Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2020 6:14:50 GMT
Well I'd argue that being openly gay in the UK in the 1980s was political enough, he didn't have to write songs about Thatcher's govt, he was openly 'immoral' anyway. But aside from that I think G's initial point was missed there and I agree with him. Was he openly gay though then? My memory is that he was guarded about it. I'm not knocking him for it btw, it's anyone's right to keep their sexuality private if they so choose.
|
|
|
Post by Reactionary Rage on Aug 10, 2020 7:40:58 GMT
I don't think Fred ever officially came out
|
|
|
Post by cousinlou on Aug 10, 2020 8:27:30 GMT
But it's true. Their main flaw is that they were always more Andrew Lloyd Webber than Andrew Loog Oldham. For quite a few songs of theirs that is certainly true. Then again, what do you expect from Freddie ? It's exactly the role he had planned for himself. Queen wasn't really a band but rather, just Mercury. To call his songs emotionally empty though is simply not true. Before you get funny thoughts, I am not a fan although I can stand the music better now than I could in real time.
|
|
|
Post by cousinlou on Aug 10, 2020 8:32:26 GMT
Well I'd argue that being openly gay in the UK in the 1980s was political enough, he didn't have to write songs about Thatcher's govt, he was openly 'immoral' anyway. But aside from that I think G's initial point was missed there and I agree with him. Was he openly gay though then? My memory is that he was guarded about it. I'm not knocking him for it btw, it's anyone's right to keep their sexuality private if they so choose. I agree. Though his looks were a bit of a give away no? You could put him in the Village people and people wouldn't be surprised.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2020 8:57:33 GMT
True, although I suspect it went over the head of much of the fanbase. I can imagine someone in the Midwest thinking his moustache is 'masculine', just like Tom Selleck!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2020 8:58:49 GMT
Well I'd argue that being openly gay in the UK in the 1980s was political enough, he didn't have to write songs about Thatcher's govt, he was openly 'immoral' anyway. But aside from that I think G's initial point was missed there and I agree with him. Mercury was publicly unpolitical. As I recall, he was absolutely not out. That would have been a personal statement and he was super-private. But he didn't need to make any kind of statement, everyone knew. There was no need. As for 'immoral', we are talking about the eighties, consumption, indulgence and bragging was the vogue not the confessional.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2020 9:34:53 GMT
I was born in 1988 so I can't remember tbh. I think the papers were calling him such at the time and it seemed to be an open secret.
The "immoral" was a reference to that Thatcher speech on Section 28.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2020 9:42:04 GMT
Oh, no-one I knew or knew of thought being gay was immoral. Nor was it the thought in any media I can remember.
Thatcher being out of touch again.
|
|
|
Post by DarknessFish on Aug 10, 2020 9:53:52 GMT
Oh, no-one I knew or knew of thought being gay was immoral. Nor was it the thought in any media I can remember. Thatcher being out of touch again. In the seventies and eighties? It was arguably as reprehensible as being foreign in the tabloids. I mean, this is a cutting from the mail in 1993:
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2020 10:10:15 GMT
Mind you it wasn't that long ago that The Mail were saying that Stephan Gately had brought his death upon himself through giving in to his sinful homosexuality. Things have only changed very recently in that regard. They probably still think it, but at least now they may have second thoughts about publishing it, which is progress of sorts.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2020 10:32:32 GMT
Oh, no-one I knew or knew of thought being gay was immoral. Nor was it the thought in any media I can remember. Thatcher being out of touch again. In the seventies and eighties? It was arguably as reprehensible as being foreign in the tabloids. I mean, this is a cutting from the mail in 1993: 1 - Daily Mail, still churning bollocks 2 - that's about children not about de facto homosexuality - if it weren't for Elton they'd still say that 3 - I forget, will fill in later
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2020 10:34:11 GMT
Sorry for derailing the thread...
For the music, I don't mind some of the later, synthier singles (Break Free with the Corrie-esque crossdressing video, and Slightly Mad) but even that period is coupled with bombastic proggy-aping wank like Innuendo. For the OP I went with Killer Queen but I dislike the 70s production on the vocals.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2020 10:38:37 GMT
They probably still think it, but at least now they may have second thoughts about publishing it, which is progress of sorts. They know they publish shit (in the late eighties/early nineties, I temped there briefly) - I highly doubt most of the writers think a lot of that bollocks. It's all about the policy of the owner/selling outrage to people keen to have their unthinking place in society entrenched by crusaders.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2020 10:53:30 GMT
One of the first things I was taught in the history part of my degree was 'consider the sources'. There is a reason it's known by some as The Daily Fascist. I still say they lead the thought of their sheeple readers rather than reflect it. That element of society who, in the eighties, thought homosexuality is abhorrent probably still do.
Besides, as I said, Mercury wasn't out.
And he was an entertainer. There's a long history of gay entertainers, none of which the Mail were ever up in arms about because of it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2020 11:13:49 GMT
So? Bono's superficial in this regard, talks alot but does fuck all. Just because freddie didn't talk about politics/social issues doesn't make him a superficial rock star. It's not a prerequisite to become a roxk star anyway. You have a very narrow definition of art. I'm talking about expression, not being a politician. Nope, are you really saying that Freddie didn't express himself AT ALL? He was just in queen to be famous, and that's it? All the songs are empty?
|
|