Seven Seas of Rhye songwriting

Holly2003 wrote:

thomasquinn 32989 wrote:

Holly2003 wrote:
It's certainly possible. Brian doesn't strike me as the type of person who would do that though. He's not Paul McCartney ...

Really? You don't think the man who, after more than 20 years of refusing to comment on the issue, claimed* that Queen played Sun City in 1984 to make a statement against (N.B.)apartheid, by playing in the recently constructed 'city of vice'**, a dodgy mega-casino in one of the Homelands, would shy away from revising the songwriting history of his band?
* From Brian's Soap Box, Thu 20 Jan 05:
"When we were taken to task by the Musicians Union for breaking their embargo on playing in South Africa, I personally went to their meeting and spoke in defence of our decision to go to Sun City, carefully explaining our reasons. At the end of my speech the whole place applauded, and the then president said that he totally understood our point of view, and respected that our motives were good, but they would still like us to pay a fine, because we had broken a ‘Union Law’ ! The compromise we came to was that the money would go direct to the Kutlwanong school for the deaf in Bophutswana, a school for poor children which we already supported by way of the entire proceeds from a “Greatest Hits” album we put out specially for South Africa.
The main contents of my speech, were that Boputhatswana was the only ONLY place in South Africa at the time where it was possible to play to a non-segregated audience (I wonder if you or your readers realize this – we had turned down lucrative offers to play in Johannesburg and Cape Town ) – and that we felt we were able to strike a bigger blow against Apartheid by going out there and speaking our minds than by staying away."
** Sun City was a gambling resort constructed by a hotel magnate (Sol Kerzner), and opened in december of 1979. It was located in a so-called Bantustan, or "black homeland", a supposedly 'independent country' called Bophuthatswana that consisted of a number of scattered enclaves, which just happened to be the unusable and impoverished parts of the north of South Africa. Sun City was 'interracial', i.e. blacks and 'coloreds' [everyone who wasn't considered white or black] could get in...if they could afford it, which less than 1% of non-whites actually could. It was the target of Artists Against Apartheid the very next year (1985).

Your interpretation of what Brian said, and his actual quote, don't match up. I'm certain Queen went to South Africa for two reasons, to make money and to broaden their fanbase after they had lost the US market. The point Brian seems to be making is that they were determined to play in SA but, given a choice of a number of venues, they chose one where they could play to a non-segregated audience. Probably that helped them sleep a little better on a mattress filled with £20 notes. However, as weak as Brian's argument is, he is only speaking about their choice of venues within SA, and isn't claiming they went to SA solely as some kind of huge anti-apartheid statement. Nevertheless, he seems to me to be painting a fairly rosy picture of Queen's actions, whereas Fred and to a lesser extent Roger, have openly said they did it for the money. But they were 4 individuals: Brian might have been more politically aware and maybe it was him who pushed for the desegregated venue. From that perspective, it's not unusual that's the argument he would lean towards to defend the band. Fred, on the other hand, might've just told the Musicians Union to fuck off while blowing his nose on a £50 note. But I don't see really what this has to do with the topic we're discussing unless you're trying to prove a pattern of rewriting history. You might add "Paul Rodgers was Fred's fav singer" to that list but I'd like to see a lot more evidence than that to prove to me that Brian is at heart a dishonest and immoral person.

ps I always wonder why people get so worked up about Sun City while ignoring Queen played in Argentina, a country run by a fascist junta with a hideous human rights record. What if Queen had played China? Would that have been as bad as playing SA? China executes more people than the USA, after all. Maybe we're more sensitive to racial considerations than political? Considering some of these points does muddy the water a bit for those who only see things in simple binary terms of good and bad.

Let's start with the main point. "But I don't see really what this has to do with the topic we're
discussing unless you're trying to prove a pattern of rewriting history." - that is EXACTLY what I'm referring to. Nothing Brian has said about Queen in the last ten years or so is reliable. There are only two possible interpretations: all four members of Queen have been lying about pretty much everything since at least 1972, or Brian is allowing himself...creative liberties...with the band's history. He might be telling the truth, but you just can't automatically assume that any more, because he's liable to claim something entirely contradictory next month.

