Music/Society Modern Wrld (W5)
piggy_cute
rock-vietnam.pdf
“Takin’ Care of Business”: Rock Music, V i e t n a m and the
Protest M y t h BY
KENNETH J. BINDAS a n d CRAIG HOUSTON* HE decade of t h e 1960s is remembered as a n era of swirling change a n d social protest, with rock music, as Melody Maker announced i n 1968, “the last medium not T totally controlled by business interests.” Many persons,
including scholars, believe the decade’s music fostered a social revolution a n d spoke for t h e ideals of young people. But does this romantic image reflect rock music’s true history during this era? On t h e subject of the Vietnam War, one of the most important events of the sixties, rock music a n d its musicians were noticeably silent. Only when the American public altered its opinion toward t h e war did t h e record industry a n d prominent musicians redirect their music by marketing songs with antiwar themes. While a few antiwar rock songs became popular hits, when placed i n the broad context of rock music’s anti-Establishment stance from 1965 to 1974, t h e attention given to t h e Vietnam W a r by t h e rock ’n’ roll industry was minimal.’
Since its birth rock music has been rebellious. The central themes of the new music included sex, freedom from parental authority a n d youth. Dominated by black-influenced rhythm a n d blues, rock music conflicted with society norms. As the music grew up i n the sixties, its attitude, sound, beat a n d lyrics were at t h e center of t h e new youth culture. While the themes remained constant, after 1965 rock ’n’ roll adopted a vigorous anti- Establishment posture. To m a n y young people, the Establishment represented an uncaring bureaucracy, social a n d economic injustice, a n d a morality blind to anything but profit. The decade’s youth, or “technocracy’s children” according to historian Theodore Roszak, viewed their parents’ lives a n d cultural institu-
*Kenneth J . Hindas is Assistant Professor of History a t West Georgia
I“Don’t Laugh Hut t h e Next Step Could Be Pop as a Political Power,”Melody College. Craig Houston is Instructor of History a t the University of Toledo.
Maker, 26 October 1968, 13.
1
The Historian CHART 1
SUPPORT FOR THE WAR IN VIETNAM 1965-1973
90 - Under 30 30 - 49 --
------_ Total Population
0 I 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973
SOURCE: American Institute of Public Opinion, as listed in John Mueller, War Presidents and Public Opinion (New York, 1973). 54-55, 275; Gallup Poll vol. 3, passim.
tions as decadent a n d morally bankrupt. Moreover, they identified problems such as civil rights, urban decay, rural poverty a n d t h e burgeoning military-industrial complex as bastard children of t h e Establishment’s culture.2
Many who rejected the Establishment’s insensitivity a n d materialism attempted to create a n d identify themselves with their own culture. This counterculture encompassed not only cultural but political ideals as well, thus combining “new ways of
Theodore Roszak, T h e M a k i n g of a Counter-Culture (Garden City, N.Y., 1969), chap. 1.
2
Rock Music & Vietnam CHART 2
TOP-SELLING ANTIWAR F ~ C K SONGS 19651974
SOURCE Billboard Magazine. Antiwar rock songs comprised less than 1.5% of the approximately loo0 singles to make Billboard’s yearly top 100 chart, 1965-74.
living with fundamental social and political change.” For the creators of the new social order, the counterculture represented an escape from parental and Establishment control. The socio- cultural wing of the youth movement looked to the writings of Norman 0. Brown, Timothy Leary and Ken Kesey i n their near- mystic pursuit of Dionysian satisfaction. Rarely did this group involve itself i n more volatile movement activities. Instead, its credo became “Tune in, Turn on and Drop out.” Long hair, love beads and a n assortment of paraphernalia became emblems of the generation, resembling a rite of passage. In contrast, the political New Left formed the rhetorical backbone of their protest around the philosophies of Herbert Marcuse, C. Wright Mills, Paul Goodman, Michael Harrington and others, and were committed to “restructuring the social order.” Many of the political radicals also adopted the lifestyle associated with
3
The Historian counterculture resistance, making i t difficult for the Establish- ment to distinguish between social a n d political radical^.^
Both the social a n d political wings of t h e counterculture identified rock music as their mouthpiece. Like all musical forms, rock ’n’ roll provoked its listeners’ feelings; but rock lyrics amplified the emotional response a n d participation of its audience. The scholar Simon Frith h a s argued t h a t “lyrics constantly reflect a n d reinforce whatever ethos society currently considers desirable.” For example, Buffalo Springfield’s “For What It’s Worth” detailed the generation’s isolation from the Establishment as well as their alienation from each other: “battle lines being drawn, nobody’s right if everybody’s wrong.”4
Rock ’n’ roll attacked a l l aspects of t h e Establishment, becoming a countercultural institution. T h e Rolling Stones ridiculed i n “Satisfaction” t h e materialism a n d conformity t h a t the post-1945 era spawned. The Beatles’ albums after 1965 contained attacks on the established order: “Piggies,” “Fool on a Hill,” “Taxman” a n d “Eleanor Rigby,” to name a few. The Doors, J i m i Hendrix, Steppenwolf, t h e Who a n d m a n y other groups attacked established attitudes toward sex (“Hello, I Love You,” “Light My Fire”), toward t h e use of drugs to achieve peace of mind (“Purple Haze,” “Magic Carpet Ride,” “Mother’s Little Helper”) a n d toward society’s inability to understand sixties’ young people (“My Generation,” “Manic D e p r e ~ s i o n ” ) . ~
Rock, as a commodity, marketed these anti-Establishment themes i n order to capture t h e consumer whose ideals i t mirrored. To many, the Vietnam War represented everything corrupt, mad a n d entrenched about the Establishment. Wayne Hampton, in Guerrilla Minstrels, believed t h e Vietnam W a r served as t h e “major catalyst to mass protest,” a n d further, t h a t the opposition to the war involved two forms: the dedicated movement a n d the less participatory counterculture. To both branches of this New Left, t h e Vietnam War was the Establishment. Logically, rock music should have exploited what appeared to be a huge antiwar, anti-Establishment market.6
“Kenneth Kenniston, Youth and Dissent (New York, 1971), 144; Allen J. Matusow, The Unraveling of America: A History of Liberalism in the 1960s (New York, 1984), 275-308.
4Ruffalo Springfield, “For What It’s Worth,” Retrospectiue, ATCO SD 33- 283,1969. Simon Frith quoted in “Why 110 Songs Have Words?” in Aaron Ikvine White, ed., Lost in Music: Culture, Style and the Musical Event (London, 1987), 83.
”Wayne Hampton, Guerrilla Minstrels (Knoxville, 1986), 15. 6Zbid., 14.
4
Rock Music & Vietnam
Investigations over t h e past fifteen years into rock’s antiwar leanings have developed two schools of thought. The first argues that antiwar rock was not‘ a n immediate commercial success. These analysts, such as Terry Anderson, R. Serge Denisoff, Steve Chapple a n d Reebee Garofalo, view antiwar rock music as a marginal commercial product until 1970, when it was co-opted into mainstream American thought. This school believes, how- ever, t h a t the few songs released helped to develop an antiwar o p p ~ s i t i o n . ~ T h e other camp, dominated by the popularizers of sixties’ culture, insists t h a t antiwar rock was always i n vogue a n d , more importantly, influential. Led by David Pichaske, Herbert London a n d Robert Pielke, they have argued t h a t antiwar rock music was in the vanguard of 1960s political consciousness. But these analysts have ignored the basic premise of t h e rock industry; as Abbie Hoffman recognized, “loving rock music just makes you a good consumer. It was only ‘revolu- tionary’ because we said it was.”u
7Included i n this group are t h e following works: Jerome L. Rodnitzky, “The Decline of Contemporary Protest Music,” Popular Music and Society 1 (Fall 1971): 44-50; Rodnitzky, Minstrels o f the Dawn (Chicago, 1976); Matthew Rinaldi, “Olive-Drab Rebels: Military Organizing During the Vietnam Era,” Radical America 8 (May-June 1974): 17-52; Steve Chapple a n d Reebee Garofalo, Rock and Roll is Here To Pay: The History and Politics of the Music Industry (Chicago, 1977); Greil Marcus, “ANew Awakening,” in The Sounds of Social Change, ed. R. Serge Denisoff a n d Richard A. Peterson (Chicago, 1972), 127-36; Ralph Gleason, “A Cultural Revolution,” in Denisoff a n d Peterson, Sounds of Social Change, 137-46; Carl Betz, The Story of Rock (New York, 1973); Denisoff, Sing a Song of Social Significance (Bowling Green, Ohio, 1983); Ralph E. Knupp, “A Time For Every Purpose Under Heaven: Rhetorical Dimensions of Protest Music,” The Southern Speech Communication Journal 46 (Summer 1981): 377-89; Charlie Clark, “When Rock Went to War: Looking Back on Vietnam a n d Its Music,” Veteran, February 1986.10-23; Terry H. Anderson, “American Popular Music a n d t h e War in Vietnam,” Peace and Change 11 (July 1986): 51-65.
%ee B. Lee Cooper a n d Larry S. Haverkos, “The Image of American Society i n Pop Music: A Search for Identification a n d Values,” Social Studies 64 (December 1973): 319-22; Ellen Sander, Trips (New York, 1973); Jane Earle Johnson, “Rock Music as a Reflector of Social Attitudes Among Youth in America During the 1960s,”(Ph.D. diss., St. Louis University, 1978), 72-132; Gary C. Bums, “Utopia a n d Dystopia i n Popular Songs: Rhetorical Visions i n t h e United States, 19631972,” (Ph.D. diss., Northwestern University, 1981), 138-54, 208, 211-13; Donald W. Turner, “I Ain’t Marchin’ Anymore: T h e Rhetorical Potential of Anti- War Song Lyrics During the Vietnam Conflict for the New Left,” (Ph.D. diss., Pennsylvania S t a t e University, 1982), 31, 164-87, 198-205, 274-92; Robert Rosenstone, “ ‘The Times They Are-A Changin’: T h e Music of Protest,” Annals of the American Academy 382 (March 1969): 731-44; Bums, “Trends i n Lyrics i n the Annual Top Twenty Songs in 1963-1972,” Popular Music and Society 9 (1983):
5
The Historian
Even though the general public endorsed the Vietnam War i n the early years, rock music failed to capitalize on t h a t sentiment, repeating the pattern of pop music from previous conflicts. America’s entry into World W a r I was the only exception in the twentieth century, as it engendered an outpouring of patriotic compositions led by George M. Cohen’s “Over There” and Irving Berlin’s “It’s Your Country a n d My Country.’’ The outbreak of World War I1 did not summon forth a n avalanche of popular prowar music, despite governmental pressure. Musicologists Peter Hesbacher and Les Waffen identified twenty-seven war songs and all expressed “positive attitudes” about the conflict. However, these songs comprised only seven percent of the total top ten songs for the period, and after 1943 few patriotic songs reached popular chart audiences. This trend continued during the Korean War, a n era almost devoid of patriotic popular music. Only four prowar songs emerged during the first two years of the crisis, representing .9 percent of the total top ten chart listings for
Rock ’n’ roll, with its anti-Establishment credo, broke from the patriotic tradition and became the first popular music to be antiwar, but was limited in sales and scope until 1970. Meanwhile, one segment of popular music-country/western-stood solidly behind America’s involvement. The key word is popular, meaning a large volume of sales. J o a n Baez, Pete Seeger, Bob Dylan, Phil Ochs and others wrote many folk songs to protest the war from 1962 to 1968, but these protest ballads had limited market potential. Historian Terry Anderson h a s explained t h a t for “a
1950-1953.’
- 2539; Glenn A. Baker, “Rock’s Angry Voice,” Goldmine, July 1982,lO-11; H. Ben Auslander, “ ‘If Ya Wanna End War and Stuff You G o t h Sing Loud’: A Survey of Vietnam Related Protest Music,” Journal of American Culture 4 (Summer 1981): 108-13; Don J. Hibbard and Carol Kaleialoha, The Age of Rock (Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1983); John O m a n , The Politics of Rock (Chicago, 1984); George W. Chilcoat, “The Images of Vietnam: A Popular Music Approach,” Social Education 49 (October 1985): 601-603; David R. Pichaske, A Generation in Motion: Popular Music and Culture in the Sixties (New York, 1979); Robert G. Pielke, You Say You Want a Revolution: Rock Music in American Culture (Chicago, 1986); Herbert Ira London, Closing the Circle: A Cultural History of the Rock Revolution (Chicago, 1984); Hampton, Guerrilla Minstrels; Arnold Perris, Music as Propaganda: Art to Persuade, Art to Control (Westport, Conn., 1985); Abbie Hoffman, Soon to be a Major Motion Picture (New York, 1980), 177.
9h13ter S. Levy, Give Me Yesterday: American History in Song, 1890-1920 (Norman, Okla., 1975), 136-38; Gene Lees, “From ‘Over There’ to ‘Kill for Peace,’ ” High Fidelity, November 1968, 57-58; Peter Hesbacher and Les Waffen, “War Recordings: Incidence and Change, 1940-1980,” Popular Music and Society 8
6 (1982): 77-101.
Rock Music & Vietnam
generation raised on rock ’n’ roll they were not as popular as a n amplified message.” An examination of music between 1965 and 1967 reveals only seven rock songs which spoke out against t h e war, a n d only two of these made the top 1O0.lo
During the initial years of t h e Vietnam War, rock ’n’ roIl remained noncommittal while the American public supported the United States’ role there. A 1965 Gallup poll revealed t h a t sixty- four percent believed America was justified i n becoming involved i n Vietnam. I n addition, only twenty-nine percent of those Americans aged 21-29 believed “the U S . made a mistake sending troops to fight i n Vietnam.” Antiwar sentiments remained in the minority through 1967 as more t h a n sixty-seven percent of those polled by Gallup that year favored continued bombing of North Vietnam. The third most popular alternative to t h e Johnson administration’s gradual escalation policy was to “blow [the enemy] off the map.””
Rock music reflected national sentiment by releasing few songs t h a t mentioned t h e war, a n d fewer still t h a t objected to it. Several factors contributed to this muzzling. As a young business enterprise, rock ’n’ roll still faced obstacles, both financial a n d cultural, which prevented t h e medium’s flowering. The rock genre itself accounted for only fifteen percent of Columbia Records’ profits i n 1964 a n d would not become a billion dollar industry until 1966. Songwriters a n d performers, usually young a n d part of the counterculture, turned over their products (songs a n d performances) to “straight” record executives a n d entrepreneurs with vastly different lifestyles a n d opinions. Finally, antiwar music faced a limited market because fewer t h a n twenty nine percent of those aged 21-29 opposed t h e war. This age group comprised almost eighty percent of t h e record-buying market,
loMax Geltman, “The Hot Hundred: A Surprise,” National Review, 6 September 1966, 896; Hesbacher and Waffen, “War Recordings,” 81; Anderson, “American Popular Music,” 54. See also Baker, “Recording the Right,” Goldmine, November 1981, 176-78; Jens Lund, “Fundamentalism, Racism, and Political Reaction in Country Music,” in Denisoff and Peterson, Sounds of Social Change, 79-91. The term rock is used here as defined by Betz in Story of Rock, viii: “music rather different from Jazz or traditional Folk . . . to which it is related . . . [but folk] did not originate [on record]. For the most part, [it] originated and developed through live performances. Rock . . . h a s generally done the opposite. Record [sales] are the music’s initial medium.”
“George Gallup, The Gallup Poll: Public Opinion 1935-1971, 3 vols. (New York, 1972) 3: 1971,2010,2052; Sheldon Appleton, “The Public, The Polls, and The War,” Vietnam Perspectives 1 (May 1966): 313; E. M. Schrieber, “American Politics, Votes a n d Public Opinion,” Politics 10 (November 1975): 207-209.
7
The Historian
a n d their prowar attitude toward Vietnam lessened the likelihood of their purchasing antiwar records.12
Rock also faced opposition from t h e federal government, which controlled the primary entertainment mediums of television a n d radio. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) restricted air play of some rock songs, warning radio stations t h a t they could face legal action for airing lyrics deemed inappropriate for broadcast. Radio a n d TV stations were unwilling to accept a n y controversial rock songs, especially antiwar songs, for fear of FCC retribution. I n contrast, by 1966 non-rock popular songs i n support of t h e war h a d captured a significant portion of t h e record-buying public. Sgt. Barry Sadler’s “Ballad of the Green Berets” led this group, becoming the top-selling song of 1966.’“
While a handful of songs during the period 1965-1968 opposed the war a n d achieved modest commercial success, they were in direct contrast to the prevailing acceptance of the war. The most popular of these, Barry McGuire’s social commentary “Eve of Destruction,” attacked all aspects of t h e Establishment from racism to war.14 Even though attempts were made to ban the song from the airways-ARC affiliates a n d other top forty stations refused to play “Eve of Destruction”-it still attained the number- one-song status a n d remained i n t h e top twenty for eight weeks.15
IYLees, “From ‘Over There,’ ” 60; Godfrey Hodgson, America in Our Time (Garden City, N.Y., 1976), 340; Chapple a n d Garofalo, Hock and Roll, 305; Paul Hirsch, The Structure of the Popular Music Zndustry (Ann Arbor, Mich., 1967), 68.
‘:’Turner, “ ‘I Ain’t Marchin’ Anymore,’ ” 4; Tom Phillips, “Vietnam Blues,” New York Times Magazine, 8 October 1967, 12. Excellent examples are the censorship of Pete Seeger a n d the Smothers Brothers for their antiwar presen- tations on television. Sadler’s song placed twenty-first i n the top-selling songs of the 1960s. See Joel Whitburn, The Billboard Rook of Top 40 Hits (New York, 1985), 552.
IdBarry McGuire, “Eve of Destruction,” Dunhill 4009, 196.5. Antiwar titles were taken from a number of Sources, including Baker, “Rock’s Angry Voice,” 10-11; Chilcoat, “The Images of Vietnam,” 601-603; Clark, “When Rock Went to War,” 10-23; Cooper, A Resource Guide to Themes in Contemporary American Song Lyrics, 1950-1985(Westport, Conn., 1986); Denisoff, Songs of Protest, War & Peace: A Bibliography and Discography (Santa Barbara, Calif., 1973). The above sources include a number of marginal listings, but a careful listening of these reveals they do not qualify as antiwar songs, such as “American Woman” by the Guess Who. Only those songs which explicitly mention war a n d its evils a r e included. See also Hesbacher a n d Waffen, “War Recordings.”
lSDenisoff, Singa Song, 37; Burns, “Utopia,” 43. Sales figures a r e taken from Peter E. Berry, The Hits Just Keep on Comin’(Syracuse, 1977); Frank Hoffman, comp., The Cashbox Singles Charts, 1950-1981 (Metuchen, N.J., 1983); Whitburn, Billboard Book; Stephen Nugent a n d Charlie Gillett, Rock Almanac: Top Twenty
8
Rock Music & Vietnam
No antiwar song would surpass McGuire’s 1965 hit. Several more artists tried to capture the small antiwar market, mostly i n the new folk-rock genre. Donovan recorded Buffy St. Mane’s compo- sition entitled “Universal Soldier” in 1965, a n d t h e song reached number forty-five i n the top 100. Two years later he released the more direct “The War Drags On,” i n which he s a n g “Dan . . . went out to fight t h e good fight i n South Viet Nam” but never returned; t h e song never reached the top 100. Simon a n d Garfunkle released “Seven O’clock NewdSilent Night” i n 1966 for Columbia Records. At the end of t h e song they quoted Richard Nixon’s admonishment of antiwar protesters, calling them “the greatest single weapon working against t h e U.S.” It also failed to make the pop charts. The more provocative the song, it seemed, t h e fewer the sales.16
Some songs from this period, despite low sales figures, would later become cult classics. I n 1967 Country Joe McDonald a n d the Fish recorded “I-Feel-Like-I’m-Fixin’-to-Die Rag.” The song, while a favorite today among the Vietnam generation, received little air play a n d sold few copies before t h e group’s appearance at Woodstock a n d t h e subsequent album a n d movie about the event. The group’s Barry Melton a n d Joe McDonald later recognized t h a t their music h a d become concurrentlv commercialized a n d trivialized to t h e point where they were “selling peace . . . for $3.98.”17
The year 1968 represented a transition in popular attitudes toward t h e American presence i n Southeast Asia. The Tet Offensive of February dimmed forever General William West- moreland’s “light a t t h e end of t h e tunnel.” I n the midst of this debacle, nearly sixty-one percent of those Americans polled considered themselves “hawks,” while seventy percent advocated the continued bombing of North Vietnam. Two months later, in early April, Gallup released figures which for the first time indicated American dissatisfaction with the war. T h e “hawk/ dove” ratio was even a t forty-one percent, and among those 21-29 years old, forty-two percent considered themselves “doves” a n d forty-one percent still thought of themselves as “hawks.” I n - American and British Singles and Albums of the 50s, 60s, and 70s (Garden City, N.Y., 1978).
16Donovan, “Universal Soldier,” Hickory 1338/Capitol5504,1965, and “The War Drags On,” Hickory 1417, 1967; Simon and Garfunkel, “Seven O’clock NewsISilent Night,”Columbia 11669,1966. Clark, “When Rock Went to War,” 12.
17Country Joe McDonald and the Fish, “ ‘I-Feel-Like-I’m-Fixin’-to-Die’ Rag,” Vanguard 79266, 1967. Turner, “I Ain’t Marchin’ Anymore,” 180. McDonald and Barry Melton interviewed in “Country Joe and The Fish: An Interview,” Jazz and Pop, November 1968,37.
