I miss Bill Hicks...

[Robert Burrows]

 

[Roger Odisio]

1 hour ago, Robert Burrows said:

 

This is great.  Hicks was great.  I hadn't seen the second part about the echo.

But one of my favorite lines I've always loved to use is about how the recreation of the 6th floor window is a painstakingly accurate depiction...Oswald is not there.

[Pat Speer]

I was a buyer in the record biz when Hicks was cooking. He started his own label to release his performances. I think he put two out, and was gonna perform, and the label called to ask me if I wanted to meet him. (I was one of the few buyers who knew who he was.) In any event, I said yep but he never performed in L.A. again. The label told me he was ill and his performance would be delayed. He died like a month later. I still have a VHS they sent me of one of his performances. I thought he was a Carlin in the making. Clever and obnoxious at the same time. 

It's funny. In retrospect, his bravest material was not his material on JFK, but his libertarian approach to smoking and drug use. It's been what 25 years but I think his observation that the best songs were written by people who were high still rings true. 

[Miles Massicotte]

I remember hearing Hicks joke in one of his routines that "actually there were 19 Oswalds". It made me wonder if perhaps Hicks had read something Iike The Second Oswald by Richard Popkin. In any case I adore Bill Hicks and his JFK humor is on point as is everything he commented on. 

[Miles Massicotte]

4 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

It's funny. In retrospect, his bravest material was not his material on JFK, but his libertarian approach to smoking and drug use. It's been what 25 years but I think his observation that the best songs were written by people who were high still rings true. 

"You see, I think drugs have done some good things for us. I really do. And if you don't believe drugs have done good things for us, do me a favor. Go home tonight. Take all your albums, all your tapes and all your CDs and burn them. 'Cause you know what, the musicians that made all that great music that's enhanced your lives throughout the years were real xxxxing high on drugs. The Beatles were so xxxxing high they let Ringo sing a few tunes." -BH

Edited December 16, 2023 by Miles Massicotte

[Jamey Flanagan]

Did y'all ever hear the "conspiracy theory" that Alex Jones was Bill Hicks? That he faked his own death and took on a new comedic role as this really conservative conspiracy talk radio guy, lol!

[Joe Bauer]

12 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

I was a buyer in the record biz when Hicks was cooking. He started his own label to release his performances. I think he put two out, and was gonna perform, and the label called to ask me if I wanted to meet him. (I was one of the few buyers who knew who he was.) In any event, I said yep but he never performed in L.A. again. The label told me he was ill and his performance would be delayed. He died like a month later. I still have a VHS they sent me of one of his performances. I thought he was a Carlin in the making. Clever and obnoxious at the same time. 

It's funny. In retrospect, his bravest material was not his material on JFK, but his libertarian approach to smoking and drug use. It's been what 25 years but I think his observation that the best songs were written by people who were high still rings true. 

Pat, Do you think his pre-mature age death was suspicious?

[Miles Massicotte]

7 minutes ago, Joe Bauer said:

Pat, Do you think his pre-mature age death was suspicious?

Didn't he pass away from pancreatic cancer?

[Joe Bauer]

Did the drugs being mentioned here make for more beautiful music from the writers, singers and musicians performing them?

On the wide scale of pop music from the 60's on I personally don't think so. Although I was a Motown music lover more than any other genre.

In fact it appears to me that most of the great song writers back then had to be extremely clear headed to consistently tap into the full capacity of their creative musical faculties.

Surely many believe the music of so many late 60's and 70's groups and performers was enhanced by their drug taking. 

Almost everyone who performed at the Monterey Pop Festival in 1968 were presumed to be heavy drug takers.

Hendrix, Joplin, The Who, etc. etc.

I just believe their music would have been just as inspiring if they weren't.

Although I must admit that the Doors music really sounded even more fantastic while smoking weed.

It's all so subjective.

To this day, when I still occasionally swoon to the older music of Barry Manilow, John Denver and the Osmond Family...I just can't believe these icons of music genius from that era ever took drugs to enhance their work.

"Rocky Mountain High" was not about drugs. 

