Heroes - Frank Zappa

Continuing with my Heroes series of blogs, I'd now like to focus the latest in the series on one of my musical heroes - Frank Zappa. I have long been a fan of Frank Zappa's music. If you happen to play a musical instrument, then you simply have to check out some of his back catalogue. It is often quite eclectic, as his music spans many different musical styles and time signatures.

Frank Vincent Zappa (December 21, 1940 – December 4, 1993) was an American composer, singer-songwriter, electric guitarist, record producer, and film director. In a career spanning more than 30 years, Zappa wrote rock, jazz, electronic, orchestral, and musique concrète works. He also directed feature-length films and music videos, and designed album covers. Zappa produced almost all of the more than 60 albums he released with the band Mothers of Invention and as a solo artist (Wikipedia).

His music was notoriously difficult to play. When auditioning musicians for his band, he would ask them to sight read difficult pieces of music, to be able to play in odd time signatures and to be able to play in many different styles (rock, jazz, latin, reggae).

His music would require extremely high levels of memorisation, as few of the songs followed the typical verse-verse-chorus-verse-verse standard of most typical songs or compositions. The compositions themselves would often be written in multiple time signatures, often in odd time, and in many different styles and tempos.

During concerts, the band would rehearse many hours of music. The actual set list for any particular concert would be handed out to the other musicians about half an hour before hand. Even while the band would be playing a song during a concert, Frank would change the style or tempo by using pre-determined hand movements and gestures. For example, he would pull his hair to indicate dreadlocks, indicating to the rest of the band that he wanted them to switch to playing in a reggae style.

So not only would the musicians have to have extremely high levels of technique to play the often extremely difficult musical pieces, but they would have to be able to play under high levels of pressure too.

Zappa was a highly productive and prolific artist and he gained widespread critical acclaim. Many of his albums are considered essential in rock and jazz history. He is regarded as one of the most original guitarists and composers of his time. He also remains a major influence on musicians and composers. He had some commercial success, particularly in Europe, and for most of his career was able to work as an independent artist. Zappa was posthumously inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in 1995 and received the Grammy Lifetime Achievement Award in 1997 (Wikipedia)

The album that got me into Frank Zappa was called One Size Fits All. I hadn't heard any of his music prior to listening to this album, but was blown away by the sheer level of musicianship, and the complexity of the music. The track 'Inca Roads' is a particularly difficult piece. It was also a very accessible album. Rather than sounding like a self indulgent album, where the songs were complex for the sake of it, the songs were very musical where complexity was simply a by-product.

My favourite Zappa album is Joe's Garage. If you're serious about your music, then you quite simply have to own this album! The album is a rock opera and concept album. If you want to hear a group of musicians playing some highly complex, but stunning compositions, then you need to listen to this album. It also contains one of my favourite ever pieces of music in the form of 'Watermelon In Easter Hay'. There are few albums I would consider perfect, but I think Joe's Garage is as near to sheer perfection as I have ever come across!

The albums feature Ike Willis as the voice of "Joe", a stereotypical garage band youth who unwittingly journeys through the miasma of the music business. As well as various other characters, Zappa provides the voice of the "Central Scrutinizer" character—a mechanical voice that narrates the story and haunts Joe's psyche with McCarthyistic 50s-era discouragement and "scrutiny." In his liner notes Zappa also states that the story was inspired by the 1979 Iranian Revolution, which outlawed public musical expression. The story parodies various topics such as groupie migration, sexual repression of the Catholic Church, Scientology, fetishism, struggling musicians and the censorship of music (Wikepedia).

I was lucky enough to see Zappa live in concert on his last ever tour of the UK before he sadly passed away. It was an experience I will never forget. To hear and see so many of my favourite Zappa tracks being played live by an ensemble of the world's best musicians was amazing! They also played Revel's Bolero, Led Zeppelin's Stairway to Heaven and The Beatles's I Am The Walrus. What a show!

Zappa's music will undoubtedly live on forever. He was one of the most highly respected musical composers of his generation, and has inspired and influenced many more musicians and composers, and will continue to do so for generations to come.

Heroes - Richard Dawkins

The latest article in my Heroes series is going to focus on Richard Dawkins. He was born on March 26th 1941 and started his academic life as an ethologist and evolutionary biologist. He came to mainstream prominence (some might say notoriety) with the publication of his 1976 book The Selfish Gene. The book is a detailed discussion of the gene centred view of evolution.

Although the idea was not unique, the book must surely take the credit for popularising the idea and bringing it to mainstream attention. Up to that point, the popular view of evolution was at the level of the organism, or to use the term used by Dawkins in his book - the vehicle. Dawkins makes a clear distinction in his book between genes, and the organisms (or vehicles) which carry them. Bodies that carry genes (including humans) only do so to help genes propagate themselves. At the level of the gene, a body's only purpose is to transmit the gene into future vehicles. Therefore the gene must act selfishly to do so.

