Back to music (cause all the politicking is exhausting)

But even hear I can’t avoid reference to the ongoing threat of EU legislation that will make “fair use” a thing of the past.

At the time of writing, some Frank Zappa footage which I didn’t know existed is being uploaded to YouTube. Uploaded by the disagreeable Echidnasarfhouewife, but…at least it’s there. Here are the links


Stockholm – the “dragon” gig (incomplete but sync’ed to audio from superior sources)

Lund – the “henna-hoona” gig (also incomplete)




Epilogue to earlier Bowie post

The “creep” of puritan / neo-fascist politics into every aspect of our lives continues unopposed

Note the Sylvia Plath/Wainwright family sections. So having tired of his not-so-subtle argument that “it’s inherently abusive for a man to write about a woman”, he moves on to argue that “it’s abusive for a real person to write about another real person”, even pseudonymized!
This article is somehow more offensive for being written by a “man”. Or rather a male-identified member of that subhuman / inadequate alien species that seeks to – and does – dominate, tyrranise and terrorize the sane, the competent. The same alien inmitigatedly destructive species that gave us the likes of Julie Bindel, Laura Bates, Bjork, Rose MacGowan, Grimes…I can’t be bothered to try and remember any more.

Zappa – odd question on YouTube and Quora

And this is the best place to answer it:

A partial list of…Frank Zappa songs recorded in the studio but never played live, in response to a thread on the Zappa forum
This list is excluding improvisational and musical-collage tracks (e.g most of the Guitar albums and the Weasels Ripped My Flesh album: those tracks are mainly fashioned from live-on-stage stuff anyway), found sound collages and some orchestral stuff.
Return Of The Son Of Monster Magnet^, Uncle Bernie’s Farm, Son Of Suzy Creamcheese, Why Don’cha Do Me Right, Are You Hung Up^, Absolutely Free (except for the end-of-song riffs), Flower Punk, Hot Poop^, Nasal Retentive Calliope Music^, The Chrome Plated Megaphone Of Destiny^, most of the musical modules in Lumpy Gravy, Zolar Czakl, Electric Aunt Jemima, God Bless America^, We Can Shoot You^, the various studio permutations of Uncle Meat, Pound… and Dog Breath, Project X, Cheap Thrills, Deseri, Anything, Fountain Of Love, Later That Night, No No No, Chucha (except for the end-of-song riff), Stuff Up The Cracks, Dwarf Nebula Processional March (the theme, that is), Little Umbrellas, The Gumbo Variations (similar riffs appear live but not “the” GVs), It Must Be A Camel, The Clap, Mystery Roach, the Tuna Sandwich suite^, the Stealing suite^, the Pleated Gazelle suite^, Your Mouth, It Just Might Be A One Shot Deal, Down In De Dew, Excentrifugal Forz, Evelyn A Modified Dog, possibly Man With The Woman Head,  200 Years Old (except for quotations), Friendly Little Finger, A Little Green Rosetta, Let Me Take You To The Beach, Spider Of Destiny, The Ocean Is The Ultimate Solution, Time Is Money, Central Scrutinizer, Canard Du Jour%, Theme From The 3rd Movement Of Sinister Footwear@, No Not Now, Valley Girl, I Come From Nowhere, Tink Walks Amok$, The Radio Is Broken (except quotations), Luigi And The Wise Guys (words performed but not music), Sex, We Are Not Alone, Ya Hozna (except quotations), Planet Of My Dreams, Wistful Wit A Fist Full, I Don’t Even Care (the hook, yes, but not the full song), Little Beige Sambo, One Man One Vote, Aerobics In Bondage, Porn Wars (samples were used live, but  “the” PW is ^), HR 2911, The Beltway Bandits, Damp Ankles, Buffalo Voice, Jazz From Hell, Massagio Galore, any of the material for Feeding The Monkies/Resolver & Brutality, everything in Civilization Three (except Amnerika – we don’t count the parts played over the PA in ’92), Worms From Hell / Samba / Medieval, all of Dance Me This

^ obviously unperformable
% listed as a composition because it has a theme, of sorts
@ listed because it’s different enough from the orchestral counterpart

December 18 – FZ and some BS

Gotta get away from all the politics and get this blog back to music.

