Introduction

Popular music has always been considered controversial, from Elvis’ pelvis-swinging, the free love attitude of the late Sixties, to the outrageous onstage behaviour of the Sex Pistols in the early Eighties.

The last few years have been no exception.

For some, a new decade signified freedom and liberation as the Berlin Wall collapsed and small Eastern European countries claimed their independence, bringing about the fall of Communism. For others, the end of an old decade brought about the end of certain freedoms, and a new style of restrictive government dictated what films and TV programmes we could watch, what books we could read and what music we could (or couldn’t) listen to. It became known as censorship and is still one of the major issues in popular music today.

The introduction of censorship

Censorship began in America in the early Eighties, when a parent from Cincinnati was shocked by a verbal tease not included on the lyric sheet on Prince‘s 1983 album 1999. This parent, a member of the local school’s Parents and Teachers Association (the most powerful and conservative organisation in America at the time), complained to the Committee and as a result, president Ann Kahn began a letter-writing campaign to record companies to establish a ratings system for albums, based on lyrical content. The campaign took off when Tipper Gore, the wife of Senator Al Gore was offended by a reference to masturbation from another of Prince’s songs, Darling Nikki. She gathered a group of the wives of America’s most powerful men, who used their surnames to gain a promise from record companies that albums containing explicit lyrics would be stickered. In 1985 these women established the Parents Music Resource Centre, who, in the mid-Eighties concentrated on blacklisting such rock artists as Prince, heavy metal band W.A.S.P. and rock group The Dead Kennedys who were eventually charged with distributing pornography for their use of H.R Giger’s Landscape #20 displaying copulating genitals in decay, on the sleeve of their 1986 Frankenchrist album. The band was acquitted in 1987, but the two month trial cost in excess of $90,000, and the band split because their records wouldn’t sell.

Censorship of rap music

Jack Thompson was an American lawyer campaigning for the national banning of 2 Live Crew, a rap group from his hometown. Their album, As Nasty as They Wanna Be has been a victim of censorship since it’s first release, as has the group themselves. Thompson began a faxing campaign to police and prosecutors to ban the album, and in June a judge found the album to be obscene and it was banned. In 1987 a shop owner was arrested in Alabama or selling 2 Live Crew’s second album Move Somethin’ to a minor, and two days after the ruling on the Nasty… album, a record shop owner in Fort Lauderdale was arrested for selling the album. Two days after this, the group themselves were arrested after performing to an adult-only audience at a Broward Country Club. The group were acquitted of obscenity charges at Fort Lauderdale Court at their trial between the 8th and 20th of October 1990, and they released a cleaner version of their Nasty… album titled As Clean As They Wanna Be which carried the sticker “This album does not contain explicit lyrics”. Clean… sold 200,000 copies, ” Nasty … sold 1.2 million copies.

Other albums featuring the American “gangster rap’” style of conveying a street life of violence, drug abuse etc, have sold to gold and platinum standards since the Censorship scare, despite being stickered for obscene language. N.W.A. caused a controversy with their song Fuck The Police and did the same with a track called Just Don’t Bite It about a sexual experience, taken from their 100 Miles And Running E.P. Shop owners in Britain have refused to stock the E.P, compact disc and 12′” versions, causing a drop of 60% in sales.

Censorship of rock music

The Geffen Record Company refused to distribute the Geto Boys‘ album because of consistent swearing, graphic violence, racism and sexism, but said that they “Vehemently oppose any governmental censorship or restrictions.” Whether there is any politics or subtle racism in the banning of this black group’s album, no-one can tell, but controversial, white rock groups are still handled by Geffen. These include thrash metal groups such as Danzig and Slayer, both of whose albums have been stickered for obscenity, and chart successes Guns’n'Roses whose track One In a Million caused an uproar because of its offensive references to ethnic minorities and homosexuals. Guns’n'Roses’ Appetite for Destruction album sleeve also had to be changed for its depiction of a raped woman, despite which still managed to sell more than 7 million copies.

