Line Out Music & the City at Night

Monday, November 24, 2008

Judging a Book by its Title

Posted by on Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 2:21 PM

rebels-wit-attitude300.gifWe got this book by Iain Ellis in the mail the other day. It's from small publisher Soft Skull Press, which usually does a really fine job with a very small budget.

It's called Rebels Wit Attitude: Subversive Rock Humorists. Here is how Soft Skull describes the book:

In Rebels Wit Attitude, music writer and professor Iain Ellis throws a spotlight on the history of humor as a weapon of anti-establishment rebellion, paying tribute to the great rebel humorists in American rock history and investigating comedy and laughter as the catalyst and main expressive force in these artists’ work. The performers who are the subject of Ellis's study are not merely funny people - they are those whose art exudes defiance and resistance, whether aimed at social structures and mores, political systems, aesthetic practices, or the music industry itself. Subversive rock humor has emerged as a formidable force of modern art, building a reputation for rock music as a rebellious—sometimes dangerous—form of expression that can dismay the adult mainstream as it empowers the youth culture. In this study of rock's impact on youth through the decades, Ellis proves that the most subversive rock humorists serve as the conscience of our culture. They chastise pretensions, satirize hypocrisy, and pour scorn on power, corruption, and lies.

Discussing the work of iconic figures as diverse as Chuck Berry, Bob Dylan, Lou Reed, the Ramones, the Talking Heads, the Beastie Boys, Missy Elliott, and Madonna, Ellis examines the nature of the rock humorist, asking why and in what ways each performer uses humor as a weapon of resistance to various status quos.... (It goes on from here. The rest is after the jump, if you're interested.)

I don't know if I'd ever be interested in this book, to be perfectly honest. The banana peel cover is kind of funny, granted, but here are two important points:

1. The "Wit" in the title is completely awful, and the title doesn't make any sense that way. It's like a pun that didn't bother to get out of bed in the morning.

2. Can we stop using the word "subversive" when we talk about rock music? I think rock music was maybe subversive like twice. Forty years ago.

Will this book get reviewed by us? I don't know. It depends on our staff. But I've told you exactly why I won't review the book. Things like titles matter, and this book is doing great work at turning me away without even opening the fucking thing up.

The commentary on these artists' work is the basis for a deeper discussion of the historical foundations and other socio-cultural contexts of humorous art, and Ellis delves into the larger issues of politics, nationality, ethics, geography, generation, art, social class, race, gender and sexuality that surround his subject. Thus Rebels Wit Attitude is at once an entertaining look at some of the greatest rebels in American rock culture and an absorbing historical and cultural study of humor and rebellion. The chapters, divided by decade, include introductory sections outlining each decade's defining forces and contextual features.

While lyrics constitute Ellis's primary field of analysis, his exploration goes well beyond that, moving into a discussion and interpretation of image, performance, product, and musical content. A guitar solo, hair style, or dance move, in context, may be just as subversive and humorous as a satirical song lyric.

Rock music has been the principle outlet of youth rebellion for over half a century, and though these rock rebels have been idolized and written about extensively, their humor - which has invariably been the bullet in the gun of subversive performers - has never been at the center of discussions. In Rebels Wit Attitude, Iain Ellis celebrates and scrutinizes the humor, asks what it consists of, how it manifests itself, what it targets, and what effect it has had on generations of fans.

 

Comments (5) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
1
Maybe Soft Skull won't care since you (and the staff of the Stranger in general) can't discuss anything without the word 'fuck.' And no, this still isn't the WASL, but the overall tone of the Music (Book, Art...blah blah blah) section of this rag is ridiculous.

If I wanted to read your personal journal, I'd get to be your friend and then steal it from you.
Posted by JealouSEY on November 24, 2008 at 3:20 PM
2
Preaching to the choir is rarely subversive, which is one reason I've always questioned the "subversive" credentials of everything from punk onward to label itself that way. To me an example of subversion would be if a totally mainstream artist, maybe Faith Hill or somebody, were to actually slip some sly social commentary into a song. That would be subversive, because her audience didn't sign up for that and wouldn't be expecting it.

To me overt rebellion isn't subversive. It's just rebellious. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but still.
Posted by flamingbanjo on November 25, 2008 at 11:40 AM
3
Literary interpretations of music are usually crap. Literary interpretations of literary interpretations of music are crap under a microscope made of crap.
Posted by finn on November 25, 2008 at 12:29 PM
4
Hi Paul, you know, it's a fair cop, as the Brits say. "Subversive" was a dreadful choice of words. It's like "edgy"—we shouldn't use it. I am glad the cover works for you, and I realize that it was, perhaps, a way for me to compensate for the weakness of the title. But I should have seen that more consciously. If my idea of the best cover for the book involved putting the title on the spine, what did that say about the cover. I should have thought of that. And didn't. My fault. And I appreciate you calling me out on that.
Posted by Richard Nash (Soft Skull) on December 2, 2008 at 2:16 PM
5
Hi Paul, you know, it's a fair cop, as the Brits say. "Subversive" was a dreadful choice of words. It's like "edgy"—we shouldn't use it. I am glad the cover works for you, and I realize that it was, perhaps, a way for me to compensate for the weakness of the title. But I should have seen that more consciously. If my idea of the best cover for the book involved putting the title on the spine, what did that say about the cover. I should have thought of that. And didn't. My fault. And I appreciate you calling me out on that.
Posted by Richard Nash (Soft Skull) on December 2, 2008 at 2:18 PM

Add a comment

 

All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact Info | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy