I agree. Bo Rhap is unique and imo very important historically, but still it didn`t change everything. How many Bo Rhap-like pieces do you find in the radio today? Or any year?
yeah but queen were on the verge of financial ruin....they had been "ripped off by their management" changed managers, and went against EMIs recommendation adn decided to release the single in it's entirety - EMI wanted to edit it - and the gamble certainly did change eveything...had it not worked they wouldn't have been the major act they are/were....as it was - it was THE defining moment - when the band became global
The band was already famous in Europe and the States, and of course UK. Killer Queen had been #2. Bo Rhap was certainly their biggest hit but the band would have certainly survived without it. Not with the same success of course, but they would have survived.
I need to read these comments in context to really understand what this is all about. It's just not clear enough. A big moment for Queen? Or is it for music in general? Need to read it.
as i said they were just "niggles" in the bo rhap story - - i felt he was trying to take credit for huge chunks of the song - esp as he said " the other three did the backing track and then Fred left him to fill in all the guitar parts" - surely the song-writer would be "directing traffic" - esp THAT early in queen's career....
but here's the latest niggle from UNCUT magazine
Did Bohemian Rhapsody change everything?
Brian: quite honestly bo rap wasn't that big a deal to us. It was a pivotal momment for us. But it was one of many, many pivotal moments.
You know what? Sod off! The past few comments I've read of yours have all been ones of negativity or bringing down of Queen. The song wasn't a big deal to them, but it meant a shitload to the public. Is that really something to turn against Brian? If you want to critique something, why don't you assess your habit of jumping to conclusions so quickly with the band that you clearly aren't understanding.
No need to become rude, it's just a discussion, ryancoke.
I agree with those who think that BoRhap made all the difference. It turned an averagely successful band into a household name over night. Everybody knows Bohemian Rhapsody and it made Queen huge stars.
I don't think that Brian wants to downplay the role of BoRhap for the band's career or he would not have taken part in the recent BBC documentary about the song. Maybe the quote in the Uncut mag was a misunderstanding.
I disagree. As from my post, I referred to Brian`s flaw clearly visible through 30 years of interviews, in which he falsly modestly and subtly does claim a lot for himself (and the band as well, like the whole Thriller - Hot Space thing). Still that`s IMO (as I specified), and also IMO it isn`t a reason to put him down; more to the point, I`m not putting him down by saying that.
How can these things become "clearly visible" when all you have is 30 years of loose interview-passages (second-hand tradition) and ambiguous written comments ? Interviews always look completely different when they're printed compared to what you perceive when you watch the same thing on video. And even a video can be misguiding.
That's heuristically not satisfying. Historians or philologists would admonish caution.
I wouldn't want to be judged on that basis.
You're entitled to your opinion, of course, and I don't want to tell you that you're wrong, but maybe you should critically challenge the way you gain your insights more often, especially since you tend to indulge in a kind of scientific approach to Queen (no pun inteded. You're simply one of our experts after all.)
I disagree. As from my post, I referred to Brian`s flaw clearly visible through 30 years of interviews, in which he falsly modestly and subtly does claim a lot for himself (and the band as well, like the whole Thriller - Hot Space thing). Still that`s IMO (as I specified), and also IMO it isn`t a reason to put him down; more to the point, I`m not putting him down by saying that.
I have to say that the whole 'Hot Space / Thriller' thing didn't make much sense to me. However, I have to say that the fact that both Queen and Michael Jackson were friends around the time when both artists were experiencing an increasing amount of popularity, which I think helped both to learn from each other.
I think that Michael learned from Queen that crossing over to other genres could be a great thing. Take for instance that 'Off The Wall' was a highly successful album, but it still seemed to stay inside Michael's common ground of black genres like soul, funk, and R&B. 'Thriller' and the following albums by Michael were more daring in crossing over in that sense.
Funny thing is that as Michael's music became whiter, so did his skin.
