Hello Folks,
I have contributed a chapter in this new book on Pink Floyd. I have included a book overview below, beneath that are a few paragraphs introducing my own chapter. You can find full details of the book here.
Thanks, Tina
The Routledge Handbook of Pink Floyd, edited by Chris Hart and Simon Morrison, is intended for scholars and researchers of popular music, as well as music industry professionals and fans of the band. It brings together international researchers to assess, evaluate and reformulate approaches to the critical study and interpretation of one of the world’s most important and successful bands. For the first time, this Handbook will ‘tear down the wall,’ examining the band’s collective artistic creations and the influence of social, technological, commercial and political environments over several decades on their work. Divided into five parts, the book provides a thoroughly contextualised overview of the musical works of Pink Floyd, including coverage of performance and sound; media, reception and fandom; genre; periods of Pink Floyd’s work; and aesthetics and subjectivity. Drawing on art, design, performance, culture and counterculture, emergent theoretical resources and analytical frames are evaluated and discussed from across the social sciences, humanities and creative arts. The Handbook is intended for scholars and researchers of popular music, as well as music industry professionals. It will appeal across a range of related subjects from music production to cultural studies and media/communication studies.
Chapter 20: Hey You! Subjectivity and the Ideological Repressive State Apparatuses in Pink Floyd’s
The Wall by Tina Richardson
Pink Floyd’s long musical history (spanning two decades at its peak) had always reflected the cultural zeitgeist, even at a time when it was at odds with other musical movements of the day, as was the case in the late 1970s with the advent of punk rock. While it is often reported that punk heralded the demise of progressive (or psychedelic) rock – “Never trust a fuckin’ hippie” Johnny Rotten if often wrongly claimed to have said – Pink Floyd’s single from The Wall, ‘Another Brick in the Wall’, was no.1 for five weeks in 1979 (UK music charts). Alan Parker’s film Pink Floyd – The Wall (1982) followed, and Pink Floyd entered film history.
Parker’s film, which responded directly to Roger Water’s lyrics, presents us with the protagonist Pink, a rock star who is at odds with his position as a revered musician: he is both a victim of the system of music production and a fascist proponent of it. Early in the film, we see him in his hotel room, barely conscious, waiting for the gig to start. Pink (played by Bob Geldof) looks both physically ill and mentally exhausted (and psychologically removed from the hotel room he occupies). His agent, and the doctor employed by him, inject him back to consciousness – ‘Just a little pinprick’ – so that he can perform for the audience. Within a short space of time, Pink is on stage in a Nazi-style rally as he sings the lyrics to ‘In the Flesh’, asking the audience “So ya… Thought ya… Might like to… Go to the show.” It is this relationship with the audience – one in which he hides from them, but also presents himself to them as if he was their leader – that creates cognitive dissonance in him.
In his book Which One’s Pink? Phil Rose (2002) acknowledges the cultural moment, as it was for rock audiences in the 1970s. He describes an early scene where we see Pink’s reaction to his fans, “As the emergency doors break open at the concert venue, crowds of frantic people are seen running down an empty corridor. In his imagination Pink superimposes on this scene the trampling feet and screaming faces of battle”. It seems, for Pink, that if he must deal with his fans, it will be from the position of someone who is at war. A war that appears externalised for Pink, is really internal and existential.
We see many images of Pink sitting in a chair, alone in his hotel room, holding a cigarette which is turning to ash. This dialectic – the ‘marauding hordes’ (of music fandom, of battle, of collective violence) versus the ‘estranged loner’ – sets up the story of Pink’s life (and along with that a multiplicity of contradictions) as it unfolds in the narrative presented to us through the album and film. At the same time, it creates for the cultural theorist another position open to interpretation, that of the structures of socio-political, cultural space and power, as they pertain to their influence on the individual (in Pink’s case, as they are imposed upon the individual). Nevertheless, we need to be careful not to set up these oppositions in too binary a way, since by using phrases like ‘social structure versus the individual’, we imply that these phenomena sit in clearly delineated camps. The very structures of society that are so prominent in The Wall – the army, the family, education, the media, the judiciary - are what creates the subject in the first place. The subject, which for Louis Althusser, is never an individual: the subject is always the subject of the ideology of societal structures.
This chapter examines the narrative of Pink’s existential anguish as it pertains to the ideological and repressive structures that surround him. By using Althusser’s theory, as defined in ‘Ideology and the Ideological State Apparatuses’, I will discuss how these structures have the simultaneous effect of forming Pink as a subject, yet overwhelming him to the extent that his psyche is fractured and all that is left for him to do is to create a wall to protect himself from the outside world. It is the closing scene ‘The Trial’ that will be analysed to explore the compromise the subject has to make regarding their own position within these structures of power. Following this, the chapter also examines Pink’s existential crisis in the context of the symbolism of the wall. But, firstly, we need to examine Althusser’s concept of the ‘subject’ in some more depth...
