PINK FLOYD: ANIMALS (1977)
1) Pigs On The Wing 1; 2) Dogs; 3) Pigs (Three Different
Ones); 4) Sheep; 5) Pigs On The Wing 2.
General verdict: An ideal three-part musical
crash course in how to hate, despise, and alienate all types of people — should
be an obligatory part of your high school curriculum.
Somewhere in between 1975 and 1977,
Pink Floyd, formerly a democratic conglomeration of different, but compatible
minds, evolved in the direction of a one-man band. In the long run, this would
turn out to be the beginning of the end: one-man bands have an unfortunate
tendency to either stagnate in the slower-and-slower-flowing channel of the one
man's brain (Jethro Tull is the most classic example here), or to heat up and explode
if the other members begin resenting their submissiveness — Floyd chose the
second route, although, curiously, it took Waters and Gilmour almost a decade
to openly declare war on each other.
In the short run, however, no
matter how many useless accusations of dictatorial assholishness one might
fling at Roger, assuming full control within the band gave him the chance to
express himself, for a brief while, with such power and clarity that everything
the band released prior to Animals would look like a happy walk in the
clouds by comparison. While Gilmour and Wright, both of whom probably had a
better ear for melody and a better understanding of sheer sonic beauty than
Waters, seemed to languish in relative passiveness, Waters' activity only grew
in the Seventies from album to album — a negative-tinged activity,
sprouting from his personal, seemingly unfriendly and unstable, character, and
seriously fueled by outside circumstances; to the point that, by late 1976, it
is safe to state that Roger Waters, the «dinosaur art-rocker» by contemporary
standards, was more frustrated, spiteful, vengeful, and misanthropic than the
punkiest of all punk bands in existence, and he did not need no chainsaw buzz
to make that known to humanity.
Already on Wish You Were Here,
we saw the first signs of what would soon become a full-fledged hatred for
(nearly) all humanity, albeit still seriously tempered with such «purer»
feelings as deep sorrow and sincere empathy for those who are (were) not able
to withhold the cruel pressure of this rotten world. But really, Floyd had yet
to come out and do it — and it wouldn't be at all possible, had Waters not
assumed complete control: Rick Wright, one of the gentlest and mellowest souls
on Earth, would only have gotten in the way, and Gilmour, even if the man is
perfectly capable of expressing anger and indignation in his work, never had
even a dozenth dose of the asphyxiating, kill-on-the-spot bile that Mother
Nature had synthesized in Waters' soul; amusingly, the more money they were
making on their records, the denser and the bitterer was the poison, with
Waters getting madder and madder at both the music business (and business in
general) and the band's audiences who, he felt, were either not getting the
message at all or would not be changed in any way upon getting the message.
But even if we think of all that
accumulated anger as stupid, unhealthy, or hypocritical, one thing is for sure:
anger — waves of uncontrollable, barely rational, overwhelming anger —
is precisely the one thing that provided the band with a second (third?)
breath, and helped them retain their creativity, vitality, and popularity in
the New Wave era, when most of their peers either disbanded, or sold out in
embarrassing ways, or retreated into niche markets. And so — thank you, Roger
Waters, for being such an asshole.
As is usual with Floyd, the songs
had a lengthy gestation period (ʻDogsʼ was previously played live for months
as ʻYou Gotta Be Crazyʼ, and ʻSheepʼ as ʻRaving And Droolingʼ, widely
available then and now on numerous live bootlegs), and the recording process
itself took half a year (actually, not atypical for the band's usual level of
perfectionism). No additional musicians or technical personnel were involved at
all, except for Brian Humphries helping out with the engineering duties (and
this gives the album a somewhat claustrophobic feel at times, compared to the
more expansive soundscapes of their previous two masterpieces).
The story of the album as such is
well-known — how several different ideas eventually coalesced in a loosely
Orwellian concept album about three types of animals, and how the album sleeve
photo was actually shot with a real floating pig in the air, and how the floating
pig flew away and scared off all the cows on a farm in Kent (just another one
of Waters' mean practical jokes on the world, oh yes) — but it should also be
kept in mind that all these conceptual and packaging elements are quite
secondary to the music, which merely takes Animal Farm as a formal
framework and uses it for Roger's own purposes (in a way, perhaps, even darker
purposes than Orwell's own).
Upon release, the album was not as
commercially successful as its predecessors — not so much, it seems, due to
essentially being a Waters ego trip (The Wall would be even more of an
ego trip, and that did not prevent it from being a smash success), but rather
because it was not accompanied by any singles, and the imposing length of the
LP tracks made it way too «dinosaurish» for the public, already in the strong grip
of the back-to-simplicity movement. Even so, it still rose to No. 2 in the UK
and to No. 3 in the US: no mean feat for a record that shows so little love for
humanity as a whole or individual humans in their own right.
One interesting consequence of the
album's lapsing into a relative gap between such massive hit generators as Dark
Side, Wish You Were Here, and The Wall, though, was its
acqusition of a certain cult status — for example, quite a few sophisti-prog
fans who usually wrinkle their noses at hearing the sellout name of Pink Floyd
are often willing to give Animals an extra chance precisely
due to its «anti-commercial» flavor, and I can certainly understand them (at
one point in life, it was my personal Floyd album, too, and even though I have
also mellowed with age, I certainly do not hold it in any less respect than I
did back when I thought it brave and cool to invent various reasons to «despise»
Dark Side for its unabashed banality, etc.). Basically, this here is «hipster-targeted
Floyd» rather than «mass-targeted Floyd», which does not automatically make one
better than the other... it is simply fun to have both side by side.
One thing, and one thing only
really matters on Animals: hatred. Yes, there is a very brief
acoustic introduction that opens the album on a note of tenderness (in the
style of ʻWish You Were Hereʼ), and an equally brief acoustic outro that closes
it on the same note. But both of these bits feel like they have been tackled on
at the very last moment — intentionally, perhaps, to provide more of a «mock-happy-ending»
(and beginning) than any real positive effect, so short and frail they are when
compared to the huge bleeding epics in between. For almost forty minutes, Animals
breathes nothing but pure hatred, despisal, or contempt for all of its heroes,
and since there are so many ways to hate, despise, and hold in contempt, the
subject never becomes boring. And, of course, it is not just the lyrics, and
not even the way they are delivered (although the vocals, most of them handled
by Roger with minor exceptions, are vituperative throughout): most of that
green fire is contained in the music, where Gilmour becomes Waters' unwilling
accomplice, and only Rick Wright tries to hold his own ground, usually without
success (the organ intro for ʻPigsʼ and the electric piano intro for ʻSheepʼ
reflect Rick's usual introspective mournfulness, but both very quickly give way
to Hell's fury).
The first two epics are those with
which most of the listeners can easily find common ground, because, after all,
the "dogs" and the "pigs" of this world are relatively
scarce compared to its "sheep", and I'd imagine that not a lot of
them frequently listen to Pink Floyd anyway. ʻDogsʼ takes a big gamble by
occupying most of Side A, but it is also the most complex construction of the
three — for some reason, out of all three classes, "dogs" hold
Roger's interest for the longest period, as he examines the average dog's
motivations, actions, and ultimate fate ("dragged down by the stone")
over at least three very different musical sections. The basic task is simple —
give a spine-chillin' musical account of the "dog eat dog" ideology —
but the way it is accomplished is definitely not, as the song takes plenty of
time to build up, evolve from fidgety-nervous folk-prog-rocker in the
Canterbury style to a slow bluesy jam and then to an atmospheric, super-slow,
keyboard-dominated mid-section, almost pedantically illustrating the actual process
of being "dragged down by the stone". Gilmour shines the most on the
slow blues jam (he uses more or less the same rhythmic base as in ʻShine
On You Crazy Diamondʼ, but this time as a launchpad for vicious and violent,
rather than solemn and mournful soloing, culminating in my personal favourite evil
cackle bit around 6:20); Wright gets to show his skill on the «drowning»
section, arguably their most openly psychedelic bit of music since ʻEchoesʼ;
but ultimately, of course, it is all Roger's show, even when Gilmour is singing
lead vocals. The "have a good drown / as you go down / all alone, dragged
down by the stone" bit gets my personal vote for «most vicious musical bit
of the year», just because it sounds so horrendously natural and deep-felt.
(Ironic bit of trivia: the proverbial dog, at the end of the song, is described
as "who was trained not to spit in the fan", which is precisely what
Waters would do at the end of the band's ensuing tour, even if we are talking
different sorts of fans here).
ʻPigs (Three Different Ones)ʼ is my
personal favorite of the three, even if musically, it is the most simple and
straightforward one, never really straining away too much from its funky base.
The reason for this, I believe, is that it is on this track that the «hatred»
motif reaches its apogee — the syncopated guitar chords slash away far more
viciously than the furious, but harmless acoustic strum on ʻDogsʼ, Waters'
vocals range from evil-grinning spiteful taunts on the verses to clenched-teeth
aggressive insults in the chorus, and then, of course, there's the talkbox...
simply put, ʻPigsʼ features the single best use of the talkbox effect in
music history, if only because the talkbox naturally sounds like a pig,
so what could be a possibly better place for it than on a song directed against
all the allegorical pigs of this world? Musically, the single most chilling
moment on the album is at 5:10, when, after a cleverly outstretched, carefully
built-up suspenseful passage, Dave lets loose with a MONSTROUS talkbox grunt —
as if, out of nowhere, a giant, smelly, bloodthirsty, 3000-pound-heavy pig
landed right on your head and pummeled you six feet under the ground with all
that weight. The overall feel of disgust and ugliness hangs so heavy above the
entire track, you almost feel the need to take a shower once it's over. By the
way, personally, I am not sure if poor Mary Whitehouse really belonged in the
"pigs" category ("house proud town mouse" is a far more apt
description), but apparently, Roger had to sweep all the ideological leaders
into one foul heap, so a-gruntin' we'll all go. (It also helped immensely forty
years later, when the song suddenly got a whole new life from Roger's
anti-Trump campaign — and the line "hey you, Whitehouse!" effortlessly
acquired a far more relevant meaning).
And then, of course, there is ʻSheepʼ,
which should have earned Pink Floyd a death sentence, but apparently half of
the fans never understood what it was about in the first place, and the other
half thought it was about the first half, so everything turned out all right in
the end. Musically, it is somewhat of a predecessor to ʻRun Like Hellʼ — same running
tempo, similarly paced bassline, similar echoey fanfare effects on the guitar
lines — and, essentially, it is about running like hell, as the poor
sheep blindly follow the pigs and end up running away from the dogs, to no
avail. The entire track is permeated with paranoia (best illustrated by the
bassline) and terror (best illustrated by the way the vocals at the end of each
line mutate and crossfade into an electronic banshee wail, only to be abruptly
cut off with a thunderblast), but the creepiest and most insulting
moment at the same time is the deconstruction of Psalm 23 — one of Waters'
smartest anti-religious jabs, by the way: how many of us have ever thought that
"The Lord is my shepherd" would quite logically surmise that,
soon enough, "with bright knives he releaseth my soul, he converteth me to
lamb cutlets"? The track does insinuate that, eventually, the sheep rise
up, generate some brain activity, and get rid of their oppressors, but somehow
it still seems more like a sarcastic dream than a reality (I mean, who ever saw
a sheep "through quiet reflection and great dedication master the art of
karate"?), and the triumphant martial guitar riff that fades out at the
end of the song never feels anything like a glorious, optimistic conclusion to
the whole concept.
And that conclusion? ʻPigs On
The Wing 2ʼ, which essentially admits that the only way to get away from the unholy
triumvirate of dogs, pigs, and sheep (in which pigs play a particularly
disgusting part) is to find yourself an understanding partner and go hide in
the woods or something like that. In a way, it is a pretty happy ending, and I
will not deny that sometimes I feel exactly the same way...
If I were the Dalai Lama, I would
probably reserve a harsh judgement for the album's concept and its unflattering
stance on all human castes. Not having the honor, I do reserve the right to
share opinions that are close enough to Waters' and, therefore, cannot blame Animals
for any conceptual or ideological flaws. I could probably complain about
the tracks being somewhat overlong, but instead of that, I would rather take
the other way round and complain that there are simply not enough tracks —
personally, I'd love to see more perspective on other inhabitants of the
Farm as well, including horses, donkeys, cows, chickens, and whoever else was
there in the original Orwellian world; more precisely, it just seems that
Waters was on such a roll, surely he'd be able to find even more
creative ways to ridicule and satirize even more categories of people,
and I would love to see Animals, rather than The Wall,
develop into the band's spatially grandest opus. Essentially, it is over much
too quickly, yet I would not insist on getting ʻDogsʼ cut down to size in order
to fit one or two additional pieces.
As for technicalities, I have
always thought that, for some reason, the production standards on Animals
were slightly below ideal, and that parts of it sound murkier than we'd
come to expect. Compared to the crystal clear, heavenly ring of Gilmour's
guitar on ʻShine Onʼ, for instance, the lead guitar parts on ʻDogsʼ are spoiled
either by unnecessary timbre effects or by poor mixing, and overall, the record
sometimes suffers from too much overkill on the effects. Maybe the presence of
an Alan Parsons or even a Bob Ezrin could have helped, but, apparently, this
was the way they (or at least Roger) wanted it to sound at the time, and
perhaps the extra effects, distortion, and general murk were thought to
accentuate the overall feel of disgust and contempt. That does not prevent us
from applauding all the fantastic production decisions (the talkbox, the
crossfades, the doom-laden looping of "stone... stone... stone..."),
but I still think that a sharper sound couldn't have hurt in many individual
places on the record; of all of the band's classic albums from that decade, I
think Animals suffers the most in terms of production.
In conclusion, I would be the first
to agree that a view of Animals as a «Roger Waters Vs. Mankind» kind of
album would not only be oversimplifying stuff, but also would be portraying
Waters, perhaps without proper justification, as a sort of monster. However,
(a) I would never rule out such an interpretation, either and (b) it is a fun
interpretation — and nobody said it was illegal to hold all mankind in one's
contempt, anyway: Timon of Athens got away with this, so why shouldn't Roger
Waters? The cool thing about art, anyway, is that we never have to agree with
the artist — the only thing that matters is how effectively the artist gets his
point across, and Animals passes that test with flying colors, an epic
distillation of pure negativity in three parts. Had the record been made by
anybody other than Pink Floyd, it would have probably sold less than a hundred
copies; Floyd, however, played a cruel joke on their audiences, first
transforming millions of people into their own loyal adepts by giving them a
brief glimpse at The Meaning Of Life with Dark Side, and then suddenly
turning around and delivering this mean blow right under the belt — perhaps the
only reason why it did not eliminate their fanbase once and for all was that in
early 1977 the average person felt so shitty about everything around him that
the vibe seemed perfectly appropriate, even if it meant acknowledging one's own
sheepishness. And although it would be hard to call the record
particularly innovative or influential, it would be futile to deny that its
relevance to this world of ours only continues to grow with each passing
decade, because, let's face it, the place is still populated to the brink with
Brahmin Pigs, Kshatriya Dogs, and Vaishya Sheep, and how many of us could
firmly claim that we do not belong to any of the three categories?..
I would dispute the likening of "Sheep" to "Run Like Hell". I guess they're both dark and rhythmic, but all '70s Floyd is dark, and the rhythms are totally different. The obvious cousin is "One of These Days".
ReplyDeleteI suppose then that Waters' ideal audience consists of people like me. This is the only Pink Floyd album I admire. And I do so without any restriction, exactly because Waters shows his hate for Johnny Rotten and me goes a lot deeper than our hate for Pink Floyd. Unfortunately Waters would fall into the hole he dug for himself with the next album, selling out by making stupid teens (and yes, I was a teen too) singing the utterly stupid "we don't need no education".
ReplyDeleteI always thought and still think that Animals is not a good album. No memorable melodies, poor sound quality.
ReplyDeleteBut Pink Floyd was never strong in the melody department. It was not one of their srengths. I like Animals just fine. Solid 7/10
Delete"Pigs" has some of the strongest and most distinctive melodies of any Floyd song.
DeleteYeah definitely one that gets more relevant with every passing year, especially this one. Just the right balance of prog gloss and punk dirt to make it go down right; anyone catch the floating pig in Children of Men? That crazy unhinged laughter near the end of Sheep gets me every time and the lunatic-triumphant riff that closes her really pumps you up, endless lines of bloodied, goose stepping sheep on your mind's movie screen marching off into an even worse future while you (hopefully) crouch in the shadows watching em go, shaking your head. I knew a talk radio show that used that riff as bumper music, dunno if it was the most appropriate selection.
ReplyDelete