Dark Side of the Moon is definitely political, if you want to set a cutoff. Also the first he had a lot of writing credit for, as I understand it. I’m not prepared to argue for earlier than that.
But even Animals, in 1977, is 40+ years before people started complaining about him being too political. It’s a ridiculous claim that deserves no serious consideration.
The problem isn’t that he’s political. The problem is he has kid rock’s level of insight. His takes are absurdly dumb and he bloviates about them at length any time he’s in front of a microphone. He believes the UK shouldn’t have entered WW2 for God’s sake. He’s a blowhard and a moron, and he’s really dialed it up the last few years.
Except now he’s properly foxnews brainwormed and is mad at Roger Waters for getting all political at his shows
Tbf Roger Waters is the most hamfisted and annoying of the politically involved musicians
Point is, he’s always been political
If “not until Animals, their 10th album”, counts as “always” then yeah sure
Dark Side of the Moon is definitely political, if you want to set a cutoff. Also the first he had a lot of writing credit for, as I understand it. I’m not prepared to argue for earlier than that.
But even Animals, in 1977, is 40+ years before people started complaining about him being too political. It’s a ridiculous claim that deserves no serious consideration.
The problem isn’t that he’s political. The problem is he has kid rock’s level of insight. His takes are absurdly dumb and he bloviates about them at length any time he’s in front of a microphone. He believes the UK shouldn’t have entered WW2 for God’s sake. He’s a blowhard and a moron, and he’s really dialed it up the last few years.
Alright cool, whatever. That’s a different conversation. Have a nice day
That was exactly the same as my original point lol