination and talent for pushing social and musical boundaries would still be here.
Discussion Question:
I read on Wikipedia that Jimi Hendrix was inspired to dress like and play music like how Little Richard does. Having a background about the latter’s career from what we discussed in class, I was wondering whether Hendrix was inspired to make music with sexual motives or whether music came before his demonstrations of sexual prowess with his guitar.
Artifact Discussion:
From listening to the songs of Jimi Hendrix, it is evident that his music employs various musical elements that make him seem powerful to both genders – women find him sexually attractive, while men are captivated by his talent and authority. His music contains all of the qualities related to the “true meaning of blackness” listed in the Waksman article: “orality, physicality, emotionalism, spirituality, and improvisation.” (Waksman 84)
Jimi Hendrix demonstrates orality through the “words” spoken via electric guitar: he uses his instrument to express himself musically and even sexually. Also, his physicality is evident through the “wah wahs” and high-pitched passages in his songs. Both of these elements communicate physical desire through their sounds – first, the “wah wahs” have a edgy if even rugged sound that is masculine to the ear, and second, the high-pitched passages from Hendrix’s guitar resemble a male singer’s falsetto. Not only does Hendrix aim to express physical emotions, but also other emotions ranging from happiness to grief through the ups and downs of his music, which are especially evident in “Voodoo Chile”. Spirituality is an interesting topic to relate to the guitarist, but the Waksman article brings up the intriguing point that Hendrix “was continually striving to push against the boundaries of both music and race” even though his hopes for creating a utopia through his electric guitar was impossible. (Waksman 109) And of course, improvisation is definitely evident in the solo passages, both long and short, in his songs; even the two Star-Spangled Banner versions that we listened to include numerous improvised extensions of the original national anthem in addition to ones Hendrix added in to give the song a new twist.
Question:
Ron Wellburn claims, “We should all, then, re-establish ourselves as musicians: every black American can at least become a drummer or learn to play on a simple reed flute, just as every black person can dance” (Waksman, 83). Later in Waksman’s article, we learn that, in Hendrix’s perceptions, “white musicians [could] play the blues as authentically as blacks” (Waksman, 87). To what degree did Hendrix’s perception on this issue affect critics’ perception of Hendrix himself as an artist?
Artifact Discussion:
Jimi Hendrix was definitely a transgressive artist. He seems rather radical in his actions, music, and dance moves (e.g. his overtly phallic use of his guitar). Despite his transgressiveness, or perhaps because of it, Hendrix’s music was of a very high quality. I listened to “Voodoo Chile” and was thoroughly impressed by the musicality expressed. I can definitely see, even without the visual image of any of his performances, why Jimi would be the focus of hypersexuality. In the beginning of “Voodoo Chile,” his raspy voice comes through, seductively groaning, “The night I was born/ I swear the moon turned a fire red.” The guitar solo from around time 3:12 to 3:27 emphasizes Hendrix’s marvelously performed bluesy guitar fills. His hypermasculinity is also realized in this song. His boastful, masculine lyrics such as, “Well I’ll make love to you in your sleep / And God knows you’ll feel no pain,” provide examples of this. Hendrix performs with much greater musicality than many of the artists we have previously discussed in class. The call and response of the instruments from 6:17 to 6:25, the balance of instruments, and the incredibly virtuous solos throughout the piece testify to this statement.
I also listened to the song “If 6 Was 9.” The theme of the song is an "individualist anthem.” The lyrics portray the underlying conflict of the counterculture of the 1960s: the dichotomies between the hippies and the white collared conservative business world of the establishment. Hendrix epitomizes the existentialist voice of the youth movement: "I'm the one that's got to die when it's time for me to die/so let me live my life/the way I want to.” He wants the audience to know that he and the youth movement are individuals by asserting “I got my own world to live through/ And I ain’t gonna copy you.” Furthermore, in this song, like in “Voodoo Chile,” the musicality perfectly matches the intended style of the song. His excellent musicianship widens the potential impact of his lyrics on the culture.
Question:
Waksman draws strong links blackness and hyper-masculinity, a connection we made in class when talking about figures like Barry White. He also explains that Jimi Hendrix music rejects many of the musical codes notable in “African-American music”. She describes his music as “crossover”, and even provides examples of Jimi’s rejection of race in general. If Elvis opened masculinity to feminine codes with his performance and style, can we say that Jimi Hendrix opened it to gender ambiguity?
Artifact Discussion:
When I first saw the Star-Spangled Banner on the list of listenings, I wondered how any version of the song could possibly be 3:47, but in upon hearing it the whole way through, I can honestly and emphatically say that it is by far the most interesting rendition I have ever heard. As compared to his later recordings, this performance was much less refined. Still, we can hear Hendrix trying to push the boundaries of what a guitar can do and the sounds that it can make. According to Waksman, Jimi slaved and obsessed over every sound in every song, and while this cannot be replicated in a performance setting, he is certainly on a different sonic wave than any other guitarist of his time.
I think this rendition of Star-Spangled Banner is an especially interesting artifact as we talk about Jimi Hendrix as a rebel. Not only is he rebellious in his sounds and appearance during Woodstock, he has chosen America’s national anthem, its most patriotic song, and made it completely his own. If playing it on an electric guitar wasn’t enough, Hendrix added all sorts of riffs and distortions to make it sound like a song that could have easily been written by a rock-n-roll artist.
52 years later, when Christina Aguilera messes up one word in the song, she makes national news. Forget words, Jimi Hendrix has taken the national anthem to another galaxy and back. Musically, I think that his later recordings are certainly more focused and the riffs and distortions more purposeful, but I have to say, I have never heard a more memorable or interesting rendition of our national anthem.
Hey, she messed up more than one word, Evan. I mean, she skipped at least a whole line.
Question:
I found Waksman's assertion that "black masculinity occurs in the white male imagination as a threat" to be highly provocative (96). I think Waksman would suggest that Hendrix had a strong white male fan base because white men looked at his sexual (and musical) mastery and recognized a "wish to possess such qualities themselves" (96). Is that true? Does that explain why men seemed more comfortable identifying as fans of Hendrix rather than the Beatles?
Artifact Discussion:
After I read Waksman's description of Jimi Hendrix's 1967 performance of "Wild Thing," I found a video of it on Youtube. I thought Waksman might be exaggerating in his description of Hendrix's "superhuman persona founded upon the display of musical and sexual mastery" (93). After all, we've talked about Elvis Presley's use of pelvic thrusts in his performance without calling him "hypersexual." But it turns out, Waksman wasn't exaggerating.
In the "Wild Things" performance, Hendrix really portrayed himself as both a musical and sexual fiend. It's hard to describe but he blurred the lines between what was musical and sexual -- it seemed like a musical performance and an aggressive sexual act were occurring at the same time. That was the most groundbreaking aspect of his performance to me. Waksman quoted another critic, Bloomfield, who wrote of Hendrix "his body motion was so integrated with his playing that you couldn't tell where one started and the other left off" (104). That quote made me think of Michael Jackson who also made movement seem to be a part of the music itself.
I listened to "Purple Haze," "Voodoo Child," and a few other Hendrix songs. I can't say I'm the biggest fan -- but I will say that he has a very distinctive sound...which comes though in every single recording. It doesn't surprise me, having read about his obsessive and perfectionistic editing of his recordings in the Electric Lady.
Question:
Waksman's article argues that Jimi Hendrix is the essence of "black." He attributes this significantly to his performance style, which was interpreted as sexual and phallic. However, isn't this exactly what many people linked Elvis Presley to, as well? So, what do you think it is exactly about Jimi Hendrix that separates him from Elvis and identifies him as "black"?