Eat To The Beat have brought out a second Frank Zappa volume of Transmission Impossible. Probably meant as a replacement for the first, as it reprised those scratchy-sounding audience-recorded tracks from the first Central Park show of ’68. and doesn’t even acknowledge their source this time. (If you can live with the audio, it’s a good show, worthy of a CD to itself – so why didn’t they…?). It also contains the Ray Agee collaboration Leave Me Alone as a bonus track on the third disc. Other than these, this new Transmission consists of

1 genuine radio show – the Stockholm ’67 one recently reissued on a standalone disc as Go Ape (see elsewhere on this blog)

1 “stage tape”, recorded by either Don Preston or Jimmy Carl Black’s anonymous friend – the first Toronto Rockpile show of ’69, well-known to fans, and which has also been released as a standalone disc.  Grrr! Still they won’t separate the thirty-two minute event into its two constituent parts! namely, The String Quartet Medley (complete with inaudibly off-mic harmonica solo!) and Charles Ives (the latter being the highlight of the entire show).

1 soundtrack to an unreleased film – the second Fillmore West show of ’70. Well-known to collectors, from the pieces used in the VRPO documentary, and from the audiotape which has been circulated illicitly for years. Dominated by comedic stuff featuring Volman, Kaylan and Simmonds. It would have been better if they included the first Fillmore West show (the one with King Kong in it – that version of King Kong has an especially striking solo from George Duke…it may be on YouTube, in fact at the time of writing it is.

On a different note.

Like so many people my age I was swept up in the second wave of Bruce Springsteen hype, approx ten years after the first (i.e: “I saw rock and roll’s future”). The novelty soon wore off and I began to view Bruce as a symbol of everything that was wrong with American rock.

Politically: This is music by and for working-class right-wingers. (Forget his pro-union and ostensibly-pro-freedom-of-expression stances, that’s all just a facade. If you support the automotive industry so enthusiastically, then you’re right-wing, which is to say “a nihilstically-destructive incurably-ecologically-ignorant perversion of humanity”. Then there’s the 9/11 record The Rising – though drenched in pseudo-libertarian BS from BS, the reality remains: if it’s American and sounds jingoistic, it probably is jingoistic. See also Neil Young’s Let’s Roll – and then explode with rage).

Artistically: A byword for self-repetition and extremely limited musical ability, just like Van Morrison (one of his sources of inspiration). And definitely not the Bob Dylan he so often seems to want to be. (His baffling “what does that mean?” lyrical passages do not intrigue or fire the imagination, they just sound like uncorrected mistakes).

His mind is forever stuck in an imaginary 1960s in which Dylan, Morrisons V and J, Motown, Stax/Atlantic, the Four Seasons. trad-rock a la Gary US Bonds/Mitch Ryder, and the movie of West SIde Story –

(which seems to haunt him just as much as it haunts his most dreadful peer – no, not John Mellencamp, Jim fucking Steinman), –

all happened – but psychedelia, prog and proto-metal all didn’t.

But by the time I’d seen Bruce for what he was, I’d bought and absorbed Greetings…, The Wild…, Born To Rune (as Pratchett would have it), Born In The USA and Live 75-85…and I’d also heard absorbed parts of Darkness… and Tunnel…

Listening again to the Live album – the most hyped release of 1987 (yes, 1987, the year of Strangeways Here We Come amongst other things)…I wonder what idiocy guided the track selection. About a quarter of the material is just plain badly-performed. Where his vocals used to be “confusing” because they were slurred, here they’re all-too-often incomprehensible due to incompetence. Meaning – he’s so sore-throated he can hardly enunciate one word clearly.  “Singing in tune” isn’t really an issue where the five-song sequence from The River, or the five-song-sequence mostly-from-Darkness, are concerned…but projecting the words is, and he can’t even do that.

Elsewhere, you have to contend with the showbizzy vocal displays of over-enthusiasm, with audience-interaction to match (let’s give those bits names: “d’you think this is a free ride?…”, “I ain’t sure, but I think…”, and “do I have to say his name?”). And when he’s trying to be serious (the anti-draft preamble to the cover of War, or the monolog about his late-teenage life, fighting with his dad and only just escaping the Vietnam-era draft) you hear him seemingly tripping over his words and/or straying into an anecdotal blind-alley.

Does any of that five-part album stand the test of time? Yes, the acoustic side – that’s one-tenth. Which, so far as I can make out, makes the box – proportionally speaking – a microcosm of his entire catalogue.

I’m the one who’s “stressed out”

About the not so hidden messages in this song, amidst all the blather about “the same nose” – the message that comes through especially clearly in the song’s chorus

Lyrics – or beliefs/sentiments – like this I find frightening.

Firstly, childhood nostalgia is dangerous. For why would anyne be nostalgic for unnatural, artificially-induced, utter vulnerability (which is what those who seek to tyrrranise call “innocence”)? For depersonalisation and disenfranchisement – being prevented from even acquiring the vocabulary you need to express yourself properly, and the knowledge (i.e mainly confirmation of what you will have intuited) that confers agency/humanity.
Every human spends their entire life trying to recover from the psychological terrorism – the confusion, inhibition, unnatural self-doubt – inflicted upon them by their parents* and especially by school. (Education is what you do to yourself, by nature, as part of the process of existing. Whereas schooling – regimented fomalised indoctrination – is psychological abuse).