9
The Historian
August the Democratic National Convention in Chicago exploded with a massive demonstration and riot which seemed to typify a year which h a d witnessed the senseless assassinations of Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King.lB
Rock ’n’ roll music, as a commodity of the marketplace subject to fluctuations in consumer demand, responded to the war’s wavering popularity by releasing a few more antiwar songs. More amplified rock began to speak out for reasons of both culture and commerce. After 1967, the music industry changed as the musical traditions of folk, soul, blues and rock blended and merged, and technology i n amplification improved. Listeners and bands formed a closer bond by identifying themselves as outsiders and members of a counterculture. Some equate this post-1967 music with revolution, but in reality the transformation was actually a business decision, as profit-oriented businessmen and corpora- tions came to realize the market possibilities of rock music. R. Peter Strauss, president of Strauss Broadcasting Group, told a n interviewer in 1966 t h a t the purpose of a r a d i o station was to play the most popular music, regardless of its content. Popular songs meant more listeners, which in turn meant greater advertising revenue. l9
Taking the growing disillusionment with the Vietnam War into consideration, the rock music industry in 1968 released five antiwar songs, as many as in the previous three years combined, with four of these reaching the top 100. Simon and Garfunkle’s “Scarborough Fair/Canticle,” in which the antiwar message remained hidden amidst a swirling interchange between the singers, hit number eleven. In contrast Bob Seger’s message i n “2+2=?” left little to the imagination, but only reached number ninety. Eric Burdon a n d the Animals released the most explicit and best known of the year’s antiwar songs in “Sky Pilot.” Although extremely long, which made it rather unsuitable for A.M. radio play, it still remained in the top 100 for sixteen weeks, peaking at number sixteen.20
The year 1968 also signaled rock musicians’ transition to album-oriented rock. These artists asserted more control over
I8Gallup, Gallup Po113: 2106,2124-25. For a good first-hand description of the disillusionment of 1968 see Raymond Mungo, Famous Long Ago: M y Life and Hard Times with the Liberation News Service (Boston, 1970), 53-70.
IgHirsch, Structure, 61. Chapple and Garofolo,,Rock and Roll, i s the standard by which to understand the economic underpinnings of the rock industry.
ZOSimon and Garfunkel, “Scarborough FairKanticle,” Columbia 4-44465, 1968; “he Bob Seger System, “2+2=?”, Capitol 2143, 1968; Eric Burdon and the Animals, “Sky Pilot,” The Twain Shall Meet, MGM K-13939,1968.
10
Rock Music & Vietnam
their now-profitable product a n d assumed the tasks of composing, arranging a n d producing m a n y of their albums. I n addition, they attempted to give generational relevance to their material in order to reach t h e audience in a direct manner. Songs released on albums, which contained from ten to fourteen other songs, benefited from t h e overall market reception of the long-playing record. An example was “Draft Morning,” included on the Byrds’ 1968 album The Notorious Byrd Brothers, which reached m a n y listeners. The Doors’ “Unknown Soldier,” released as part of their popular Waiting f o r the Sun album, broke into the top 100 singles chart a n d rose to number twenty-two.21
The antiwar songs t h a t reached a significant level of popularity from 1965 to 1968 contained several general themes. The first was a sense of confusion felt by youth over t h e war. Most of the songs failed to attack American involvement, yet they revealed a sense of helplessness a n d viewed t h e war as an absurd creation of the Establishment’s military madness. The Byrds i n “Draft Morning” detailed the plight of a young draftee who left his warm bed to report for duty even though he did not agree with t h e war. His only protest was the impotent question: “Why should it happen?” J i m Morrison of the Doors gave a s t a r k interpretation of t h e anonymous masses giving their lives for a n ambiguous cause. All t h a t awaited t h e “Unknown Soldier,” h e cried, was a grave, as death proved t h e only peace, when finally “it’s all over, t h e war is over.”22
Cynicism became a way to attack the conflict. Barry McGuire’s “Eve of Destruction” admonished the political powers for sending American boys off to kill a n d die while denying them t h e right to vote. The Fugs ridiculed t h e mentality of the political a n d military elite by singing “if you don’t kill them the Chinese will, if you don’t want America to play second fiddle, kill for peace.” The cynical outlook toward the war reached its zenith with Country J o e McDonald’s “ ‘Fixin’-to-Die’-Rag,” i n which h e prophesied t h a t “peace will only come when we blow them all to kingdom come.”23
”The Byrds, “Draft Morning,” The Notorious Byrd Brothers, Columbia 9575,1968; The Doors, “Unknown Soldier,” Waiting for the Sun, Elektra 45628, 1968. Charles Reich, The Greening of America (New York, 1970), 243-47; see also Andrew Bailey, “Albums Overshadow Singles as Key to Talent’s Hit Status in British Market,” Variety, 27 August 1969,51.
22The Byrds, “Draft Morning”; the Doors, “Unknown Soldier.” ‘:Country Joe and the Fish, “ ‘I Feel-Like-I’m-Fixin’-to-Die’ Rag”; the Fugs,
“Kill for Peace,” ESP 1028,1966, and “War Song,” Tenderness Junction, Reprise S6280.
11
The Historian
In addition to feelings of cynicism a n d powerlessness, some musicians were conscious of the war’s grim toll on both individuals a n d society. P a r t of this awareness involved their understanding t h a t this war-Vietnam-was different from previous American wars a n d t h a t a n y American father could “be the first one on [his] block to have [his] son come home i n a box.” The songs identify the jungle war, t h e yellow peril a n d the manner of fighting a modern war. Eric Burdon’s “Sky Pilot,” drawing upon World War 11’s “Praise t h e Lord a n d Pass t h e Ammunition” for its title character, reverberated with the sounds of modern warfare- helicopters, bombs a n d machine-gun fire. Country Joe simply identified t h e war’s site, “the next stop is Vietnam,’’ while Bob Seger lamented t h a t his friend w a s “buried in t h e mud in some foreign jungle land.” The most explicit indictment of the war came from t h e Fugs, who i n “Kill for Peace” s a n g t h a t “the only gook a n American c a n trust is a gook that’s got his yellow head
Perhaps the most disturbing theme was the loss of faith i n government, i n humanity a n d finally in God. The contradictory words a n d deeds of t h e government concerning t h e Vietnam W a r destroyed respect for the Establishment’s values a n d institutions. According to the government, in the words of Bob Seger, “You s a y he died for freedom,” but to Seger t h e war’s purpose was transparent: “he died to save your lives” a n d to protect American political prestige. The young soldier could not be faulted because he was only an international pawn i n the deadly game between communism a n d democracy. Both Donovan a n d the Fugs believed the powers used the “Universal Soldier,” fearing t h a t if South Vietnam fell to the Communists then the Vietnamese “might love t h e Russians.” America h a d to send her boys to prevent this travesty. But to m a n y young people this justification h a d no factual basis, a n d they echoed Seger’s sentiment t h a t “it’s the rules not t h e soldiers t h a t a r e [the] real enemies.”Zs
Burdon’s “Sky Pilot” also described t h e loss of faith i n God a n d government. As a n agent of t h e U.S. government, t h e chaplain had a duty to convey to t h e young soldiers that “the fate of your country is in your young hands.” The sky pilot went on to tie America’s millennia1 mission to t h e war, asking God to “give you strength to do your job real well.” When t h e soldiers went off to fight, h e stayed behind a n d prayed for a successful mission. A
Wountry Joe and the Fish, “ ‘I-Feel-Like-I’m-Fixin’-to-Die’ Rag”; Eric
‘“Bob Seger System, “2+2=?”; Donovan, “Univeral Soldier”; Fugs, “Kill for Burdon and the Animals, “Sky Pilot”; Bob Seger System, “2+2=?’
