"Hot Space" / "Break Free" video killed Queen in America - Myth or reality?

[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Micrówave wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]NOTWMEDDLE wrote: [/QUOTENAME]By the mid-80s, New Wave was out and glam metal was in. [/QUOTE]

They should have left the IWTBF makeup on!!!!! Damn!!!

[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Daniel Nester wrote: [/QUOTENAME]One bum album does not a ruined career make--ask Styx (Kilroy Was Were)[/QUOTE]

Actually, this did happen with Styx. They started sucking upon it's release, and that's also when people started making fun of the song "Babe".[/QUOTE]

Styx changed its sound due to prog rock and art rock falling out of fashion and the advent of punk and New Wave coming in. Genesis and Styx, Rush and Pink Floyd all had to adapt to changes in musical styles.

Some excellent responses here! And I completely overlooked the fact that they didn't tour.

I guess my goal in this was to at least expand the blame to a number of factors instead of the usual excuses.

I've heard it a million times, but I don't think that IWTBF (or U2's "One") was ever banned by MTV. They may not have played it a lot, but that would have been big news as drag was never a reason to ban anything. I think people are getting confused about what banning means. While Wikipedia is hardly the definitive source for accuracy, here's a pretty comprehensive list of banned videos, neither One not IWTBF is mentioned, odd considering that U2 and Queen aren't exactly low profile bands.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_on_MTV#Banned_music_videos

This thread is great. Interesting to hear from the American fans who were there 'at the time'.

Another point which I feel applies to the more general US music fan is the question of homegrown artist vs those from overseas.
Of course Queen were huge in many other territories but the fact remains that there is a certain 'rivalry' between the English speaking music producing nations. Just like some people prefer to buy cars, food and beer from 'home' couldn't it be the same with music?
After all, if you are in a country where English isn't spoken (eg Japan) it's the melody (and often band image) that attracts the fans. If you understand the lyrics but are not so familiar with quaint English eccentricities, you may be turned off to a point. Those older fans enjoyed Queen in the early days as a larger part of the music scene (and possibly the last of the 'British Invasion) and obviously many still have their love for the band today. But as the more transitory fans lost interest, a newer generation may not have embraced a band like Queen with the same fervour as before.
The US is too large a country to pigeonhole but just listening to the traditionally popular musical styles (blues, jazz, country, R+B folk etc)goes some way to explain how hard it may have been to categorise, and sometimes, accept Queen.
As an English person I'd argue that some British artists create music that has a more profound effect on me than, say, something by Springsteen, Johnny Cash or Mahalia Jackson. That's not to say those aren't powerful musicians, it's just that sometimes things are lost in the cultural gap.
The timing of Queen's 'demise' in the US does appear to coincide with Hot Space and beyond but that may have just been coincidence as the local market was producing more and more homegrown talent that spoke to the people more directly.

Let's face it....1980 was the year Queen ruled America....that album was played everywhere...and overplayed....Another One Bites the Dust was a tremendous success but so was Crazy Little Thing and Dragon Attack even got great airplay....then Queen puts out Greatest Hits and they still rule....but they were too popular....now people weren't liking them because they were overplayed..even US Tabloid magazines started taking shots at Freddie...personally I don't think the general North American public was even aware of Freddie's sexuality...he was a singer in a band, they bought the records, he rocked live, many probably never saw him.....so what he now had a mustache....so did popular male actors like Burt Reynolds, Tom Selleck it was pretty much a style...the average joe public has no idea what styles may be going on in gay circles.......
But Flash Gordon was a waste even on many die hard fans....and Hot Space was horrendous compared to the Queen of old...Freddie misguided the band into a funk direction thinking it was the new thing....and most of the tracks don't stand up today....you compare it to Journey's Escape and you can see why people weren't into it...their hard rock band had turned into some synth techno-pop funk band with some of the now dreaded disco (sucks) mixed in......No rock songs were released as singles either....
Next comes The Works - you can only really have one album that really bombs....but instead of releasing rock tracks in America they go with another synth-pop song Radio Gaga....then follow it with another...this time even with a synth solo to replace the Rocker Brian....plus you do a video in drag...then when they still had a chance to put out a rocker they release It's a Hard Life.....for the casual fan who liked the old stuff.....why would he or she even buy it....they aren't rock anymore....it's like a muzac / pop band....too bad they never got to hear rockers like Hammer to Fall...after that America just wasn't interested - the marketing for A kind of Magic was horrendous.......it wasn't until I want it All that radio finally wanted to hear Queen again because it was something rock fans wanted....Queen were never to be a pop band in America and compete with all the young kids looking pretty and writing cheesy garbage...but as a rock band they could have still been a force....I want it all got them back again....Innuendo did some more and then of course Freddie's death and Wayne's World....
you won't find Queen and Paul Rodgers writing disco techno-pop rap stuff......they will quite smartly stick to their rock audience

