An introduction to "Under
Wraps"
In
September 1984, after nine months of recording at
Anderson's home studio, Jethro Tull released their
most controversial album since "A Passion
Play": "Under Wraps". Working with new
electronic means like samplers, sequencers and
high-tech synthesizers used by Ian for the first time
on his solo album "Walk Into Light", was
taken much further than one would have dared to
imagine, to an extent where the flute seems to be
completely out of place! Which - for a Tull album -
is rather peculiar!
Working on an album in the relaxed
atmosphere of a private studio affected the outcome.
It offered the band members - Anderson, Barre and
Vettese - the time and opportunity to experiment with
new forms and 'soundscapes', exchange musical ideas,
and work more intensively together in the recording
process then had ever been the case before.
The contributions of Martin Barre en
Peter Vettese led to a very innovative and powerful
album brimmed with original musical ideas. The album
was recorded with the aid of a Linn drum machine,
instead of a proper drummer which might be the main
reason why there is no "live feel" to it.
Most of the songs have a "spy" theme - as
Barbara Espinoza states in her book "Driving In
Diverse": "contrived espionage and intrigue
abound" (1999, p. 89). I for one assume this not
to be coïncidal. Ian loves to read spy novels while
on the road, especially books written by John Le
Carré. So why wouldn't he try to adapt this 'spy
novel' format into a set of songs? More important
however is, that we should take in account that Ian
as an artist writes music and lyrics that often
contain his comments on society. When it comes to
this album, we should realize that the international
political situation in the early eighties might have
been the context for this album. To put it more
specific: the occupation of Afghanistan by the Soviet
army in 1979, the meddling of the Soviets with the
internal affairs of that country and the political
reaction of the Western world (remember Reagan's Star
Wars programme) caused the last big spasm of the Cold
War. In addition to these events there were several
so called "spy scandals" in the early
eighties, such as defecting agents on both sides and
double agents revealing "their" secrets.
Like "A Passion Play" eleven
years before, this album also divided the
Tull-followers into two groups: either they loved it
for its inventivity and its energy or they hated it
for sounding too artificial and not sounding anything
like "their Tull". ( I for one belonged to
the last lot and refused to buy the album until 1999
....... and then had to change my views and consider
it - musically speaking - as one of the most
intelligent albums the band ever recorded). However,
both for Martin Barre and Ian Anderson as well, this
is one of the Tull-albums they rate highly and still
listen to for fun.
The "Under Wraps" tour
programme (1984).
By kind permission of Pete McHugh (Electrocutas
- The Jethro Tull Archive).
After the completion of "Under
Wraps" Doane Perry was invited to join the band
as percussionist for the upcoming tour. Most of the
"Under Wraps" songs proved to be very hard
to sing on stage. This constant straining of Ian's
voice and the use of "heavy electronics"
made this situation worse: he suffered more and more
from throat problems like laryngitis and muscular
spasms. Reaching the upper key notes became
hazardous, eventually to such an extent that the
Australian leg of the tour had to be cancelled after
five gigs! In fact, Ian never overcame this problem,
in spite of a period of rest and medical treatment.
Personally I think these problems were mainly due to
the fact that Ian never was professionally trained as
a singer: lack of technique in combination with the
excessive touring of the previous fifteen years
eventually damaged his vocal chords and throat
muscles. From 1985 on he saw himself urged - sorry
but true - to adjust the songs he wrote to his vocal
limitations.
* Jan Voorbij
Jethro Tull in the "Under Wraps" days:
Ian Anderson, Peter Vettese, Martin Barre, Dave Pegg
and Doane Perry (1984)
Annotations
Under Wraps # 1
European Legacy
Our thinking, feeling and acting is
to a large extent determinated by the context of
our descent, our childhood, the way we were
brought up, the country or region we live in, and
the people that make out our family and friends
in our formative years: "European
Legacy". All these elements are
building stones for our personal and/or group
identity. For over a century scientists have been
debating the question to what extent our social
and physical environment determine what kind of
personality we eventually acquire. In psychology
this debate is known as the
"nature/nurture"or
"nature/culture" discussion. In terms
of philosophy this view on humanity is known as
'positivism', and it was very popular in the 19th
century. Marxism is one of the best known
examples of posivist philosophies (It considers
both human acting and thinking to be determined
by their economical situation in society). It
seems to me that this psychological phenomenon is
the main subject of the song. The narrator uses
four images to show how our legacy affects us and
our identity.
The line "Visitors
who took a hand a thousand years ago" is
referring to the many tribes from Ireland,
Scandinavia and Western Europe that invaded
Britain over the centuries, esp. during periods
when the nations of the British isles were
divided and fighting eachother: "who
took a hand". Since our
narrator speaks of invaders from a thousand years
ago, he specifically means the invading Vikings (
"The Danes"), and the armies of William
of Normandy, who invaded and conquered Britain in
1066. The "faint
reminders" is a
reference to the round houses or
"brochs", which is peculiar for they
were built by tribes that inhabited Scotland,
Hebrides and Orkneys between 600 and 100 B.C.! (
See for more information the Broadsword
annotations).
Both groups eventually "washed
up a new identity": in other
words, they became Britains over time, but their
ancestors took their legacy with them when
crossing the Channel and the North Sea: "The channel's wide, but
it's their European legacy". Note the
double meaning in the line "washed up a
new identity": 1. These invaders washed
up: they came from all directions and landed on
different places and in different times on
Britains shores and 2. once they settled there
succesfully their descendants developed a new
identity.
