Dennis and Bob

Dennis Brown became known as the Crown Prince of Reggae. This title was given to him by someone known then as the King of Reggae: Bob Marley, who called Dennis his favourite Reggae artist..

Perhaps such laudatory titles, while creative and playful, should not be taken as absolute truths: especially in a wide and varied music scene as that of Reggae and Jamaican music, with many good singers, artists, and songwriters. Many of whom only did not reach the level of international fame of Bob Marley, or even less than Dennis Brown, who hardly reached the mainstream.

It is interesting, though, to compare these two artists with honorary titles musically. I – and other Reggae fans – did that already.

There is some truth to the Spanish saying "las comparaciones son odiosas" (all comparisons are hateful), but comparing can still be useful to describe and analyze cultural developments.

VOICE

My opinion has always been that purely focusing on “voice” and “singing” Dennis Brown is better than Bob Marley, though this may come close to sacrilege for some. A (Reggae) musician friend of mine, here in Amsterdam, placed a nuance.. "Bob could sing very well, it’s maybe the “timbre” of Dennis Brown’s voice which is prettier or more soulful". In the whole, this friend (a Reggae bass player) further argued: "the lyrics, melodic flexibility, and songwriting, Bob Marley was a “fuller” artist than Dennis Brown".

LYRICS

Regarding Bob’s lyrics I imagined he had a point, though I had some doubts. We must beware of commercial aspects: you just get to hear Marley’s songs much more, so also the lyrics. That being said, I must admit – and said it before, also on this blog – that Bob’s lyrics were special and wise. Much wisdom about humanity, poverty, the Black struggle, and, well, life. This was formulated, moreover, – as Lee Perry said – in accessible, understandable words for many people. That’s a skill Bob Marley had, and made him appeal to many people, especially the poorer people of the world, even outside of Jamaica or the Reggae scene as such.

SINGING

Still, I am willing to argue that Dennis Brown’s appeal was on the other hand not just his soulful voice or timbre. Indeed his singing had even more “reach” (technically/musically) than Bob Marley’s. This reach is not just relating to chord progressions or other such musical issues, but also regarding a certain recognizable, “original” style of singing.

This Dennis Brown singing style has, after all, inspired other singers in Jamaica too, even by their own admittance. Echoes of Dennis’ soulful, powerful “deep tenor” singing can therefore be found in later Jamaican Reggae singers like Frankie Paul, Luciano, and Bushman, and more (e.g. Natty King), relatively lesser known ones. That’s influence.

That voice is a good way to bring lyrics across, but can also “distract” from text, from some perspective. Or it adds another layer, is another way to look at it.

LYRICS

Another interesting question is whether the lyrics and songwriting of Dennis Brown really stayed that much behind those of Bob Marley’s. I heard and read several people say that, but even that is not so clear to me. The “distracting” voice of Dennis may influenced that thought, but is it true?

In other words: did Dennis have lyrics comparable to Bob’s?

An interesting comparison, due to their both being Jamaican Reggae artists with a Rastafari adherence, conscious lyrics and love lyrics, and a short generation apart mostly in the Roots era (Dennis lived on partly through the early Dancehall era), but different degrees of international fame.

MISTRUST

There is mistrust in Jamaica about Bob Marley’s fame being “helped” by the fact that he was half-White, and that musical qualities thus became secondary to racial preferences in the Western world.

Though I would not discard this – as is too often done nowadays – as a “conspiracy theory”, as I think race might have played a role. I also think, however, that it is not the only reason of Bob’ s relative fame, when compared to people like Dennis Brown, Gregory Isaacs, Bob Andy, Peter Tosh, etcetera.

Marley certainly had some extraordinary talents, in particular the combination of them (catchy melodies, memorable lyrics, charisma, and accessibility). Bob maintained his Rastafari and pro-Black stance, confirming his sincerity, even with messages running counter to the dominant Western economic system. Bob himself kept his integrity, in other words, and maybe he could because of his talent and charisma.