For the record I saw IWTBF during its original run on MTV at least twice. I know this because I remember being happy to catch it on audiotape the 2nd time. (we had the MTV stereo hookup LOL)

And I'm in Kansas.. so if something was gonna be banned, this would be the place ;)

You have made some excellent points, here!

I was one of those fans(a casual fan, back then) who was around from the first playing of, "Killer Queen," on the radio, to the hugely popular CLTCL...
I DO think that Freddie's sexuality had at least a small part to play in the loss of Queen's popularity in the states, based on the comments I heard from those around me, including the radio disc jockies, at that time, and, I think a good deal of this is due to the emergence of MTV.
I don't think the population of Americans that were largely listening to the radio, and, watching MTV, really understood the tongue in cheek factor that seemed so much a part of Freddie's public persona.
Just my observations of what was happening in the American scene that surrounded me at that time.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]saltnvinegar wrote: [/QUOTENAME]This thread is great. Interesting to hear from the American fans who were there 'at the time'.

Another point which I feel applies to the more general US music fan is the question of homegrown artist vs those from overseas.
Of course Queen were huge in many other territories but the fact remains that there is a certain 'rivalry' between the English speaking music producing nations. Just like some people prefer to buy cars, food and beer from 'home' couldn't it be the same with music?
After all, if you are in a country where English isn't spoken (eg Japan) it's the melody (and often band image) that attracts the fans. If you understand the lyrics but are not so familiar with quaint English eccentricities, you may be turned off to a point. Those older fans enjoyed Queen in the early days as a larger part of the music scene (and possibly the last of the 'British Invasion) and obviously many still have their love for the band today. But as the more transitory fans lost interest, a newer generation may not have embraced a band like Queen with the same fervour as before.
The US is too large a country to pigeonhole but just listening to the traditionally popular musical styles (blues, jazz, country, R+B folk etc)goes some way to explain how hard it may have been to categorise, and sometimes, accept Queen.
As an English person I'd argue that some British artists create music that has a more profound effect on me than, say, something by Springsteen, Johnny Cash or Mahalia Jackson. That's not to say those aren't powerful musicians, it's just that sometimes things are lost in the cultural gap.
The timing of Queen's 'demise' in the US does appear to coincide with Hot Space and beyond but that may have just been coincidence as the local market was producing more and more homegrown talent that spoke to the people more directly.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Dusta wrote: [/QUOTENAME]You have made some excellent points, here!

I was one of those fans(a casual fan, back then) who was around from the first playing of, "Killer Queen," on the radio, to the hugely popular CLTCL...
I DO think that Freddie's sexuality had at least a small part to play in the loss of Queen's popularity in the states, based on the comments I heard from those around me, including the radio disc jockies, at that time, and, I think a good deal of this is due to the emergence of MTV.
I don't think the population of Americans that were largely listening to the radio, and, watching MTV, really understood the tongue in cheek factor that seemed so much a part of Freddie's public persona.
Just my observations of what was happening in the American scene that surrounded me at that time.
[/QUOTE]

Thanks for some more insight into the US perception of Queen in the 70's/80's Dusta. Can you remember what kind of things the people around you and DJs said about Queen back then?
I think you hit the nail on the head about the 'tongue-in-cheek' aspect of Freddie's character. There are some bands that take themselves SO seriously that they risk ending up as an almost Spinal Tap-esque parody. I believe Queen took their musicianship and performances extremely seriously but they were able to stop and recognise the absurdity and humour in their persona too.
As for the IWTBF video, it never even struck me as any kind of comment on sexual preferences. All I saw were 4 guys dressed up in the tradition of pantomime, lets face it, with the exception of Roger, none of them even looked remotely feminine did they?!
For the record, I honestly had no idea about Freddie's sexuality until after his death, maybe I just wasn't paying attention but I find it hard to believe the American public would have been both so aware and so judgmental. Actually, I think we are much more obsessed with people's sexuality now then back then simply because there is so much more information available.