Another album sleeve that had to be changed was Jane’s Addiction‘s Rio De La Habitual, displaying lead singer Perry Farrel as a naked woman in bed with another man and a woman. Having learnt their lesson after the last album sleeve was criticised for showing busty Siamese twins with their heads on fire, record company Warner Bros. altered the sleeve to feature the First Amendment.

Early in 1990, New York Cathedral’s Cardinal John O’Connor condemned heavy metal music, saying it was responsible for the rise of Satanism in the city. The PMRC also believed that heavy metal acts incorporated back masking into their music, that is, lyrics that, played backwards, take on a new, evil meaning. Their booklet, Stairway to Hell: The Well-planned Destruction of Teens informs of how the line “It’s just a spring clean for the May Queen” from Led Zeppelin‘s Stairway to Heaven when played backwards allegedly reads “I live for Satan, he will give you 666.”

Backmasking was also mentioned in the trial of English heavy metal band Judas Priest in 1990, when they wore accused of hiding the mysterious message Do It! in one of the tracks off their Stained Class album, driving two teenage dropouts, Raymond Belknap and James Vance, to suicide. Other messages such as “Sing my evil spirit” and “Fuck the Lord” were alleged to have been included, but to show how ridiculous it was, lead singer Rob Halford brought into court a tape on the last day of the trial, and played backwards the line “They won’t take my love away” which became “Hey look Ma: My chair’s broken. The judge dismissed the case.

Freedom of speech

The First Amendment is clear about the Americans’ freedom to express themselves, and many believe that Censorship is an infringement of their rights. Censorship campaigner Tipper Gore said “We are strong advocates of the First Amendment and its protections of free speech and free expression. We do not, and have not … supported restrictions on those rights.” But Barry Lynn, a legislative counsellor of the American Civil Liberties Union believes that “Slapping on labels … that imply that records have “bad things” on them is a violation of the First Amendment.” A New York journalist wrote that slapping a warning sticker on an album “Because somebody… might complain” causes it to be “categorised by its nastiest moment, no discussion necessary”.

Censorship is now being opposed in America, primarily by “Music in Action” in Brooklyn, N.Y. and by “Rock and Roll Confidential” in Long Beach, California. In 1990, the Rock artists themselves joined the fight against Censorship in a campaign called “Rock the Vote”. But it still goes on. The same thing is now beginning to happen here in Britain, N.W.A’s new album Efil4zaggin (Niggaz4life) has been banned for its explicit lyrical content. We may not like the album, but we want the right to buy it.

Of more than 7500 albums released in America between January 1986 and August 1989, forty-nine displayed a warning sticker on the sleeve. The PMRC believe there should have been more. In 1989 record companies began the voluntary labelling of albums, and the first to appear was Prince’s Graffiti Bridge and was sold to adults only.

It is now easier to buy a .44 Magnum over the counter in America than it-is for a seventeen-year-old to buy a 2 Live Crew album in his local record shop, and the system is being introduced into this country.

Introduction

While Censorship raged through America at the end of the last decade, restrictions of a different kind were being enforced here in Britain. Private parties were being raided by police, and it is believed that two hundred people were being arrested every weekend for nothing more than … dancing! One example of this was New Year’s Eve 1990 when young Germans gathered at the ruins of the Berlin Wall to celebrate a new decade of freedom. Young people in London doing the same thing were prevented by police and politicians.

The birth of Acid House

The root of this clampdown can be traced back to 1987 when Chicago duo Phuture released an album called Acid Trax creating a new culture known as Acid House, defined as “Cheap synthesizer sounds, fluctuating basslines and minimal vocals.”

The fashion caught on, creating a market boom in Acid House music, T-shirts, badges etc. People danced to it in specialist nightclubs, it filled the pop charts, and the Second Summer of Love got underway in the wake of the new lifestyle, attitude and culture that had been established.

At this time over a third of 15-19 year olds claimed their favourite music to be Acid House and £3 million was being spent every month on House albums. And then it all went wrong.