Peace,” and “War Song.”
12
Rock Music & Vietnam young, wounded soldier, upon his return from battle, gazed a t t h e sky pilot a n d quoted t h e Bible, “Thou shalt not kill.” The failure of God a n d country resulted in t h e loss of faith i n humanity itself. T h e individual was helpless to stop t h e endless cruelty a n d inhumanity of war.26
Richard Nixon’s ascension to t h e presidency, combined with t h e internal convulsions t h a t rocked America i n 1968, ushered i n a new era both i n the Vietnam War a n d in the American response to it. Between 1968 a n d 1970 t h e w a r grew unpopular and opposition to t h e war gained respectability as prominent poli- ticians a n d opinion-shaping elites began to speak out. By the end of 1969 the Gallup Poll showed t h a t a majority of Americans (55%) regarded themselves as doves while only a third (31%) thought of themselves as hawks. Almost sixty percent of Americans in their twenties, the primary target for rock, considered themselves d0ves.2~
Research has shown t h a t opposition to the war developed more for pragmatic reasons t h a n because of undue influence from either the media or antiwar activists, the war’s two traditional scapegoats.28 Raymond Mungo, a young antiwar activist a n d co-founder of the Liberation News Service, understood this i n 1970:
the anti-war movement . . . didn’t end the war; worst of all, though, the anti-war movement . . . has been slowly co-opted in the public mind by profoundly pro-war forces-Kennedy, McCarthy, business- men, etc., people who do not disagree with the morality of murder but who see this war, this time, as unproducti~e.~9
Objection even spread to t h e halls of Congress where members supporting t h e war attacked colleagues expressing their support f o r t h e Vietnam moratorium of October 1969. Opposition developed largely because Americans grew tired of “the failure of our substantial military investments to yield
2 6 E r i ~ Burdon and the Animals, “Sky Pilot.” 27Gallup, Gallup Poll 3: 2222,2223. Charles DeBenedetti, “On The Signifi-
cance of Citizen Peace Activism: America, 1961-1975,” Peace and Change 9 (Summer 1983): 13; Rinaldi, “Olive-Drab Rebels,” 27.
“George Herring, “Vietnam Remembered,”JournaZof American History 73 (June 1986): 163.
29Mung0, Famous, 114. :+““Huge Moratorium Protest Divides Congress,” Congressional Quurterly
Weekly Reports, 17 October 1969, 1971-73; Howard Schuman, “Two Sources of Antiwar Sentiment in America,” American Journal of Sociology 78 (November 1972): 513.
13
The Historian Disenchantment with t h e war reached mainstream America
in 1969 a n d paralleled rock’s emergence as pop music’s economic leader. By the end of t h e decade rock sales h a d increased to more t h a n sixty percent of Columbia’s total sales. Throughout t h e record industry over $1.8 billion worth of records a n d tapes were sold by 1971, but not until that year did rock comprise a majority (54%) i n sales for popular music.31
Given the anti-Establishment stance of rock music, one would presume t h a t musicians would record songs opposing t h e war. Yet, m a n y rock personalities kept silent about Vietnam. Few major artists spoke out against the war. I n fact, t h e Beatles, by f a r t h e best-known group in t h e 1960s, had little to say o n t h e topic except “we don’t like war, war is wrong.” J o h n Lennon, i n a 1981 Playboy interview, acknowledged t h e Beatles’ lack of antiwar material, but cited t h e song “Revolution” as his personal antiwar statement. The reason t h e group failed to record antiwar songs, h e said, was because their manager, Brian Epstein, “stopped us from saying anything about Vietnam or t h e war.” Lennon added t h a t Epstein even prohibited press questions about t h e conflict. Following Epstein’s death a n d with Yoko Ono’s influence, Lennon became more outspoken. In 1969 h e a n d Yoko participated i n t h e “Bed-in for Peace” i n Amsterdam a n d soon thereafter recorded “Give Peace a Chance.” The Rolling Stones, t h e era’s other premier rock group, also failed to oppose t h e war. This should not surprise anyone for, according to David Harker in his One f o r the Money, t h e Stones’ “inability to see social unpleasantness seems almost congenital.” Thus two of t h e era’s most famous groups epitomized the attitude of rock musicians i n general.32
When public support for t h e war declined in the late 19609, the music industry responded to the changing climate. Russell Sanjek, public relations director for BMIrecords, said i n 1968 that “the music business is a whore. It will make a n d market anything . . . that it thinks will sell.” The years 1969-1974 witnessed a boom i n antiwar sentiment, a n d t h e release of thirty- four antiwar songs reflected t h e change. Of t h a t group twenty-six
31Gillett, Making Tracks: Atlantic Records and the Growth of a Multi-Billion Dollar Industry (New York, 1974), 274; Chapple and Garofalo, Rock and Roll, 177; “The Revolutionary Hype,” Time, 3 June 1969,49; CBS Market Research, cited in Chapple and Garofalo, Rock and Roll, 185.
32Robert E. Dallos, “Beatles Strike Serious Note in Press Talk,” New York Times, 23 August 1966. John Lennon interviewed by David Sheff, September 1980, in G. Barry Golson, ed., The Playboy Interviews with John Lennonand Yoko Ono (New York, 1981), 158. Hampton, Guerrilla Minstrels, 18-20; David Harker, One for the Money: Politics and Popular Song (London, 1980), 103.
14
Rock Music & Vietnam
reached t h e top 100. The antiwar stance h a d found a m a r k e t , a n d industry analyst J o n a t h a n Eisen best explained this change, describing the record business as “a billion dollar a year industry, [which] lives through the propagation of transient tastes a n d meaningless crazes.”33
Nevertheless, some artists did write bolder lyrics about t h e war. But as t h e number of songs opposing the war increased, their numbers remained minute i n comparison to the total number of popular songs released. J o h n Lennon’s “Give Peace a Chance,” which rose to number eleven i n t h e top 100, did not name t h e Vietnam War, but its message about conflict was obvious. More popular a n d explicit i n its opposition, Creedence Clearwater Revival’s (CCR) “Fortunate Son” detailed the nation’s inequitable draft policy. “Fortunate Son,” CCR’s fourth gold single, rose to number three a n d remained on the charts for ten weeks.34
Other more radical-albeit less profitable-songs examined t h e role of draft resisters a n d evaders. Tommy J a m e s a n d the Shondells’ “Sweet Cherry Wine,” which rose to number seven, s a n g about t h e military’s displacement of God as mankind’s judge. Using religious invocation, the group warned:
Listen now we ain’t marchin’ anymore. No we ain’t gonna fight, Only God has the right to decide who’s to live and die.35
At t h e same time, Steppenwolf launched a scathing attack upon America a n d her institutions in their album Monster, which featured “Draft Resister,” a song supporting young men who were evading conscription. The group labeled as “traitors to humanity” all who refused to join t h e antiwar movement a n d , if necessary, dodge t h e draft. The song did not make the popular charts .36
When Richard Nixon announced i n May 1970 t h a t t h e war had been extended into Cambodia, the spread of American military involvement reignited a n t i w a r opposition. Once a g a i n t h e Establishment’s actions spoke louder t h a n its words; Nixon’s drive for peace included expanding t h e war. Almost immediately protests flared with demonstrations occurring throughout the
””Lees, “From ‘Over There,’ ” 6 0 Jonathan Eisen, The Age of Rock (New
““ohn Lennon, “Give Peace a Chance,” Apple 1809, 1969; Creedence
3sTommy James and The Shondells, “Sweet Cherry Wine,” Roulette 7039,
36Steppenwolf, “Draft Resister,” Monster, Dunhill DS-50066, 1969.