Yes, this has been an excellent thread, it's good to see intelligent opinions expressed that aren't dismissed with idiotic remarks.

Saltnvinegar makes an excellent point about nationalism and how music relates into markets. The Stones were big in America, as were Zep, as they were more US blues based bands, so they had a pretty wide appeal across the US. Queen were big in big markets where new things are good, but I doubt that they ever had a concert in middle America in places like Iowa or Nebraska. Regal British pop/rock with a leotarded singer isn't going to over big in the heartland. Conversely, a guy like Springsteen is embraced because (most) Americans, and certainly all American critics think he's telling THEIR story. To me as a Canadian with an open mind, Queen music represented everything life could offer, happiness, sadness, anger, unbridled joy, beauty, and I could go on with another hundred words. Springsteen music captured the gloom of life in US suburbia or the cities, always about escaping pregnancy, unwanted jobs, a place you didn't want to be, etc. American's loved that. But where was his Mustapha, Bohemian Rhapsody, Somebody to Love? If music were food, Springsteen's stuff was meat and potatoes where Queen's was a seven course meal of things you'd never eaten before. I think the fact that Queen got any airplay in the US was a minor miracle.

Forgive me if you've seen this before, but I thought it too relevant not to post.

***
This is a letter from Queen guitarist Brian May, which originally appeared in News of the World: The Newsletter for Queen Fans (North America). He is attempting to answer the question of whether Queen “gave up” on American fans after the 1982 tour behind the Hot Space album, which failed to go gold. He is addressing the newsletter’s editor, Cola Todd.

26th March 1997

Dear Cola:

Now I would like to answer the Big Question that you ask.

America was our great pride and joy as we grew of age as a band. Throughout the late 70s we worked very hard, touring many months of every year, and a large proportion of that time was spent in the States. I guess we took pride in the fact that every time we came back, usually with another album on the shelves, the response got bigger and bigger. We felt that we were earning our wings, as it were, and that the following we had was a genuine word-of-mouth thing, based on the uniqueness of the Queen shows, etc. We also put in time at Radio when we were passing through, particularly Roger and I, so that there was a continuing direct connection between us and the public.

As far as I can tell, a number of things happened with the last Queen U.S. tour:

1) The Hot Space album was perceived by Radio as Queen forsaking Rock and Roll for Disco – out timing was perhaps a little premature, which was evident when you compare with material with what Michael Jackson was to be doing with Ed Van Halen and Slash in years to come.

2) Relations with Radio was not taken care of – we had a new man in charge of Promotion on the road, who, unknown to us at the time, was very high handed and rude with the media people and gave them the impression that we no longer cared. We only later discovered the huge extent of the damage much later, when trying to get Freddie’s solo record played. There was great resentment (radio people, like the rest of us, need to feel loved, and important!), and word of mouth on our tour was distorted by people who now wanted to see us fail.

3) We got caught in the crossfire of an attempt by Capital Records to withdraw from the Independent Promotion Circus (a.k.a. Payola) which dominated radio plays at that time. Capital dropped the man who was the lynch pin of their connection with the network of the radio station bribery, and the next week, 95 per cent of radio stations dropped our record, Radio Ga Ga. You can check this out in the record books. There was also the convenient rumours that the lyrics of the song were demeaning to Radio programmers, so there was a handy excuse available. Capital had been made an example of, by those in control, and we were the instrument.