"Dawkins coined the term "selfish gene" as a way of expressing the gene-centred view of evolution as opposed to the view focused on the organism. From the gene-centred view follows that the more two individuals are genetically related, the more sense (at the level of the genes) it makes for them to behave selflessly. Therefore the concept is especially good at explaining many forms of altruism, regardless of a common misuse of the term along the lines of a selfishness gene." The Selfish Gene

Many critics of the book took the phrase literally, and accused Dawkins of condoning selfish behaviour at the level of the individual organism, including selfish behaviour at the level of a human being. This is a popular criticism, but it is entirely without basis or merit.

"Selfish", when applied to genes, doesn't mean "selfish" at all. It means, instead, an extremely important quality for which there is no good word in the English language: "the quality of being copied by a Darwinian selection process." This is a complicated mouthful. There ought to be a better, shorter word—but "selfish" isn't it." The Science of Selfishness

The first book by Richard Dawkins that I read was The Blind Watchmaker. Two books ignited my passion for science. One was The Dragons of Eden by Carl Sagan. I mentioned this in my Heroes article on him previously. When reading The Blind Watchmaker, I was fascinated by the ideas it contained. The title of the book comes from a reference made by William Paley in his book Natural Theology. Paley argues in his book that the complexity of living organisms is proof of the existence of a divine creator. He uses the watchmaker analogy to substantiate this claim.

The watchmaker analogy is a teleological argument for the existence of God. The argument states that the complexity of life, and of living organisms is analogous to the complexity of the internal workings of a watch. A watch is a complex piece of equipment containing many moving parts which must work together in intricate detail to serve its purpose of accurately telling the time. More importantly, a watch is designed by a watchmaker. Likewise, the complexity of living organisms must also have a designer. In this case the designer will be God.

In the book, Dawkins makes extensive reference to a computer model of artificial selection (which he originally developed himself on his Apple Mac). The program uses the concept of a "biomorph". This is a mathematical organism whose shape is defined by its "genome". The genome in this case is a vector of numerical values (don't be put off by the mathematics). The "genes" that define the "genome" are allowed to change over time within certain predefined boundaries. This process is akin to the way that evolution works in real life, and so gives a fascinating insight into the workings of evolution. In the book are depictions of how the biomorphs change (evolve) over time. Starting out with a fairly rudimentary biomorph, Dawkins supplies screen shots of the biomorph over time as it gradually evolves. It amply and very clearly demonstrates how complexity can arise from simplicity.

Dawkins goes on to give many explanations for living complexity, such as the evolution of sonar in bats. His explanations are so clear, so well constructed and written, that the arguments can be easily absorbed and understood. This is something I have admired throughout all of his books. He never assumes the reader is a scientist, nor does he assume the reader is a dolt. He assumes the reader is intelligent with a keenness to learn about the topic he is writing about. He never patronises the reader for not understanding some of the basics that a scientist may already know. He will devote pages, sometimes chapters, to describing and explaining any underpinning theory on which a later chapter may rely. It is a great skill to be able to disseminate and describe so ably to the lay reader some of the complex ideas in his books. He does so without ever losing track of the discussion, or losing the reader.

You cannot possibly write about Richard Dawkins without mentioning his atheism. He is well known for his criticism of creationism and intelligent design. He was one of the founders of the Bright movement (of which I am a proud member). In his 2006 book The God Delusion, Dawkins contends that "a supernatural creator almost certainly does not exist and that religious faith is a delusion—a fixed false belief." As of January 2010, the English language version has sold more than two million copies and has been translated into 31 languages, making it his most popular book to date.

I read this book not long after it came out. It is the most comprehensive dismantling of religion I have ever come across. He uses his skill for well constructed debate and argument to powerful effect. Dawkins contends that a supernatural creator almost certainly does not exist and that belief in a personal god qualifies as a delusion, which he defines as a persistent false belief held in the face of strong contradictory evidence. He is sympathetic to Robert Pirsig's statement in Lila that "when one person suffers from a delusion it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called religion."

Richard Dawkins is a great supporter of critical thinking, of rational based decision making where evidence is fundamental. This comes through strongly in his writing. He is not afraid to tackle a subject, even supposedly sacred ones or taboo ones such as religion. He argues from fact, from science, from evidence. So when Richard Dawkins sets his sights on his intended target, you know with certainly that his arguments will be robust and based on hard evidence and science.

I admire Dawkins's writing skills, the fact that he can make complex ideas understandable to the lay reader who is sufficiently motivated to make the effort to learn about the topic. I admire his tenacity and heretical values. He is a fierce opponent who is not afraid of polemic. He does not shy away from debate or challenging long established doctrines and beliefs. His weapons of choice when debating are evidence, critical thinking and rationalism. These are traits we should all employ when discussing and debating ideas and theories.