York, 1969), xiii.
Clearwater Revival, “Fortunate Son,” Fantasy 634,1969.
1969.
15
The Historian United States. One such demonstration took place at Kent State University, where amidst t h e confusion the Ohio National Guard killed four students. Shortly thereafter Crosby-Stills-Nash & Young (CSNY) released their unsettling “Ohio.” The song’s author, Neil Young, regretted that “I h a d to write this song. It’s ironic t h a t I capitalized on the death of these American students.” While peaking a t number fourteen, it encountered some resistance from radio stations because of its blatant description of t h e Vietnam War’s effect on American lives a t home. A major h i t for CSNY, “Ohio” became the long-awaited popular antiwar anthem, even though it never mentioned t h e war.37
Between 1970 a n d 1971 a majority (56%) of Americans viewed t h e war as a mistake a n d sixty-one percent advocated early withdrawal. Motown Records, the General Motors of rock, decided to cash i n on the public’s new outlook toward war a n d society and, according to scholar Gary Burns, “belatedly discover[ed] a social consciousness.” Artists such as the Temptations, Marvin Gaye, Freda Payne a n d Edwin Starr now understood t h a t “protest songs were commodities manufactured for profit,” just like love songs. According to Starr, war destroyed all aspects of life a n d was good for “absolutely nothing.” Starr’s “War” remained i n the top-selling slot for three weeks a n d became t h e first antiwar song from Motown to climb to number one. Starr a n d Motown president Barry Gordy, upon seeing the success of “War,” released “Stop the War Now,” but i t failed to achieve its predecessor’s high rating, reaching only twenty-four in the charts. The Temptations, who helped write “War,” also contributed a number one selection i n “Ball of Confusion.” The 1970 song concluded “end t h e war, a n d the band played on.” Marvin Gaye a n d Freda Payne also had top-selling discs with lyrics expressing a desire for t h e war’s end. I n his number one hit “What’s Goin’ On,” Gaye, assuming the persona of a young m a n , told his father “we don’t need to escalate . . . war is not t h e answer.” P a y n e also viewed t h e war i n personal terms, believing t h e men going to fight i n Vietnam were being wasted.38
.j7Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young, “Ohio,” Atlantic 2740, 1970; Neil Young quoted on record jacket, Decade, Warner 3RS 2257, 1976. Charles E. Fager, “Chilling Outrage,” The Christian Century, 12 August 1970,999; “Banned ‘Ohio’ released here,” Melody Maker, 25 July 1970,3.
‘InGallup, Gallup Poll 3: 2254, 2316; Edwin Starr, “War,” Gordy 7101, 1970 and “Stop the War Now,”Gordy 7104,1970; The Temptations, “Ball df Confusion,” Gordy GS954,1970; Marvin Gaye, “What’s Goin’ On,”Tamla TS-310,1971; Freda Payne, “Bring the Boys Home,” Invictus 9092, 1971. Albert Goldman, “The Emergence of Rock,” in The Sixties, ed. Gerald Howard (New York, 1982), 349; Burns, “Utopia,” 147.
16
Rock Music & Vietnam
The popularity of antiwar rock songs peaked between 1970 a n d 1971 with the release of twenty-two such compositions, fifteen of which made the weekly top 100 singles chart. CCR released two songs in 1970 with underlying antiwar themes, a n d both became top ten sellers. Although “Run Through t h e Jungle” a n d “Who’ll Stop the Rain” never mention Vietnam, they “burned vivid images into t h e enlisted man’s mind,” according to m a n y Vietnam veterans. J o h n Lennon continued his antiwar stance with the allegorical f a n t a s y “Imagine.” Reaching t h e number two slot, the song asked t h e idealistic question “what if?” Within Lennon’s utopian dream, residents of t h e world would abandon the notion of war. I n 1970 former Army paratrooper J i m i Hendrix released a song dedicated to “all the soldiers fighting i n Vietnam,” a n d used his guitar as a “Machine Gun” to show his solidarity with the troops. Hendrix’s “Izabella,” released i n 1973 after his death, described a soldier’s longing to hold his girlfriend instead of h i s gun. Graham Nash, on his best-selling 1971 album Songs for Beginners, lamented t h a t “military madness was killing the ~ o u n t r y . ” ~ g
Aside from t h e established rock acts which publicly dissented from the war, several marginal groups released albums with antiwar selections, but none reached the charts. The Association sang “Requiem for the Masses” on their album Insight Out, dedicated to those who had died in Vietnam. Steve Miller s a n g the “Jackson-Kent Blues” for t h e young people from the two campuses who h a d been killed during the demonstrations. Sea Train’s “Marblehead Messenger” asked the soldier to lay down his weapons to “put a n end to war.’’ On Black Sabbath’s album Paranoid, the song “War Pigs” attacked the world’s military generals whose “evil minds . . . plot destruction.” Reggae star Jimmy Cliff released his version of a protest song i n 1970, simply entitled “Vietnam.” He told the story of a mother who mourned her son’s loss in Southeast Asia a n d begged, “somebody please stop the war.”40
”CCR, “Run Through the Jungle,” Fantasy FANT-8402, 1970 a n d “Who’ll Stop the Rain,” F a n t a s y 637, 1970; J o h n Lennon, “Imagine,” Apple SW-3379, 1971; Jimi Hendrix, “Machine Gun,” Band of Gypsys, Capitol STA0472,1970, a n d “Izabella,” War Heroes, Reprise RS2103,1973; Graham Nash, “Military Madness,” Songs f o r Beginners, Atlantic SD7204,1971. Clark, “When Rock Went to War,” 13.
4OThe Association, “Requiem for the Masses,” Insight Out, Warner Brothers WS-1696,1970; Steve Miller Band, “Jackson-Kent Blues,” Number Five, Capitol 436,1970; Sea Train, “Marblehead Messenger,” Marblehead Messenger, Capitol SMAS-829,1971; Black Sabbath, “War Pigs,” Paranoid, Warner Brothers K-3104, 1970; Jimmy Cliff, “Vietnam,” A & M 1167, 1970.