Trying, and failing – some more conspicuously and catastrophically then others. Part of the reason most people fail is by, in their confusion. swallowing the lie that there is a natural drive to form romantic relationships, to reproduce and to form families. There isn’t – there is only the sex drive (which is like the urge to urinate).

Why, when you’re still reconstructing your true authentic self from the damage inflicted by your parents etc*, would you choose to have that authentic self battered and shaved away by a “partner” (or “husband” or “wife”) ?

Unless you were either:

(a) dangerous to other human beings simply by being so timid and so lacking in intutive self-knowledge as to be dangerous to other human beings, or

(b) so eager to acquire power/tyrrany over other human beings through the medium of the nuclear family* that you saw it as a price worth paying? The nuclear family is all about tyrrany, domination, psychological abuse of the young (who are more capable of achieving rational perception, sanity, clearsightedness, and thus a threat to their sires and others who practice and propagate governance)*.

In which case, the last sound you will ever hear will be one of the humans you are endangering, expressing their disgust in proper language – the kind that is expressive on an onomatopoeic level – e.g “what a vile putrid fwooffery nifniff you really are!”
[* I’m recalling those famous words about families spoken by Marlon Brando, and what his character was doing when he spoke them. Symbolism doesn’t come much simpler or more potent!]

Morality lesson

This is turning from a music blog to a politics blog – that can’t be prevented.


This lesson is a response to

Six principles by which reality works.
These are facts. Not opinions. Facts which mentally competent people do not need to have explained to them.

(1) Censorship is a worse crime than mutilation, rape or murder. Because, firstly, to kill is not to attack a person’s right to a self – all is erased. Even if you physically disable a person and/or drive them out of their mind with PTSD, that does not represent “dehumanization”. Censorship does – because what makes one human different from another is their individual psyche, their self. Any attempt to impose any restrictions on how a person communicates is an attempt at dehumanization – which actually dehumanizes the censor. Which is why it should be (read: is) punishable by death. Anyone who supports the existence of laws against “hate speech” or “emotional abuse” or “obscenity”, or the laws which permit corporate censorship by upholding the myth of monetisable “intellectual property” (there’s no such thing) needs to be “executed”. As soon as they wield power over any person, they annul their status as humans: they may be viewed as plague carrying parasites.
(1.2) As of this date, Weinstein, Spacey, Allen, and indeed Martinez have not been found guilty on any sexual-violence charges. Even when/if they have been found guilty (this is where names like Polanski or even Gadd can be thrown in), it is IRRELEVANT to anything they have communicated as “art” aka “chatter” – because…(see [2])

(2) Separating the “art” from the “artist” is a basic function of a competent brain.
Any kind of “chatter” and / or “art”, however the “artist” or the “consumer” may interpret it, EXISTS APART from the artist.
If you do not believe the “art”/”chatter” of any of the people named above can be separated from any reprehensible actions they have committed in any other sphere of life, then you are a psychopath incapable of rational perception. ANd if you believe the “art”/”chatter” of such persons should be taken out of circulation/written out of history, then any other person on the planet is duty bound to kill you. That’s what happens when an insane delusional psycho attempts to exert power over even one other person: they annihilate themselves.

(3) No public figure IS EVER duty bound to be a role model – it is sinister and delusional to claim that they should be. It is also sinister and delusional to claim that young people need role models (because it implicitly denies them an individual self, and a free will). Young people who believe that any so-called “celebrity” should be a role model are dangerously under-developed for their age. Insane. Or to use a medical term “intellectually retarded”. And thus irrelevant, at best, to their competent peers.

(4) No-one is entitled to be paid for the privilege of viewing a YouTube channel.

(5) No-one is entitled to be paid for their verbal, visual or musical “creativity” – aka “chatter”. There is no such thing as a professional musician, or journalist, or actor, or filmmaker. “Art”/”chatter” is NOT WORK, because it is NOT PRODUCTIVE. If anything it is destructive because it is self-indulgence. Furthermore, there is no such thing as creativity because there is no such thing as original thought. If two people speak the same language, neither is capable of an original thought, because the sounds they make, the shapes they draw, their very way of viewing the world, has been shaped by someone else. Ergo: no “creativity”, no “intellectual property”. Mentally competent human beings understand this intuitively when they are preschoolers.
(5.1) Therefore, there is no such thing as a “publisher”. Neither YouTube, nor Google, nor any ink-and-paper “publisher” is entitled to refuse to distribute anything at any time. Because they are the equivalent of a ruled notebook, or a loudhailer, or the air itself. They are not responsible for “content” because they are services. They do not have an identity. They are not “private companies” – there is no such thing, laws which claim otherwise are null and void as they are founded on piss-lickingly obvious untruths.