Edited December 16, 2023 by Joe Bauer

[Pat Speer]

2 hours ago, Joe Bauer said:

Did the drugs being mentioned here make for more beautiful music from the writers, singers and musicians performing them?

On the wide scale of pop music from the 60's on I personally don't think so. Although I was a Motown music lover more than any other genre.

In fact it appears to me that most of the great song writers back then had to be extremely clear headed to consistently tap into the full capacity of their creative musical faculties.

Surely many believe the music of so many late 60's and 70's groups and performers was enhanced by their drug taking. 

Almost everyone who performed at the Monterey Pop Festival in 1968 were presumed to be heavy drug takers.

Hendrix, Joplin, The Who, etc. etc.

I just believe their music would have been just as inspiring if they weren't.

Although I must admit that the Doors music really sounded even more fantastic while smoking weed.

It's all so subjective.

To this day, when I still occasionally swoon to the older music of Barry Manilow, John Denver and the Osmond Family...I just can't believe these icons of music genius from that era ever took drugs to enhance their work.

"Rocky Mountain High" was not about drugs. 

There are different kinds of music and creativity. There is the workman-like attention to detail trying to get everything right kind of creativity that produces great pop songs and symphonic music, etc. But then there's the wild, semi-improvised, surprising music that might not eve make sense, but somehow works. 

The former is difficult to do while high. The latter is easier to do while high. 

Now, intriguingly, while many assume one can't remember stuff while high, Bob Dylan has long claimed he took drugs to help him focus while trying to remember verse after verse in his songs. I can kinda see that. A lot of entertainers take drugs before they get on stage, and a lot take drugs when they get offstage. I've known some that do both. They need to relax before they perform, and need to come back down afterwards. 

I have also read an interview with (McCartney, or some other icon, I can't remember) where he claimed that he thought smoking weed had improved his creativity, and felt he'd gone stagnant when he quit, but then went back and listened to the outtakes of his pot years, and realized most of it was terrible. 

SO...for some, the verdict is still out. But I find it hard to imagine jazz music in the fifties without the influence of heroin, and rock music in the late sixties/early seventies without the influence of marijuana and LSD. Now, I don't think cocaine or meth did anyone any good, except maybe inspiring some metal musicians to play faster.

But, all things considered, I think Hicks was right. Some great art was made while under the influence of drugs. Heck, this was even acknowledged in my college poetry classes... "in Xanadu did Kublai Khan a stately pleasure dome decree" didn't spring forth from a sober mind...

Edited December 16, 2023 by Pat Speer

[Scotty Moore]

Absolutely adore Bill Hicks.  He had a way of viewing everything that went on around him.

His destruction of Jay Leno was also bang on the cash. 
 

And Mr Speer, your first paragraph above is very well put.  

[Kirk Gallaway]

7 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

There are different kinds of music and creativity. There is the workman-like attention to detail trying to get everything right kind of creativity that produces great pop songs and symphonic music, etc. But then there's the wild, semi-improvised, surprising music that might not eve make sense, but somehow works. 

The former is difficult to do while high. The latter is easier to do while high. 

Now, intriguingly, while many assume one can't remember stuff while high, Bob Dylan has long claimed he became a pothead to help him relax while trying to remember verse after verse in his songs. I can kinda see that. A lot of entertainers take drugs before they get on stage, and a lot take drugs when they get offstage. I've known some that do both. They need to relax before they perform, and need to come back down afterwards. 

I have also read an interview with (McCartney, or some other icon, I can't remember) where he claimed that he thought smoking weed had improved his creativity, and felt he'd gone stagnant when he quit, but then went back and listened to the outtakes of his pot years, and realized most of it was terrible. 

SO...for some, the verdict is still out. But I find it hard to imagine jazz music in the fifties without the influence of heroin, and rock music in the late sixties/early seventies without the influence of marijuana and LSD. Now, I don't think cocaine or meth did anyone any good, except maybe inspiring some metal musicians to play faster.