17
The Historian Realizing t h e vast consumer potential of antiwar material,
record companies now promoted “schlock.” By 1972 protest rock had become so mainstream t h a t middle-of-the-road pop performers capitalized on the public’s disenchantment wjth t h e Vietnam adventure a n d questioned t h e war on A.M. radio. Unwilling to attack America’s involvement i n Southeast Asia, these songs decried war i n its most generic sense. C a t Stevens’ 1971 number four hit “Peace Train” referred to t h e war i n a n ambiguous way a n d offered little more t h a n prayer as a solution. The Fifth Dimension sought to profit from t h e growing antiwar sentiment with an obscure allusion i n their 1970 song “Save t h e Country.’’ Emerson, Lake, a n d Palmer (ELP) mocked the “Lucky Man . . . [who] went to fight wars for his country . . . n o money could save him so h e laid down a n d died.” Melanie h i t t h e top ten with two vague antiwar ballads in 1970, “Lay Down (Candles in the Rain),” a n d “Peace Will Come (According to Plan).” Even t h e Beach Boys now labelled t h e war a waste, a n d i n “Student Demonstration Time” they s a n g t h a t “I know we’re all fed up with useless wars a n d racial strife.” Included on their Surf’s Up Brother album, t h e song represented in toto t h e Beach Boys’ protestations about Vietnam.41
As support for t h e Vietnam War diminished a n d t h e rock industry released more antiwar material, changes i n musical approach took place. While t h e songs i n this period (1969-1974) lacked specific references to Vietnam, they criticized war i n obscure ways, questioning t h e very concept. The situation i n Vietnam now symbolized war i n general, as the songs protested the moral decay of civilization: “War, what is i t good for?” A significant portion of these songs failed to mention a n y war but attacked i n vague references t h e polarization of the era, best exemplified by “Ohio,” “Peace Train” a n d “Imagine.” The graphic atrocities of war which characterized t h e earlier period’s lyrics became absent after 1970, as protest became vague a n d centered upon the need for utopian peace. T h e vividness also disappeared i n t h e music. Simple chord patterns a n d production techniques h a d dominated t h e earlier songs, as they included the sounds of war-planes, bombs, guns, bugles-and often featured one singer with little backup. But in t h e period after 1970 t h e
41Cat Stevens, “PeaceTrain,” A & M 1291,1971; The Fifth Dimension, “Save the Country,” Bell 6045, 1970 Emerson, Lake, and Palmer, “Lucky Man,” Cotillion 44106,1971; Melanie, “Lay Down (Candles in the Rain),” Buddah 5060 and “Peace Will Come (According to Plan),” Buddah 5066, 1970; Beach Boys, “Student Demonstration Time,” Surf’s U p Brother, Brother 6453, 1971. Eisen, Age, xii; Clark, “When Rock Went to War,” 13.
18
Rock Music & Vietnam
songs became “slicker.” As production technology improved, songs included complex arrangements, best exemplified by Edwin Starr’s “War” and Freda Payne’s “Bring t h e Boys Home.” This period’s antiwar songs included trumpets, violins, harmony backgrounds, dance rhythms a n d a n y number of other techniques designed to increase product desirability. With rock’s commercial- ization of t h e antiwar song, it was not surprising t h a t the period after 1969 saw a n increase in released material.42
While opposition to t h e war appeared to increase o n the record c h a r t s i n 1970 a n d 1971, the record buyers, companies a n d artists did not mobilize against t h e war. Society assimilated a n d accom- modated radical political messages, a n d then proceeded to distill a n d soften t h e rhetorical potential. J o h n Sinclair, manager of MC-5 a n d chairman of the White Panther party, while believing i n t h e revolutionary potential of rock music, understood by 1970 t h a t t h e “music was no longer wholly ours, it . . . h a d been turned into a n entertainment form . . . a n d it was out of our hands.” J o h n Gabree, writing i n High Fidelity, questioned if a n y popular consumer-oriented art form could offer much hope to transform society. Noted music historian David Rosen, while concluding t h a t young people felt some protest towards their society a n d culture, observed that record companies viewed protest music only i n terms of its commercial potential-that is, profitability. Sinclair concurred, believing t h a t the Establishment “moved in a n d took it over by buying off t h e musicians a n d turning music into a simple Amerikan commodity which could be bought a n d sold like anything else.” By 1971 Country Joe McDonald, a n acknowledged antiwar musician, h a d become disgusted with the increased trivialization a n d commercialization of t h e war, a process h e h a d seen sprouting three years earlier. His audiences did not “care about the ‘Fixin’-to-Die Rag,’ ” h e complained, but were more excited a n d enthusiastic about the possibility of publicly spelling t h e word “fuck” i n t h e “Fish Cheer.”43
McDonald’s gripe points to another obstacle against a true radical mobilization: most rock audiences were apolitical. Record buyers might have recognized t h e political a n d moral undertone
‘ZStarr, “War.” 43John Sinclair, Guitar Army: Street Writings/Prison Writings (New York,
1972), 28; John Gabree, “Rock: Art, Revolution, or Sell-Out?’’ High Fidelity and Musical America, August 1969; David M. %sen, Protest Songs in America (Westlake Village, Calif., 1972), 148; Sinclair, Guitar Army, 28; David Felton and Tony Glover, “The Rolling Stone Interview: Country Joe McDonald,” Rolling Stone, 27 May 1971,37.
19
The Historian
of the antiwar songs and albums they purchased, as Rolling Stone’s J o h n Morthland observed i n 1970; but few became “sufficiently motivated to take actions against the war,” he concluded. Young people often bought and listened to albums and attended concerts as a means to escape the war’s reality, for as Jerome Rodnitzky concluded, “rock concerts provided musical performances to see and hear, but hardly to think about.”44
The blame for the failure of rock music to develop a political and moral conscience must rest with artists and record companies, as well as consumers. The objective of a n y performer in the record industry is to reach the greatest number of people by selling records. J o h n Fogerty of CCR believed it foolish not to be commercial. “Success,” he noted, “means a lot of people accepted what you do.” Joe McDonald also realized the necessity of commercialization. “We find ourselves,’’ he said, “in an adult world of business, of having to compete.” Keith Richards of the Rolling Stones felt powerless within the corporate structure. He believed t h a t the Stones’ albums did not flow straight from the group to their audiences, but rather they went through the hands of some “very straight English private . . . company,” who then released what it believed the people would buy. Frank Zappa, a controversial and respected artist, understood the profit motive. In 1969 he declared t h a t “most . . . people,” whose job it was to produce, promote a n d sell records to deejays and record stores, “know nothing about music, but look instead for the commercial potential.” Thus, by the end of 1971 antiwar rock songs h a d become not a social protest rising up from the people, but a brief, commercially viable product.45
Top re,cord executives who operated their enterprises on a strict financial basis began to view the war as an economic quagmire. The Columbia Broadcast System (CBS) a n d Radio Corporation of America (RCA), multinational companies which dominated the recorded music industry in the United States, supported the war throughout the Johnson presidency when the conflict’s economic effects were positive. But in the late 1960s inflation, the imbalance of payments, recession and continued student and ghetto riots took a negative social and economic toll
44John Morthland, “Kent Aftermath: Teen Turmoil Poison at B.O.,” Rolling Stone, 25 June 1970,8; Rodnitzky, Minstrels, 140.
45John Fogerty, interviewed by Ralph Gleason in Rolling Stone Interviews, 2 vols. (New York, 1971-1973), 1: 338-39; “Che Guevara, revolution, Yippies, hippies, fascists, LSD and Country Joe,” Melody Maker, 23 November 1968, 11; Rolling Stone Interviews 2~288; “Zappa Paints a Picture of Two Worlds Divided,” Billboard, 10 May 1969,50.