As for Sun City - the main issue I was trying to point out is that, regardless of what Brian said, felt or thought, playing Sun City was *not* a compromise, it was *not* the 'least indecent option'. I included a reference to Artists Against Apartheid in my post to help illustrate the point that Sun City was, and was perceived as being, one of the *very worst* examples of apartheid South Africa. It was not really 'non-segregated', it was designed so that white customers could bring in black hookers. That sounds pretty callous, and that's exactly what it was. I don't know if you've ever been to South Africa, but I have family there. Even during apartheid, most *whites* (a majority of whom supported apartheid) regarded Sun City as a source of shame.

I do not support a great number of choices Queen made, and the South American tour is one of them. However, the reason I don't comment about that here, is that Brian hasn't (yet) launched into a revisionist apologetic to explain how they were actually trying to topple the Videla-Viola-Lacoste-Galtieri junta by taking their money to play in Argentina.

Very quickly because I'm just about to go out:
"Nothing Brian has said about Queen in the last ten years or so is reliable."
He has made some errors about which songs were on which album etc. That's not quite the same as fabricating something like this. It's also not evidence of a pattern.
RE: Sun City, you're repeating yourself, and I don't disagree that SC was a fudge, at best. But from his pov at the time it mightve made sense. You might accuse him of ignorance but not deceit.
Re: Argentina, my comment wasn't directed at you, more at why SC is singled out. Once bands left Europe back then there were very few places they could play that didn't have a political system or regime that was "clean". So where do you draw the line? SA had a brutal racist regime in place, but was that as bad as Argentina? Why the huge campaign to stop artists playing SA but not Argentina? (Queen did get some shit from NME about this.) My guess is that in the West we must be more agitiated about racism than political abuses, but that hardly seems a tenable intellectual position. So Brian/Queen may have felt there wasn't a coherent and agreed position about where they could tour and why. I don't necessarily agree with that -- I believe they did it primarily for the cash -- but it does muddy the waters a bit.

Many (but not all) of the South Africa concerts were played to mixed audiences. In fact, they gave away free tickets to ensure this. Here's a scan.. zero Rands:

http://www.queenconcerts.com/inc/tickets/1984-10-07.jpg

I'm sure they meant well, and perhaps the promoter even told them audiences would be mixed. But just imagine if they walked no stage the first night and not a single black person could be seen.

Or maybe the first two nights went well, and the third night was all white ... and maybe this upset Mercury to the point that he lost his voice.

Who knows..

Trying to deny Brian´s claims is the same thing as trying to prove that Brian May is a liar, and i would never do that!

I figured he meant he slaved over the (amazing) solo - fair enough, but not a songwriting claim is it? Yes, I know he DID claim that :o)

Also - the sun city debate. Oh lordy.

The Real Wizard wrote: Many (but not all) of the South Africa concerts were played to mixed audiences. In fact, they gave away free tickets to ensure this. Here's a scan.. zero Rands:

http://www.queenconcerts.com/inc/tickets/1984-10-07.jpg

I'm sure they meant well, and perhaps the promoter even told them audiences would be mixed. But just imagine if they walked no stage the first night and not a single black person could be seen.

Or maybe the first two nights went well, and the third night was all white ... and maybe this upset Mercury to the point that he lost his voice.

Who knows..

The fact remains, it was well-known in Europe in 1984 that Sun City was about the lowest you could sink. I am not overstating matters when I say that Sun City was (rightly) known as little more than a combined casino/brothel. Even South Africans called it Sin City, and certainly didn't want their neighbours to find out if they had been on a trip there. When Queen played South Africa, that was a very poor decision. It really doesn't matter one bit if they played Cape Town or Sun City, and my main point remains: from 1984 until 2005 Brian never spoke out about this set of concerts, presumably (I hope) because he was ashamed of this dreadful call. Then, in 2005, he decided it was actually a moral decision to have played Sun City, and that is (one of the many thinks Brian has recently done that I find very) hypocritical.