Freddie was not Queen's guitar player. Although he wrote a few songs on guitar he wasn't the player Brian was or is. Brian always would have almost always had to come up with guitar parts in the Freddie songs, duh. And when brian speaks of freddie he has nothing but admiration for him. Stop tryin' to make trouble.
All he said was he came up with the Bohemian Rhapsody guitar solo, which he did.
i don't know WHO you are replying to (but in case it was my original thread that your (ahem!) repsonse was aimed at)
when you have read the quote from UNCUT mag then come back and say there isn't just the slightest hint of "playing down bo rap"
one fact will always remain - if Queen had not gambled on bo-rap -and stuck to their guns re the full version being released then they would not have been the success they were - the band was almost bankrupt - no i know some wont believe this - but it is well documented
Queen had had two top-10 albums and two top ten singles and still had not seen any royalities - the management group were paying them £50 a week!
if the bo-rap gamble had not paid off - then queen would have become another typical mid70 band that didn't have world-wide success....and yes - they may have made some money and had a few more hits - but they could well have been no bigger than (say) UFO, Rainbow or Whitesnake - that is my point
After reading all the posts, I guess you are right, Brenski
Without BoRap they would have never been THAT big. And they had other defining moments, but none was bigger than the opus magnum: Bohemian Rhapsody (I think that Brian has forgotten it was a number one hit TWICE!!! -> 1975 and 1991).
How can these things become "clearly visible" when all you have is 30 years of loose interview-passages (second-hand tradition) and ambiguous written comments ? Interviews always look completely different when they're printed compared to what you perceive when you watch the same thing on video. And even a video can be misguiding.
That's heuristically not satisfying. Historians or philologists would admonish caution.
I wouldn't want to be judged on that basis.
You're entitled to your opinion, of course, and I don't want to tell you that you're wrong, but maybe you should critically challenge the way you gain your insights more often, especially since you tend to indulge in a kind of scientific approach to Queen (no pun inteded. You're simply one of our experts after all.)
I agree to disagree in there. IMO, a person is reflected by what he/she writes or says, you can more or less interpret my personality just by reading my posts. It`s "risky" in the way that drawing deep conclusions is to be taken carefully, but still it`s not impossible.
That`s what the IMO thing is about. IMHO Brian is arrogant. Not in a Roger Waters kind of way (which is more direct), but subtly, using fake modesty and "accidentaly" sweeping his insights. But that`s just my opinion, I don`t mean to change anyone`s perspective whatsoever.
He did a great job and he`s got a point in being so proud of it, and proud of the band he cofounded, still IMO he goes too far sometimes, or several times, in his soapbox, or his interviews. It doesn`t change the fact that I like the songs, neither I`m judging him, he`s got flaws like everybody else, as I`ve got mine (and very annoying btw), etc. I just expressed my opinion.
I've read the article ( and the other related articles in the mag ). I can see where Brenski's coming from and maybe there is a hint of something in how Brian answered the question. I would suggest that it's not so much jealousy as someone who's just tired of answering the same old question.
Let's face it, Brian's contribution to the band is hardly inconsequential, He wrote one of the best known songs in the world (WWRY), the story of his guitar is always fascinating, he is recognised by his peers as being just about the best in the business at what he does. He's been pivotal in bringing to the stage one of the most successful musical productions of all time. He and Roger have announced one of the most eagerly awaited tours for many years.
With all of those achievements and many more not mentioned, wouldn't you be just a little pissed off if somebody then asks you (for the millionth time) about a song that you didn't write?
as i said they were just "niggles" in the bo rhap story - - i felt he was trying to take credit for huge chunks of the song - esp as he said " the other three did the backing track and then Fred left him to fill in all the guitar parts" - surely the song-writer would be "directing traffic" - esp THAT early in queen's career....
I don't think Fred was writting guitar solos for Brian... :S
And also- you're forgetting about different thing he said- he said that when Fred was writting BoRhap he wasn't involved for at the same time he was working on Prophet's Song- that's not really taking the credit, is it?