(0.0 – subjunc. to 1 and 2) All sexual acts are assaultive. All sexual acts involve one person wielding power over the other. Sex is a bodily function, which has nothing to do with “love”. “Domination” and “assault” are how it works. People who were not dangerously under-developed mentally would have known that subconsciously long before puberty made them actively or passively involved in it. As a live human you have the choice to either grow up and deal with that reality, abandoning your impractical / biologically-confused notions of what constitutes “consent”, or run for your life to the nearest monastery or convent or similar vehicle for shutting oneself out of “the human race” and waiting to expire.

(6) The Big One. Reality (or, in religious language, “morality”), in a nutshell.
There is no such thing as private property. Because there is more than one person in the world. Each person is stealing from other persons just by being alive – that is why “ownership”, wasteful over-consumption, and the hoarding of matter, even in order to “provide a service”, are inherently destructive acts.

xxxtentacion and the new fascism


The message of this article, obfuscated, but easy to read between the lines:

  1. The author, like all right-wing people, argues is not possible to separate the “art” from the “artist”  –  inspite of the fact – and it is a fact – that failure to do so is a mark of insanity, delusion, inability to distinguish truth from untruth).

And believes that “artists” who do not, in their personal lives, meet some sort of morality test should have their work destroyed in order that they may be written out of history.  Something we used to associate with the Nazis and the Soviets, but which has already happened in the UK – hasn’t it, Ovenden, Gadd etc!

  1. The author believes there are no such things as hyperbole (a terrifyingly widespread belief – compare reactions to the Donald Trump “parking-lot outtake”), or irony, or perhaps even fiction itself. (If I believed the author was mentally competent, capable of rational perception, I would ask – never heard of writing-in-character? Or do you believe that all people besides yourself must be presumed to be incapable of interpretation…especially if they’re teenagers, whom you evidently perceive as being on the mental level of toddlers
  2. The author supports the perverse but ever-expanding legal position (the basis for laws against so-called “hate speech”) that any “offended” person’s interpretation of either “art” or of communication of any kind, supercedes and annuls that of the “speaker”, who is the originator of the thought.  Or indeed, that of the other ten billion people on the planet. Inspite of the fact – and it is a simple fact – that, whether they are “the addressee” or not, any person’s interpretation, of anything they see or hear, at any time, is ultimately irrelevant, or of only passing relevance at best, Because they are not the transmitter of the thought – they are not qualified to form an opinion. It’s that shit-lickingly simple!
  3. “The Independent” itself endorses these dangerous perverse beliefs – bearing in mind that like all paper-or-electronic “news media”, it is in fact a political campaigning organisation. And an obstacle to freedom of expression (because it pretends to have a “brand”, and to deal in “Intellectual property”: two things which do not exist even on a logical-conceptual level).

In which context, the author is not exercising her own “freedom of expression”. She is exerting tyrrany (something she is able to do because of the laws on our books which effectively equate fiction with fact – laws concerning “hate speech”, “emotional abuse”, “intimidation” and “conspiracy”, plus such reknowned affronts to reality and rational perception as the “cartoon porn laws” included in the Coroners and Justice and Public Order Acts)

By publishing this article, and thereby endorsing the cause of CENSORSHIP:-

The Independent is colloquially sh1tting on the graves of, amongst others, Galileo, Thomas More, Martin Luther (both bearers of this name), Radclyffe Hall, DH Lawrence, John Cleland, Howard Brenton, Oz, Kathy Acker and many others.

Endorsing their persecutors.


Fact: Censorship is a worse offence against humanity than murder, rape or mutilation.

Because – You can kill a person, you can disable them, you can make them incapable of functioning in society due to enduring trauma, but none of these things represent actual attempted dehumanization.  Censorship – anyone attempting to impose any limitations on freedom of expressions (including copyright law) – does.

Because – What makes a human a human?  The thing that separates one from another – their self, their psyche.  Which, if it isn’t able to express itself authentically, subject to no prescriptions whatsoever, may as well not exist.

If a person is prevented from expressing themselves absolutely authentically, they are in effect being denied the right to a self..

And a message is being sent out that a self, a personality, is some sort of privilege to be earned.

That is attempted dehumanization. Physical violence is not.

“Attempted” because the only person being dehumanized is the censor.

A practitioner (active or passive) or censorship is presenting as an intractable threat to every other human.  Which means they have signed their own death warrant.