Even if Brian *believed* they were making a statement against apartheid, that only proves he was gullible: the South African authorities widely publicized the Queen-concerts with editorial statements suggesting, in one form or another, that Queen's appearances in South Africa prove that Europeans weren't supporting the cultural boycot of the apartheid regime instated by their leaders, and that the success of the concerts showed that their system wasn't untenable at all.

But by all means, don't take my word for it. Most public libraries have internet portals to international periodicals. Look up some national South African newspapers from the weeks Queen played South Africa, and look at the comments they make. Queen allowed itself to be used for propaganda, either wittingly for money, or unwittingly out of naiveté, and nothing that Brian May says will change any of that.

Wow - heavy stuff, but a point very well made ThomasQuinn

It seems to me that Queen still get plenty stick for playing Sun City in the general media, especially publications like the Guardian. Looking at some of the other artists that apparently played there such as Elton John, Frank Sinatra and also black arists like Tina Turner and Dionne Warwick how come they are not vilified to the same degree? They are clearly not the biggest name to have played there.

In fact, they are. People like Paul Simon and Elton John got heavy fines and were shunned by numerous venues for several years. The thing is, only die-hard fans still remember it. Joe Public would have to look at a newspaper archive to find info about it. Why? Because Europeans and Americans prefer not to talk about the apartheid-era, because we just weren't as clean as we like to think we were.

But to take this away from the Sun City-debacle and into the point I raised the Sun City-concerts for: Queen gets loads of flack in the '80s over Sun City (it's one of the main reasons cited why Queen weren't asked to help record the Band Aid single, for instance, despite latter-day claims that they were asked but 'couldn't make it'), Brian says absolutely nothing about it. Then, in 2005 he gets a bright moment, comes up with an explanation and claims that it's the explanation he already offered 20 years earlier. Brian goes into this kind of revisionism quite a lot recently ("Paul Rodgers was Freddie's favorite singer", "American Idol-type shows are an insult to music / We're going to find a new singer through an American Idol-type show", etc.), the result being that his word alone just isn't good enough anymore.

Brian can claim he wrote "the bridge" to SSOR (note that there is plenty of room for interpretation as to what that means, cf. this topic), but that doesn't automatically make it true. There's just no way to establish this beyond reasonable doubt any more, and I think Brian is to blame for that.

thomasquinn 32989 wrote:
In fact, they are. People like Paul Simon and Elton John got heavy fines and were shunned by numerous venues for several years. The thing is, only die-hard fans still remember it. Joe Public would have to look at a newspaper archive to find info about it. Why? Because Europeans and Americans prefer not to talk about the apartheid-era, because we just weren't as clean as we like to think we were.
But to take this away from the Sun City-debacle and into the point I raised the Sun City-concerts for: Queen gets loads of flack in the '80s over Sun City (it's one of the main reasons cited why Queen weren't asked to help record the Band Aid single, for instance, despite latter-day claims that they were asked but 'couldn't make it'), Brian says absolutely nothing about it. Then, in 2005 he gets a bright moment, comes up with an explanation and claims that it's the explanation he already offered 20 years earlier. Brian goes into this kind of revisionism quite a lot recently ("Paul Rodgers was Freddie's favorite singer", "American Idol-type shows are an insult to music / We're going to find a new singer through an American Idol-type show", etc.), the result being that his word alone just isn't good enough anymore.
Brian can claim he wrote "the bridge" to SSOR (note that there is plenty of room for interpretation as to what that means, cf. this topic), but that doesn't automatically make it true. There's just no way to establish this beyond reasonable doubt any more, and I think Brian is to blame for that.

Do you have any evidence that Brian didn't make this explanation to the Musicians Union, as he claimed? Has the MU publicly refuted his version of events, for example?

There is no evidence for- or against him having offered said explanation to the MU. However, Brian has never (before 2005) publicly given this explanation, in print or otherwise, which makes it suspect. That is not the same as *proof* that he is lying, but I think my statement, that Brian's word is not enough to count as proof of anything regarding Queen, is justified.

In Musician Magazine in 1986 Brian said ""We finally had a chance to take our music to fans who had been buying our records and playing in a non-segregated situation" so this proves that quite soon afterward Brian was speaking about playing to non-segregated audiences and he didn't just fabricate this info 20 years later.