20
Rock Music & Vietnam
and caused the industry’s support for the war to wane. CBS aired its dissent in 1971 with the documentary, The Selling of the Pentagon. RCA, which owned the National Broadcast Company, lagged behind CBS in opposing Vietnam involvement due to its multimillion-dollar Department of Defense contracts which ran through 1974. By the early 1970s most record producers, executives and multinational corporations favored disengagement from Southeast Asia and, since they controlled the popular record culture, proceeded to disseminate profitable radicalism with a n antiwar message.46
When Nixon ended American military involvement in Vietnam in J a n u a r y 1973, Americans sought to put the long conflict behind them, a n d music returned to the established marketable themes of love, romance and broken hearts. Although the war continued in Southeast Asia, American popular music, always a reflection of national attitude, ignored the distant fighting. Only seven antiwar rock songs appeared after the Paris Peace Accords. ELP re-released its 1971 single “Lucky Man,” hoping t o capitalize on their own increased notoriety and the war’s end, but the song fared no better the second time around, reaching only sixty-three in the top 100. A number one song which dealt with the Civil War, “Billy Don’t Be a Hero,” by Bo Donaldson and the Heywoods, described a fiancbe’s anger over the death of her betrothed who h a d died a hero. The O’Jays released a number one single in 1973 which urged people all over the world to climb aboard the “Love Train.” Still the message of these songs was lost amidst vague generalities and popular ~ l i c h b s . ~ ~
A few artists continued to address the war and its ramifications for American society during the period 1972-1974, but consumer appeal proved meager and the records never became hits. Perhaps the best known of these artists was Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band. On his first album Greetings from Asbury Park, Springsteen sang “Lost in the Flood,’’ about a returning veteran
.Whapple and Garofalo, Rock and Roll, 186437,220; Rodnitzky, “Decline of Contemporary Protest Music,” 49. In 1973 ten corporations accounted for 82.9% of U S . domestic record sales.
“Bo Donaldson and the Heywoods, “Billy Don’t Be a Hero,” ABC ABCD- 824, 1974; O’Jays, “Love Train,” Philadelphia KZ-31712, 1973. Anderson, “American Popular Music,” 61-62. The authors discuss only five; the remaining two are: A1 Wilson’s ‘‘La La Peace Song” and Albert Hammond’s “The Peace- maker.” Although some analysts, including Cooper and Clark, list more songs in this era, most of their listings do not qualify because of their ambiguity, such a s Coven’s “One Tin Soldier,” or because they are more gospel music t h a n rock, such as the Chi-Lite’s “There Will Never Be Peace.”
21
The Historian alienated from society. The New York Dolls also confronted postwar guilt i n “Vietnamese Baby” asking, “now t h a t it’s over . . . what you gonna do?” But by the end of 1973 the war seemed distant to the public, a n d musicians, producers and record companies once again followed after the audience’s changing tastes.48
* The question then becomes, why was rock not overwhelming
in its opposition to the Vietnam War? The reasons, aside from the profit motive, are several. First, young people desired to remain loyal Americans, as evidenced by Jimi Hendrix’s rendition of “The Star-Spangled Banner” at Woodstock. While many believed the Vietnam War to be wrong, they felt the blame lay with the Establishment, not the soldiers. Those fighting the war were of the same generation and held many of the same beliefs, often including an antiwar attitude. Vietnam was rock’s first war, and for musicians to attack it was tantamount to abandoning their husbands, brothers and friends fighting in Southeast Asia. Moreover, the soldiers in Vietnam also purchased rock albums.
But perhaps a more central reason was the aim of rock music itself. Rarely political, rock spoke to and for the cultural wing of the counterculture. As Allen Matusow argued in The Unraveling of America, “as the decade closed it became clear t h a t drugs, sex, a n d rock a n d roll lacked intrinsic moral content”; and further, that the appeal of rock music to the counterculture came from its “demonstrable power to liberate the music instincts.” Rock, therefore, remained apolitical because the market it targeted for purchase-“turn-on-drop-out” youth-was not overtly political.49
As the years passed, popular imagination enthroned rock music as the leader of political antiwar opposition. I n romantic hindsight most young people of the sixties have been cast as social reformers, antiwar activists and hippies. Mass media reinforces this myth through movies like The Big Chill and 1969 and television programs like “Family Ties,” “Kate and Allie” and “Simon and Simon,” all of which glorify the “good old days” of the 1960s. All these romantic remembrances place rock i n the forefront of social and cultural activism. A countercultural symbol, rock unified America’s youth by focusing on personal
4HBruce Springsteen and the E Street Band, “Lost in the Flood,” Greetings from Asbury Park, Columbia KC 31903, 1973; New York Dolls, “Vietnamese Baby,” Mercury SRM-1-675, 1973.
49Matusow, Unraveling o f America, 303-304.
22
Rock Music & Vietnam
politics; but in the main, it remained apolitical toward society’s problems-especially civil rights and the Vietnam War.50
This nostalgic leap-of-faith theory presumes that because rock was anti-Establishment, it was antiwar. Radio stations have engraved this myth onto the American imagination as they promote nostalgic “noontime nuggets,” “electric lunches” and “psychedelic suppers” which allow the listener to relive his or her glory days in the last era t h a t mattered. In addition, recent antiwar songs of Bruce Springsteen (“Born in the USA”), Billy Joel (“Goodnight Saigon”) and Charlie Daniels (“Still in Saigon”) have added to the mystique t h a t rock music, social activism and antiwar attitudes walked hand in hand.
Since the 1950s, rock ’n’ roll h a s stood outside a n d criticized the adult culture in which it flourished. After 1965 rock adopted anti-Establishment principles a n d articulated t h e counter- culture’s aims. At the same time, rock was a business and, as Michael Lydon wrote in Ramparts in 1969, rock music was “an American creation on the level of the hamburger or the billboard.” As a consumer-oriented industry, rock had to determine where the market existed a n d adjust its product development to changing opinions. Songs about sex, drugs, alienation from parents a n d revolution sold well, as did the standard themes of love a n d youth. In contrast, songs about the Vietnam War did not. Antiwar rock represented only a small number of songs released, and musicians avoided specific references to the war in Southeast Asia. F a r from creating attitudes about the war, the music industry pandered to consumers’ changing tastes. Not even the Vietnam War, the most flagrant manifestation of the established culture’s tenets, could force the rock industry to speak out. Recognizing rock music’s concern for the bottom line, Rolling Stone magazine observed, “The difference between a rock star and a robber baron is six inches of hair.” “Takin’ care of business” stands as a n appropriate motto for popular music in a n y era.51 Like all corporations, record companies followed public opinion in the sixties, a n d always gave consumers the product they desired.
“See Jon Wiener, “Looking Back, Moving Ahead,” The Nation, 26 March 1988, 421-22; Andrew Fisk, “Far Out, Man,” in ‘‘Letters,’’ The Nation, 21 May 1988,698.
51Michael Lydon, “Rock For Sale,” Ramparts, June 1969, 19. Rolling Stone magazine quoted in George Brown Tindall, America: A Narrative History, 2 vols. (New York, 1984), 2: 1295. Bachman-Turner Overdrive, “Takin’ Care of Business,” Mercury SRM 1-1004,1974.
23