4) We made a video in drag, as a spoof on a soap series, which was viewed as very funny, and something of an innovation, in Europe, but to the media in the U.S., it was seen as a threat to Morality. Yes, seriously – I was around to see the reaction of the TV people first-hand – they were horrified! Again, some of the media were looking for fuel for the fires of hatred (or at least distrust!), and a Homophobic undertone that further undermined Queen’s image in the U.S. The rest of the world did not seem to find this a problem. Which brings us to:

5) When the question of touring came up, we always looked at reactions to our latest album around the world. There was a massive explosion of interest in most of the countries of South America, in Africa, in the East, in Eastern Europe, and part of Western Europe which had been slow in the early days while were enjoying great recognition in North America. It made sense (and fun!) to go touring in the countries where there was growth and even hysteria, rather than flogging a Dead Horse in the US, where we felt there was a tide of something which for our interests and purposes was not dissimilar to McCarthyism which has driven the previous generation’s artists o

Couple of points:
You also have to remember that there is no define right to be successful in any country. And just because you ride high in the charts doesnt mean you are successful.
Ultimately to do well you need the right people around you, whether your music is good or not is sometimes secondary. You need the record company pulling for you and ploughing money into your product in the form of promotion, advertising, payola etc. If they dont think its right at that moment theyll spend less. I heard that Elektra spent an extra $2m on promotion for The Game as they thought it could be big. If you want a successful record you have to be prepared to pay, but if it doesnt do well they lose faith pretty quickly. The end of the day its all business, sometimes it works and sometimes it doesnt

Thanks for posting that Daniel, very interesting. They say that great athletes have short memories, because to question your shortcomings leads to confidence loss, so it's easier to place blame on conditions, outside factors, etc. I think Brian is much like an athlete in this manner, because it's always someone else to blame, never Queen themselves or QP. So having said that...

1) The Hot Space album was perceived by Radio as Queen forsaking Rock and Roll for Disco – out timing was perhaps a little premature, which was evident when you compare with material with what Michael Jackson was to be doing with Ed Van Halen and Slash in years to come.

Which is fine, but Michael Jackson gained fans from rock music with his crossover, which was always a bigger field than what used to be called R and B. Plus, EVH had a world class all-time rock solo with Beat It. Body Language was programmed Euro-disco and Back Chat, the second single, was perceived as more of the same, even with a Brian solo. A critic at the time stated Queen weren't sure after the success of AOBTD which world they wanted to live in (rock or dance) and it showed.

2) Relations with Radio was not taken care of – we had a new man in charge of Promotion on the road, who, unknown to us at the time, was very high handed and rude with the media people and gave them the impression that we no longer cared. We only later discovered the huge extent of the damage much later, when trying to get Freddie’s solo record played. There was great resentment (radio people, like the rest of us, need to feel loved, and important!), and word of mouth on our tour was distorted by people who now wanted to see us fail.

Probable, but the Queen released Ga Ga and IWTBF as thje first singles in North America on Capitol. Given Brian's previous statement about "The Hot Space album was perceived by Radio as Queen forsaking Rock and Roll for Disco", surely the Queen camp would be aware that the PERCEPTION of them losing their core rock audience would be enough for them to fight to have Hammer to Fall or I go Crazy released as the first two singles to show America that they were actually a rock band. Instead, from CLTCL, which was a 1979 single release, to IWTBF, virtually no parts of Queen's North American singles featured Brian's Red Special, and most tracks were drum machines and sequencers. The sound you hear is all but the most die hard Queen fans leaving the building.


4) We made a video in drag, as a spoof on a soap series, which was viewed as very funny, and something of an innovation, in Europe, but to the media in the U.S., it was seen as a threat to Morality. Yes, seriously – I was around to see the reaction of the TV people first-hand – they were horrified! Again, some of the media were looking for fuel for the fires of hatred (or at least distrust!), and a Homophobic undertone that further undermined Queen’s image in the U.S. The rest of the world did not seem to find this a problem. Which brings us to:

Read post 2. In North America, Queen were arena rockers, not pop keyboard players. I love IWTBF, but fans didn't buy the pop Queen incarnation. Bigots and imbeciles may have been upset about this, but weren't Culture Club on the scene in '82? They were hugely controversial, and the talk of America and morality. Duran Duran wore lots of make-up and were a bit feminine, as were all of the groups of that time. Queen were a hard rock band whose audience in the US was primarily jeans wearing young boys who wanted Queen to stay in 1976-1977 forever. When the band changed, the fans didn't, and they left. Despite Brian's sincere protestations, those are the facts. And for the record, this era of Queen paled in comparison, but a big part of the reason I love Queen is they didn't want to be the band in 1984 that they were in 1974. Change is good, but some people won't accept it.

