CHEER-ACCIDENT played what was to be their first show since the death of Phil Bonnet. The stage was arranged with chairs as the members (including new guitarist Jamie Fillmore) took their places on the stage. The first song was a touching rendition of I'm A Believer sung by Thymme Jones who was accompanied by Jamie on acoustic guitar. This helped set the mood for a show which was as much a farewell to Lounge Ax as it was to Phil Bonnet.
A couple songs into the show Thymme gave a little talk, about how he doesn't play the drums anymore, and how people had told him that his drumming gives them joy, but he had asked himself, "is it the right kind of joy?" He then said that the next song which they were going to play was what he believed to be "the right kind of joy." This statement could be seen to encapsulate the mood of the entire show.
The overall feel of the show was that of a sing along. They did this in a way which isn't untypical of the rock band, in the "unplugged" segment of their show, in which they arrange their chairs in a semi-circle, but the music which they played didn't reinforce the obvious sort of values which are conveyed in the rock show. This wasn't the intimate moment, in which the audience gets to know a more personal side of the band. It had this CHEER-ACCIDENT twist, which made it kind of funny, even perverse, but the performance was delivered in such a straight forward and heartfelt manner that one couldn't view it simply as a joke.
There was a sense of intimacy, but it was also strange. An unfamiliar intimacy. There was no way to ground what they were doing, and yet it came from a foundation. There was a sense of camaraderie, like a bunch of seamen (or any other band) drinking their rum and singing their songs. The music was a mixture of sailor songs; the songs of a nomadic people, a music which travels at the margins of the dominant culture, and yet, at the same, there were also campfire songs; the songs of the camp meetings (ala Ives), in which the town's people gather to sing the praises of the lord, and to celebrate the values of the dominant culture.
There was also a funny sort of Yiddish sensibility which crept into the music, not only in that many of the words had a Yiddish sound to them (such as Hiezel), but in the way that they played with the language. The Yiddish language is one which deterritorializes a major language. Listen to the way Yiddish comedians (especially Mickey Katz) play with the English language, causing bits of it to break off, producing nonsense, but at the same time producing a new sense. There are jokes riddled throughout the language. The constant twists and turns of the tongue and brain, which reconfigure language into some new hybrid of errant associations which stretch between Yiddish and English.
There is a pure sort of joy in the language, in the funniness of the language itself, as a way of liberating forces within the dominant tongue. A subversive language with a subversive logic. This fits perfectly within the set of references; pirates, cowboys, sailors, for it is a small group, which operates within a dominant set of relations. The Jews are a people in exile. And this use of language shows how they are able to use their language to carve out a place within the dominant culture.
In contrast to this Yiddishness there were also songs about the blood of the lamb, which brought in a Christian influence, yet the two nestled quiet comfortable together, in the glow of the same light. The Christian music is at the other end of the spectrum, but it isn't out of place. It has more in common with the pop song, as a dominant form of expression.
Jesus Christ Superstar meets The Yiddish Cowboy Pirates. A strange mixture of different sensibilities, of different types of identity, which merged like the peoples of the earth.
The music had the sense of being a culture in formation, in which the different influences are still fresh, not yet being totally incorporated into a new structure. There was a looseness to the relations, without any particular influence dominating. And yet it wasn't like pastiche, there was a real sense of connection to the music, not just a collage of different musics. This music wasn't consciously eclectic. This is a music which felt as though it grew out of these relations, instead of being a set of references, or signs.
This wasn't a music about music, or about culture. There was no intellectual distance. This was a direct expression of that which is formed within a set of relations, relations which are not closed. These are songs of joy, and an expression of the openness which is joy. It is this joy which helped the performance move beyond the more obvious and familiar signs of intimacy.
It is because of the openness that the different types of musical (and cultural) influences could be combined. They didn't conflict with one another, because they were bound up within the spirit of the show. I don't want you to get the impression that this was a solemn affair, for there was the obligatory "pointless theatrics" which have become somewhat of a CHEER-ACCIDENT trademark, but this quirkiness was absorbed by the overall mood of the performance.
The band was having fun on stage. They were doing what they loved. And this came through in the performance. There was no irony, and yet at the same time there weren't the obvious types of overtures which performers make to try and win over an audience. There was a genuine openness to the performance. This is really hard to achieve, because there is a simulacra of intimacy, which has become part of the rock performance, in which the band sits in chairs on the stage, and plays within an intimate group setting, as opposed to the rock performance in which the band members strut their egos on stage.
Thus it is difficult to do this without appearing as though one is going through the motions, being anything but sincere, in their use of the signs of intimacy. This type of stage set appropriates the signs of folk music, which is based on group communication, instead of individual expression, and turns it into a form of marketing.
It gives the audience the impression that they are somehow closer to the band, that they have moved beyond the public image, and are given access to a more private area of the musicians' lives. It is a way of forming an illusory bond between the audience and the band. But it is in fact part of the band's public image. The public image has to create the illusion that we can look into the private life of the performers, that we have formed a kind of human contact.
This is really no different than VH-1's Behind The Music, or, for that matter, Lifestyles Of The Rich And Famous. "An evening with…" You feel like you have been included in an elite group, as though you are hanging out with rock stars. It has the opposite effect of producing a sense of commonness. It is a feeling of exclusivity. You get to hang out with a famous rock band, and it only costs you $45.
CHEER-ACCIDENT was able to avoid these cultural traps through being direct. The performance was exactly what it was. There was no irony. The music was there for enjoyment, and nothing more. This type of material could easily be presented as a series of inside jokes, which only the band understands, but here there was a sense of sharing, of laying it out there for people to do with what they wished.
This openness produced a sense of the universal, as opposed to the exclusive. It wasn't about belonging, of being on the inside or the outside, but about sharing, about the universality of music. A truly beautiful way to say goodbye to a great friend, and also to a great club. The musical life of Chicago will not be the same without them.