Artifact Discussion:
For my discussion, I would like to focus mainly on how Jimi Hendrix was seen as transgressive, if at all. Firstly, with respect to his performance style, he is definitely not the first person to attempt a niche for highly sexualized movements and phallic gestures with his guitar. Elvis Presley is very famous for being the first artist to transgress in this sort of way. Thus, I view Hendrix's performances as inspiration drawn from the king of rock and roll. So, I see Hendrix's performance style as neither transgressive nor identifiable with black culture.
However, I do think what really separates Hendrix from previous artists, and signifies him as transgressive is his sound innovations. Although his music is clearly inspired by earlier artists such as Muddy Waters when he was growing up, Hendrix really pushes the boundaries of exploring new sound combinations and pitches in a way that was never done before. I particularly enjoyed listening to his version of "Star Spangled Banner" which I would describe exactly as the "electric church" that Hendrix would so many times refer his sound to. So, I would say that it is the combination of his unique sound and his entertainment value that identified him as a transgressor.
One last thing to notice is that his music genre of rock was highly identifiable amongst mainly white men, rather than a black audience. Waksman's article says that many white rock artists of the time felt threatened by Hendrix's abilities and style. He also gained envy from white boys who idolized his sexuality and white girls who desired his sexuality. Thus, I would also say that his abilities to transcend these cultural boundaries as a black man in a predominantly white audience can be seen as transgressive, as well.
Question:
It seems everyone has already drawn attention to Jimi Hendrix’s “blackness” having had something to do with his sexual appeal and how his “white” sound was received by the public. However, I wonder if what was intriguing about Hendrix was really that he was black or the fact that he wasn’t white, which isn’t exactly the same thing. If we look at Elvis, he was a white man who was also crossing boundaries, playing the guitar sexually, and singing “black” music. Why were white musicians portrayed as having millions of screaming girls following them around while black musicians were more appealing to white males? What does that then say about societal definitions of gender/sexuality, race, and the connection between the two?
Artifact Discussion:
Something I’ve always found interesting about Hendrix’s music is the power it has to transport the listener somewhere else. His recordings and his performances encourage taking music in not as a secondary part of an event but as an experience in itself. You are supposed to be surrounded by sound and the feelings these sounds may bring up. In almost every one of the songs we listened to, Hendrix’s guitar makes it almost impossible to focus on anything else around you other than the music. There is no way one could appreciate what Hendrix was trying to do without providing full attention; there are just too many little things going on, from the drum fills embedded underneath the guitar to the great amount of distortion of each chord, which creates an instantly captivating sound. This isn’t background music you’d hear while shopping or hosting a dinner party. This is music you’re supposed to sit and actually listen to.
With that in mind, I found it interesting that Waksman would describe Hendrix’s music and performances as very sexual. Granted, he would makes some sexual movements and gestures during his shows, I’ve always taken his style to suggest, as was mentioned in the article, a blurring of the line between your body and the music you’re listening to. I think that makes it more sensual rather than sexual. In “Voodoo Child,” as well as his other tunes, though his raspy voice and guitar playing grab the audience’s attention instantly, I’d argue the sexual connotation is added by the listener; immersing your body in pleasure and letting go of yourself into the sound of a guitar goes far beyond simply sexual desires.
I hope I don’t come across as too much of a hippie in this post… :)
Question:
A lot of Hendrix’s lyrics seem nonsensical. I’m confused about the level of detail and focus he put into his singing. What did he put his effort into? Escaping?