Boy, Boy Thomas, some great observations there vis a via Brian's.

I didn't think about that lapse of Red Special-laden singles, really, until now. I do remember a couple of weeks when radio stations in Philly would play I Go Crazy as well as Radio Ga Ga. Then nothing. No Hammer to Fall, not anything.

Daniel Nester's post, above, including the letter from Brian, answers a good deal of the questions you ask, here.
Unfortunately, I think the Hotspace album was considered a sort of betrayal to some American Queen fans...it was all in the timing, as Brian claims. This was also reflected in the radio play, and, the attitudes of disc jockeys at that time.
Also, humour in the IWTBF video was lost on many Americans, much as Freddie's tongue in cheek stage persona was. Many Americans didn't know a thing about the Brit show the video was inspired by, and, saw it as Queen flaunting their gayness.

And, regarding Freddie's sexuality: For as long as I can recall, Freddie's sexuality was not in question. Now, I will admit that, by having two gay dear friends who were like older brothers, I was sort of a part of the gay scene, which claimed Freddie as one of their own. I don't know what was different about America, it just seemed that Freddie was always considered a gay man. And, this was okay, by the rednecks, as long as the rest of the band was, "normal." The IWTBF video sort of, well...called into question the, "normalcy," of the rest of the boys.

All in all, it is really quite ridiculous, and, I am not proud of that little bit of American Queen fan history. Brian was, mostly, spot on in his observations outlined in that letter.

I have always loved Queen, and, my loyalty never wavered, though there were some years where I didn't listen to ANY music.[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]saltnvinegar wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Dusta wrote: [/QUOTENAME]You have made some excellent points, here!

I was one of those fans(a casual fan, back then) who was around from the first playing of, "Killer Queen," on the radio, to the hugely popular CLTCL...
I DO think that Freddie's sexuality had at least a small part to play in the loss of Queen's popularity in the states, based on the comments I heard from those around me, including the radio disc jockies, at that time, and, I think a good deal of this is due to the emergence of MTV.
I don't think the population of Americans that were largely listening to the radio, and, watching MTV, really understood the tongue in cheek factor that seemed so much a part of Freddie's public persona.
Just my observations of what was happening in the American scene that surrounded me at that time.
[/QUOTE]

Thanks for some more insight into the US perception of Queen in the 70's/80's Dusta. Can you remember what kind of things the people around you and DJs said about Queen back then?
I think you hit the nail on the head about the 'tongue-in-cheek' aspect of Freddie's character. There are some bands that take themselves SO seriously that they risk ending up as an almost Spinal Tap-esque parody. I believe Queen took their musicianship and performances extremely seriously but they were able to stop and recognise the absurdity and humour in their persona too.
As for the IWTBF video, it never even struck me as any kind of comment on sexual preferences. All I saw were 4 guys dressed up in the tradition of pantomime, lets face it, with the exception of Roger, none of them even looked remotely feminine did they?!
For the record, I honestly had no idea about Freddie's sexuality until after his death, maybe I just wasn't paying attention but I find it hard to believe the American public would have been both so aware and so judgmental. Actually, I think we are much more obsessed with people's sexuality now then back then simply because there is so much more information available.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Boy Thomas Raker wrote: [/QUOTENAME]I've heard it a million times, but I don't think that IWTBF (or U2's "One") was ever banned by MTV. They may not have played it a lot, but that would have been big news as drag was never a reason to ban anything. I think people are getting confused about what banning means. While Wikipedia is hardly the definitive source for accuracy, here's a pretty comprehensive list of banned videos, neither One not IWTBF is mentioned, odd considering that U2 and Queen aren't exactly low profile bands.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_on_MTV#Banned_music_videos[/QUOTE]

The video was banned for years here in the States. It wasn't until 1991 on VH1's My Generation 2-part Queen Special (hosted by Brian May) that the video was aired again in the US. Since then, VH1 Classic has aired it a few times.

Also, Calling All Girls was Hot Space's second American single and while it got some airplay on US radio, it paled in comparison to the rockers from The Game. Back Chat was not released Stateside as a single.