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=fp8JAQAAMAAJ&q=%22We+finally+had+a+chance+to+take+our+music+to+fans+who+had+been+buying+our+records+and+playing+in+a+non-segregated+situation%22&dq=%22We+finally+had+a+chance+to+take+our+music+to+fans+who+had+been+buying+our+records+and+playing+in+a+non-segregated+situation%22&source=bl&ots=307aGIRuFX&sig=pU7AjOSO1TbxOf3cCBwOoJEx1jw&hl=en&sa=X&ei=yGo7UPLoGoHZ0QX71oGQAw&ved=0CC4Q6AEwAA

According to Phil Sutcliffe, Brian spoke to him about the Musicians' Union speech in a 1991 interview:

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=adNONbUWLjgC&pg=PT185&lpg=PT185&dq=%22sun+city%22+musicians+union+queen&source=bl&ots=AZcTbl0Il3&sig=KPzcM_OTJpLyuTDKf2YOvHyGIV0&hl=en&sa=X&ei=QWk7ULqqC-md0QXOpoDwDg&ved=0CDMQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22sun%20city%22%20musicians%20union%20queen&f=false

Also in 1991, Brian is interviewed in Q Magazine and basically says exactly what he would much later say on his Soapbox:

http://www.deaky.net/rain/q91E.html

thomasquinn 32989 wrote:

Brian can claim he wrote "the bridge" to SSOR (note that there is plenty of room for interpretation as to what that means, cf. this topic), but that doesn't automatically make it true. There's just no way to establish this beyond reasonable doubt any more, and I think Brian is to blame for that.

This is only true in your head!
You´re being very hard towards Brian and you´re just manipulating things and taking it out of context so it fits your theory.

First of all you say:
"Brian goes into this kind of revisionism quite a lot recently ("Paul Rodgers was Freddie's favorite singer..."

here´s a link of a Roger Taylor interview:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CSrmEMdBMY

at around 3:36 you can hear Roger -very naturally i may add- stating that Freddie was a huge Paul Rodger´s fan. Maybe he´s lying too, and you and the other so called experts of Queenzone who clearly know Freddie better than his bandmates, because you´ve read all Freddies interviews and he never stated this, know better!

Then you said, again about Brian:

"American Idol-type shows are an insult to music / We're going to find a new singer through an American Idol-type show"

When and where did Brian said this? You´re just implying things. Queen never went into the process of finding a new singer through that kind of shows. They choose a singer who was found in that process but that isn´t the same thing. That was what INXS did, and Brian stated that they were never gonna do that- meaning going through that process. That doesn´t mean that they´re gonna close their eyes and ears to the talent that is discovered through those types of shows. And clearly Adam Lambert is one hell of a talented singer- whether you people like it or not.

Then you said, about Brian again:

"the result being that his word alone just isn't good enough anymore"

Really!?- Are we talking about the same person here? Again, hard words, and againg this is only true in your head. You´re being very negative towards Brian and very manipulative. This isn´t the kind of post i would expect to see on Queenzone, a forum for fans to discuss the great band and their music.

After what Brian May has acomplished with his life and music, i think it´s really sad to see people on Queenzone going through that hard work only to proove that Brian is a liar. Trying to find every little bit of discrepancy on interviews given by him throughout the years, taking it out of context, and so on, and so on...

Brian doesn´t need to prove anything to you or the other naysayers on this forum. As long as there people like me who absolutelly adore this band and the music, and really suports the Queen+ projects and enjoys that Brian and Roger still love to play together, they will be fine. Trust me!

This thread is great. Well argued everyone.

Mr.QueenFan:

"Brian doesn´t need to prove anything to you or the other naysayers on this forum. As long as there people like me who absolutelly adore this band and the music, and really suports the Queen+ projects and enjoys that Brian and Roger still love to play together, they will be fine. Trust me!"


Ah, right. So this forum is open only to those will absolutely and unconditionally support anything Brian or Roger do. We have a word for those people: stepfords. I seriously hope you are a teenager, otherwise you have a very unhealthy case of hero-worship.