The media intervenes

The press decided that Acid House culture was a repeat of the drug-crazed ideas of the Sixties and that the Trance Dance characteristic of Acid House was drug-induced. Misconceptions were aroused that the term “Acid” actually referred to a drug, despite the words from D-Mob’s acid house anthem We Call It Acieeed that go

If you thought it was a drug
Now you know you’re wrong
You hear it in Phuture, Shoom and Spectrum.
We call it Acieeed.

Phuture, Shoom and Spectrum were three London nightclubs where Acid House began. The drug called Ecstasy began to be linked to the scene, and following an ill-informed education from the media, the government began its attack on Acid House, and people’s right to dance.

Laws were passed restricting the right to party, clubs had to close at embarrassingly early hours, T-shirts were banned from Top Shop, party organisers were persecuted by the police, and Radio One and Top of the Pops, the main sources of radio and TV airplay, refused to play certain Acid House tracks.

Legal battles

On November 4th 1988 the police raided two separate boat parties in Greenwich, making eighteen arrests. Nine were charged or convicted, including Clive Reynolds, who was found in possession of 58 tabs of Ecstasy. The organisers of the parties were worse off than him, Robert Darby and Leslie Thomas sentenced to ten and six years respectively for ”conspiring to manage premises where drugs were supplied.” On January 9th 1990, the man in charge of the convictions, Det. Chief Inspector Albert Patrick appeared on TV’s ”Thames Report” saying that it was an excellent result, and was the first of its kind in this country. But there is room to doubt this statement. Was Robert Darby’s crime greater than that of the drug dealers, or even the rapists, muggers and child molesters who often get leaner sentences?

Since the Greenwich incident, police presence has been more frequent especially throughout 1990. They have been known to set up roadblocks on motorway turnoffs to prevent both party goers and families returning from holidays from passing through. They have also been known to drag security men and party organisers from their cars at home, none of whom can be legally arrested before an illegal party has taken place. Parties have continued to go ahead, just as the police have continued to attend and arrest.

Diary of events, 1990

March 1990 – A riot broke out at a warehouse in Nelson, Lancashire when police raided a party of 4000. One or two people were arrested, many were taken to hospital. Less than three months later, 231 people were arrested and 700 more were questioned by police at a party under the M1 motorway near Wakefield. None were charged.

22nd July – 836 people were arrested at a party near Leeds. Three policemen and just as many partygoers were admitted to hospital. Eight people were charged and complaints were filed against the police for brutality.

29th July – 5th August - Parties were stopped at Leeds, Wakefield, Garforth and other places around the country. A total of eight people were arrested.

12th August – 27 people were arrested at a stopped party in Chester, 25 in Carlisle. The Sun runs an article ”ACID YOBS IN RIOT.”

It has become evident that the police have no authority to erect roadblocks to prevent partygoers, and mass arrest is acceptable only when there is reasonable suspicion that a criminal offence is being committed. Many of these Acid House ravers believe that the police’s priority should be the policing of violent crimes and burglary etc. and not of people trying to enjoy themselves. But party people are not bowing to pressure. The Freedom to Party Movement has been established and is taken particularly seriously in the North. Martin Lever says that “We won’t be denied the right to dance. I’m going to go again. They’re not going to stop me. If I want to walk into a warehouse and dance, I will!”

“This is a democracy!”

The fight for the right to party goes on.

Bibilography/research

• “Class of 88: The True Acid House Experience” – Wayne Anthony (Virgin Books, 1998)
• “Music Censorship “- Tony Fletcher (From SKY Magazine November 1990)
• “Whose Law?” – Dominique Harvey(From RAVE-The Dancefloor Magazine 11th September 1990)
• “Party Politics ” – Sherryl Garratt And Chris Taggart (From The Face February 1990)
• “HOUSE” – Sherryl Garratt (From The Face September 1988)
• “Bombs Away ” – Robin Smith (From Record Mirror 2nd February 1991)
• Extracts from Playboy, In Bed With Madonna and MTV‘s Year in Rock 1990