But, all things considered, I think Hicks was right. Some great art was made while under the influence of drugs. Heck, this was even acknowledged in my college poetry classes... "in Xanadu did Kublai Khan a stately pleasure dome decree" didn't spring forth from a sober mind...

There are 2 different things, creating a song  and recording a song. A lot of songs created in the 60's 70's and 80's periods that at least I know well were drug induced, and you often can tell which songs were and weren't. It's generally a mistake to fuse your drug induced song into a drug induced recording session, but at least during those years , it was done all the time, under the idea that the ends and the means had to be the same. Hopefully the artists learned over time, and many of them did. . But recording is generally a more sober, exacting event. But there are some artists who will insist they have to get a few belts under them to sing without inhibition or smoke some pot to improvise a good lead. Some magic can occur, under either circumstance.

You're quite an inclusive swooner, Joe!

Bill Hicks was a national treasure and of course,  it did involve more than just his views about the JFKA. This was a really good film, a story about his life.

 

 

[Joe Bauer]

I always liked songs that we so effecting of my being ( in a good way ) that I would find myself just popping out with some of the lyrical lines spontaneously without even thinking of doing so in the middle of doing something otherwise mundane. 

"At the Copa...Copa Cabana...Music and passion were always the fashion...at the Copa ... la de la."

"We've only just begun...to live..." "White Lace and promises...a kiss for luck and we're on our way..."

"Trailers for sale or rent...rooms to let 50 cents...no phone, no pool no pets...I ain't got no cigarettes..."

My most memorable Lennon song lyric was "All we are saying is...give peace a chance."

And "Imagine all the people...living for today..."

No drugs needed for that kind of inspiration.

[W. Niederhut]

58 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

There are different kinds of music and creativity. There is the workman-like attention to detail trying to get everything right kind of creativity that produces great pop songs and symphonic music, etc. But then there's the wild, semi-improvised, surprising music that might not eve make sense, but somehow works. 

The former is difficult to do while high. The latter is easier to do while high. 

Now, intriguingly, while many assume one can't remember stuff while high, Bob Dylan has long claimed he took drugs to help him focus while trying to remember verse after verse in his songs. I can kinda see that. A lot of entertainers take drugs before they get on stage, and a lot take drugs when they get offstage. I've known some that do both. They need to relax before they perform, and need to come back down afterwards. 

I have also read an interview with (McCartney, or some other icon, I can't remember) where he claimed that he thought smoking weed had improved his creativity, and felt he'd gone stagnant when he quit, but then went back and listened to the outtakes of his pot years, and realized most of it was terrible. 

SO...for some, the verdict is still out. But I find it hard to imagine jazz music in the fifties without the influence of heroin, and rock music in the late sixties/early seventies without the influence of marijuana and LSD. Now, I don't think cocaine or meth did anyone any good, except maybe inspiring some metal musicians to play faster.

But, all things considered, I think Hicks was right. Some great art was made while under the influence of drugs. Heck, this was even acknowledged in my college poetry classes... "in Xanadu did Kublai Khan a stately pleasure dome decree" didn't spring forth from a sober mind...

Well said, Pat.

Your comments about potentiating "wild, surprising" creative processes reminded me of an old 2013 interview of Jerry Garcia.

In talking about the formative years of the Grateful Dead-- and the band's experiences during Ken Kesey's electric kool aid acid tests-- Garcia said that taking LSD gave him a sense of "infinite creative possibilities."

And now-- after decades of anathematization in the U.S.-- psychedelics are being studied for their therapeutic potential.

 

[Sandy Larsen]

Can some people take drugs without getting hooked? Like most people (I think) don't get addicted to alcohol... only alcoholics do. That's my understanding, anyway.

I've never done drugs, nor have I ever been in that type of environment. The nearest I've been is knowing people (including family members) who smoked weed. None of them were addicted, as far as I could tell.

I took Halcion for insomnia when it was first released. That really messed me up. Apparently the half life is very short, which doctors say is a good thing. But for me it caused withdrawal symptoms every day. The dosage doctors prescribe today is much lower.

(Don't forget my question.)