* Jan Voorbij
* The Under Wraps logo was also applied
on the album cover of
"Live At Hammersmith"(1984)
Later, That Same Evening
The second one of the songs with a
"spy" theme. The construction of the
lyrics and the imagery applied make the song
almost film-like - as if one if watching a spy
movie. This technique of visualisation and
putting stories into a romantic setting can be
traced in most of this album's songs.
"Hard
- it was hard to keep my mind on what she had to
sell": is reference to
industrial or military espionage, esp. the
illegal selling and purchasing of classified
documents, plans, drawings, photographs, etc.
* Jan Voorbij
Saboteur
Another aspect of the
"spy" theme is dealt with here: the
hitman or hired killer, who eliminates people for
money ("pass
the hat and pass the knife"). However,
Ian portrays him here as a psychopathic murderer
- a split personality perhaps - who is convinced
that his act is not a crime ("No, no, me no
saboteur") - although
he is aware of the effects ("deepest regrets I humbly
offer you as I cut into your life.") - ,
because it serves some necessary and
"greater", "sacred" goal ("I anticipate a cleansing
opportunity to take the horns by the bull" - note the
wordplay in this saying btw!) and thus considers
it to be rightful ( "I'm
only removing broken sea-shells from the
beach"). The
elimination of physically and mentally
handicapped and retarded people, jews, gypsies
and gay people by the nazis spring to mind: they
used a similar argument for their crimes .....
The first five stanza's are dark and
brooding and the tension is built up carefully.
We can see the killer moving in closer and closer
("Following
the trace you leave unwittingly"), stalking
his victim, penetrating his or her private life
and home ("happy
in your domesticity"..."misfortune,
like a sparrow hawk hangs over you"), evoking
feelings of being treatened ("By now you must be
worried, wondering who is me and what lies behind
my art"),
committing his crime efficiently ("with
clean precision"). Finally
there might be a similar person very close to us:
"there's at least
one of me inside your ranks in your factory or
school".
There is a peculiar twist in the
last part of the song, that is not completely
clear to me: the sixth stanza consists of a
critical implicit comment on history and
historiography:
"History forever
writing, pages to be cut or painted grey, or,
celebrated like Jesus in his temple rage...".
Every society in any era will
manipulate history to satisfy its own needs or
ambitions desired. Here it seems that Ian wants
to say that societies are selective when it comes
to the appreciation of agression and violence.
Jesus' act in the temple is "celebrated",
while other acts are condemned. Or is it the
principal person here considering his act as
necessary as Jesus might have considered his and
therefore deserves a place in the history books?
* Jan Voorbij
"Walking
on cold corners of the maze.
Following the trace you leave unwittingly."
The image of the maze originally
comes from Greek myth: Theseus followed a golden
thread, given to him by Ariadne, in order to find
his way out of the maze after killing the
Minotaur which lay hidden at the centre.
The notion of the hunter and the hunted is thus
implicit in these lines.
Andy Jackson looks at this song from
a different perspective:
The word "saboteur" implies
someone who commits an act of wilful destruction,
often from within the organization or society to
which they belong. There is usually some
ideological or economic reason for this act. The
end result is always an unbalancing of the status
quo, a spanner in the works.
I take a metaphorical view of this song. For me
it's about the role of the creative artist within
society, or what Colin Wilson has described as
'the Outsider': the individual who has sacrificed
a plush, comfortable life for the isolating
journey towards Art. The painted ducks reflect a
safe middle-class existence -- as they did on
'One White Duck', where they were regarded with
similar cynicism and disgust.
The artist, as Outsider, is
dangerous for the sole reason that he or she
cares very little about society's ordered
structure, it's hierarchical career moves, it's
policy of politely sweeping personal demons under
the carpet. During the old-style Communist
regimes of Russia and Poland, the individuals
most targeted
for silencing were the poets and novelists.
It was their words alone which had the ability to
sabotage the endless propaganda. In both
examples, the artist is not bound by whatever
social or moral system happens to be in
operation.
"Happy in your domesticity
(it don't come free)" -- what
then is the price? I would suggest that the
price is passion, to some degree: the passion to
create something better, the passion to dig
deeper than the comfortable surface of
life. This of course is the artist's role.
To cut into the fabric of things, to lay bare
whatever hypocrisies may be in fashion.
"Who is me and what lies
behind my art" -- again
we return to the question of identity that runs
through so many Tull songs, and what that 'art'
amounts to. Again, the question of motive
or of personal morality is raised: a question
with no answer, since the artist takes no sides .
. . and, indeed, is not even playing the
same game.
The narrator in this song recognises that,
despite society's increasing conformity, there is
still 'one of me inside your ranks' -- another
Outsider who is also within, preparing to raise
their own voice in their own way.
"To take the horns by the
bull" -- this echoes the phrase
in 'Crazed Institution' ('just a little touch of
make-up; just a little touch of bull'), another
song in which the artist is examined in relation
to the surface glitter of rock and roll, and
which, also, depicts the artist as a
Christ-figure.
"celebrated like Jesus in
his temple rage" -- this
event is unique in the Bible in that it portrays
Jesus as a man of human passion and not simply as
a moving symbol of peace, mercy, love, etc. The
only other comparable passage I can think of is
Matthew 10:34 -- "I come not to bring peace,
but a sword".
The significance for the artist is clear -- a
purposeful destruction of hypocrisy, a rage
against the gods of commerce in defence of what
you might call the Spirit. In this one act
of passion, Jesus made it clear that he was a
saboteur, a new spanner in the works. The
Outsider who changed the system from within.
In short - it only takes one vision to knock a
hole in reality. The artist or visionary, as
solitary a free agent as the hit-man, will be the
one most likely to pull the metaphorical trigger.
* Andy Jackson
Continuation
|
Introduction 