Artifact Discussion:
I picked “Little Wing” because it happens to be one of my favorite songs (and one of the few I can play on guitar). Both articles discuss the concept of Jimi Hendrix’s “blackness” to excruciating detail. But amidst the discussion of Jimi, the line that rang true with me was “not black, not white, just Jimi.” Also the discussion of the importance of musicians and not singers was intriguing to me. Both of these concepts typify “Little Wing.” When comparing Jimi Hendrix’s version of the song to Derek and the Dominos’ version, the distinction of race is apparent. There is an improvised jazz feel to Hendrix’s version because of the constant guitar riffs going on in the background. There is rarely a repetition of a guitar line; rather Hendrix rips down the scales with smoothness. Yet, although his song is more “black” and “jazzy” than Clapton’s version I would certainly not call it “black music.” It is more psychedelic due to its lyrics and distortion. This label is apparent due to the references to “clouds,” “moonbeams,” “zebras,” and “fairytales.” It is hard to believe Hendrix was so detail oriented due to the fluidity and calmness in the song. The song’s focus is entirely on him. Even though his voice is not stellar, he and his guitar command the entirety of the listeners attention. Derek and The Domino’s version has more attention on the collaborated singing and bluesy aspect of the song. When they sing the same bizarre lyrics the spacey-ness of the song is replaced with connotations of love.
QUESTION: In the article there is an emphasis placed on race and gender through music by Hendrix. The "public" versus "private" image was something that often caused contradiction in the way Hendrix was perceived. As an artist on stage and in the studio there are different expectations that Hendrix took on. Surrounding himself with the music world was sort of a way to escape the perception and expectations that encompassed the role of an African-American artist. With that being said, is their any connection to what we see wit Usher and Justin Beiber today? Is the same importance of sound and appreciation for the actual music by Hendrix similar to the bond that Usher and Justin have through their music production? Are the same expectations being looked into under a new light(where a black male artist can be a mentor to a white kid, and not be judged for it)? Like Hendrix and his crossover status, is Usher's identity of "blackness" compromised at all by his mentoring?
Discussion: After listening to Jimi Hendrix tracks i feel that he was definitely a transgressive artists. to be honest i think his music was something that you wouldn't expect from a black artist. And while I know several of my black relatives that listen to Jimi Hendrix, his music was most popular in the white community. The sounds of his music is something that is hard to describe btu nonetheless is quite enjoyable to listen to. Although I havent seen Hendrix perform, I could picture Hendrix incorporating movement into his performances. The sounds he makes with his guitar in the two track we listened to definitely making me picture Hendrix dancing or moving on stage.
In what ways did Hendrix pave roads for other performers/ performers who challenged society and divisions existing in the world of music; were his impacts on society taken more critically as displays of blackness? masculinity? or black masculinity? How might the terms have been defined at the time?
What really stuck out to me was the excruciating pressure there must have been and even must be on celebrities who are expected to perform in certain ways from the day they come onto the scene until indefinitely. I can only imagine that this difficult task, and was for a musician like Elvis, and gathered from the reading, from Hendrix. Being black put him in a setting where he had to deliver the prevailing stereotype of the time, or exist outside of his identity, perhaps even outside of the community he most identified with. Was this perhaps the same thing he might have had to endure being a man? What roles do who others identify us as /what powers might they have over us and what we produce? Could it be said that he was being his authentic self, and to what extent might stereotypes be internalized and perpetuated without us knowing? His being dubbed such phrases as “Wild man of pop” really stands out me in a way, in which I am not sure how much of this was praised and respected for its countercultural impact and the breakthroughs he made in the music world, and how much of such perceptions were condemning or even telling of how people saw him as a black, and maybe an “icon” of masculinity.
The fact that he brought the cosmic and the religious into his musical conversations still manages to promote the “blackness” associated with having a “soul essence” that is described in the article. From listening to voodoo child, I really get a sense of a musical focus; perhaps it would have been different if I had seen him perform, but the way he played music definitely captured an essence of feeling and emotion that we have been mentioning in class in our discussions of what moves people and what . There are long stretches of instrumentals in which hardly a word is uttered, and the guitar does the singing. There are still trails of what is often associated with black music: gospel, jazz, blues, use of organs and other instrumentation, but the use of the electric guitar is surprisingly fluid in its connotation. Thus it’s not just the lyrics that can make a person feel a sort of way, not just the tone of the voice that but music becomes an embodiment of the person, and an embodiment of a voice yearning to be heard.
Post a Comment