Tommy

Though I had heard various songs from the Who's Tommy album, I never listened to the entire album. So I recently listened to it. As I listened, I got curious, and asked the question that doubtlessly many have asked. Who is Tommy?

Apparently, we are Tommy. Pete Townshend, after being burned out on drugs and celebrity attention, underwent a spiritual awakening. He came under the influence of the teachings of Meher Baba. He soon gave up psychedlic drugs and sought to bring others under the same teachings. He dedicated the Tommy album to Meher Baba.

Meher Baba was a spiritual master from India, deeply into mysticism. For him, reality is mostly illusion, and the goal of life is to realize the Oneness of God in a mostly pantheistic manner. The ultimate realization of this level of concsiousness is Avantarhood, which Meher Baba declared he reached on February 10, 1954. Meher Baba took a strong public stand against using drugs to achieve new levels of consciousness.

Pete Townshend therefore believed that we, like Tommy, are blind, deaf, and dumb, and need to take the "Amazing Journey" (the central track on the Album), and achieve a new level of spiritual consciousness, as Tommy did. In the Album, Tommy strongly advises his followers not to take drugs or alcohol. Like Tommy, we need to break through the mirror to truly see, hear, and speak.

However, Pete Townshend added many extraneous elements to the story, such as the Pinball Wizard (though it may be the best song on the Album). Ironically, probably most of the Who fans listened to Tommy while doing drugs, and did not give up drugs as a result. Later on, Pete admitted he was not direct enough in getting across the message he wanted to give.

I personally do not think the underlying message was strong enough. Mysticism, Eastern or otherwise, can be directed toward spiritual consciousness, but there is no logical reason that it cannot be directed to drugs or that it can speak against drugs.

However, though not all the songs are equally strong, there are some great rock songs on this album with rich chords. Many songs employ an acoustic guitar in contrast to the usual electric guitar, though that is there as well. The concept of the album was ambitious in attempting to convey a unified message, as well as the overture and underture. Overall, I enjoyed listening to this album.

Though Pete Townshend initially denied the album was autobiographical, he later came to the realization that it was. It has many parrallels to his personal life. The Tommy tour also witnessed a transformation of Roger Daltry as he increasingly took on the character of Tommy as he sang the role part.

Oil Crisis

I learned a lot of things I did not know by reading the book on oil I mentioned in the Introduction post:

1. During the 1973 oil crises there was sufficient oil in the U.S., even though there was a shortage. However, the federal government had instituted an allocation program. Under the program, oil could not be moved from one part of the country to another part without submitting for permits and obtaining permission from the government. Without this government program, the oil companies could have moved oil quickly enough to meet any immediate shortage in any part of the country. The inefficiency under this government allocation program was such to cause a lot of the gas lines experienced at that time. In addition, consumers rushed to the gas stations to fill up as soon as the news reported any shortage. Also, people filled up on gas every chance they had so not to be caught short later on.

2. The rise in oil prices in the 70s led to increased exploration and a glut of oil by the mid-80s, especially from the North Sea and Alaska, which led to a dramatic decrease in the price of oil from around $40 a barrel to as low as around $6 a barrel.

3. Oil has had a long history of wild fluctuations depending on supply and demand in the market.

Richard III

Ricard III is a historical play that seems like a tragedy, except there seems to be no hero or good person who tragically turns bad because of some fatal flaw. Instead, Richard, who starts as the Duke of Gloucester, is the epitomy of evil from beginning to end with apparently no redeeming quality.

If Richard was a fictional character, he would be quite an invention. However, he was a real historical figure, two kings before King Henry VIII who people today are more familiar with. He was overthrown by Henry, Earl of Richmond, who then became King Henry VII, father to King Henry VIII. Shakespeare wrote the play while Queen Elizabeth reigned. This meant Shakespeare had to be careful in the treatment of how her grandfather had overthrown a sitting King of England. However, Shakespeare did not treat Richard in a completely historical manner, so there is a blend of history, fiction, and drama, and the character reflects such a blend.

Before Richard, King Henry VI was King of England. Shakespeare has 3 plays on Henry VI in 3 parts, and Richard III is a continuation. Therefore, you learn a lot about Richard's character and the historical situation in the preceeding plays, and you are somewhat at a disadvantage if you haven't read them first as I did. It helps to understand what is called the War of the Roses, which essentially was a long-standing feud between the York family and the Lancaster family. Richard belonged to the York family.

As the play opens Richard's oldest brother, Edward IV is on the throne, but old and ill. To become King after Edward dies, certain people must be dead, and Richard must be married to the right people. Shakespeare has Richard tell us how he is going to go about doing all this, and then craftily and efficiently carries out those plans. The amazing thing is that all the targets of his malice, except for some children, firmly believe he is honest, on their side, and watching out for their best good. This is partly because they all have something to gain, and Richard plays on this to the hilt and then turns it on them. Of course Richard thus becomes King.

Shakespeare presents us with much more than a simple evil villain. Shakespeare's penetrating insight into human personality presents us not only with a fully formed evil persona, but someone we can understand and see develop. Towards the end, as armies gather against him, a parade of ghosts of those he has murdered accuse him in his dreams so that his conscience mightly pricks at him, and he writhes in its throes.

What do I fear? Myself? There's none else by.

Richard loves Richard; that is, I am I.

Is there a murderer here? No. Yes, I am.

Then fly. What, from myself? Great reason why:

Lest I revenge. What, myself upon myself?

Alak, I love myself. Wherefore? For any good

That I myself have done unto myself?

O, no! Alas, I rather hate myself

For hateful deeds committed by myself!

I am a villain. Yet I lie, I am not.

(Act V, Scene 3, lines 182-191)

He can't quite make up his mind as he wrestles with his evil.

Richard is finally killed in the final battle, and the Earl of Richmond become King Henry VII. The War of the Roses is ended, and the House of Tudor becomes the ruling family. Shakespeare carries a sense of God's foreordained justice throughout the play.

There is a lot more going on, a lot more characters to study, and a lot more I could discuss, but I am trying to keep this post brief. I highly recommend reading this play. Try using a version with good notes to help with the difficult language. A study guide also helps, and if you can't find one, use the one online at Sparknotes.