MUSICALLY

Besides lyrically, also musically this integrity was kept, but to a lesser degree. The adaptations of Bob Marley's music in the mix (by executive producer Chris Blackwell, mainly) toward Rock and pop were mostly at the cost of rhythm and groove. I as a percussionist notice that even more, probably. Elsewhere on this blog I spoke in a post/essay of April, 2017 - (how time flies..) - of this as “subdued percussion”, i.e. percussion and drums too soft in the mix. For my taste..

This somewhat more “Western” Rock sound (though limited) is not irrelevant for the theme of this post. It explained Bob’s music wider appeal, also outside the Reggae scenes, and among different races.

The Joe Gibbs, Niney, or even the earlier Studio One home-made Jamaican productions of Dennis Brown seemed less “translatable”. Especially the more “Rootsy” ones. Or were deemed as such: it often did not even reach enough of the public in the first place, due to this "commercial" (or ideological?) estimation.

Maybe Dennis Brown’s songs were too Black and Jamaican, for it to have the same international appeal as Bob’s? Or is that just an illusion in some minds, wishful thinking, even?

LYRICS

First the lyrics. I know many of Dennis Brown’s song and I remember several memorable lyrics, phrases from his songs. Singing them. Expressing Rastafari faith, often in Biblical terms, popular sayings. Kind of repetitive, but functional. Rebellious lyrics, against the system, are there too. They are either way more “messages” than stories, and that’s a difference with Bob, I think. Bob tells more original stories in his lyrics, and depicts visual imagery in well-chosen words.

Dennis Brown certainly has intelligent and commenting lyrics, but focusing on mental, or even metaphorical/abstract, messages, Rasta vocabulary (“Rasta children, I and I come from Zion"), or Bible scenes. It is more introverted than Bob’s lyrics, really. Bob looked and commented at the wider world, and many people world wide understood. Also a difference between Dennis and someone like Peter Tosh, who had a more “rebellious”, directly socially commenting image. More political, while Dennis was overall more “spiritual”.

Otherwise put, Bob’s lyrics were more realistic, Dennis’s more symbolic and conceptual. Bob’s more prosaic, epic, and Dennis’s more poetic.

That does not mean that Dennis Brown’s lyrics do not have the same wisdom as in Bob’s lyrics, with similar “emotional truths”, especially when touching human relations.

A good example is the song Let Love In (Your Heart). An essential truth, and well and soulfully sung, kind of meandering (a difference with straighter-singing Bob).

Also songs like Looking and Watching, Revolution, Tribulation, The Half, Concentration, or Rasta Children, contain deeper human wisdoms, way beyond formulaic statements of faith.

The lyrically claustrophobic Three Meals A Day about prison life is minimal, but nonetheless poetic. And again inward-looking: Bob was on the other hand more often outward-looking..

LOVE SONGS

Dennis had more love songs than Bob Marley. Besides a Roots icon, Dennis also became somehow known as a Lovers Rock man, alongside the Cool Ruler. Some of his relatively bigger hits were love songs.

His handsome, joyous – pleasantly seductive - smile when dancing (inherited by his daughter Marla), made him have a sex-appeal with women.

Yet, again: the love song lyrics were also more inward-looking than those of others. Dennis’s relatively biggest hit was Money In The Pocket (high in the UK chart in the 1970s) even spoke of inner, mental processes, rather than the outside world.

If there is one truth about the claims by some that Dennis Brown had less appealing lyrics than Bob, it is that Bob’s extrovert “outward” lyrics appeal more to people than introvert “inner monologues” or mental processes with which Dennis often surrounded his (social) messages.

Maybe that’s all too human, even if superficial. Some might prefer those “inward”-looking lyrics, as some big commercial hit songs at times show. Different tastes, majorities and minorities, etcetera.

SONGWRITING

Lee “Scratch” Perry also said about Bob Marley: “he had the best melodies”. He had good melodies and catchy vocal lines, but “the best” is too absolute. Perry worked a lot with Bob, but several other Reggae artists had a talent for catchy melodies in song, that stay with you. Too many to mention: Bob Andy, Alton Ellis, Gregory Isaacs, Mighty Diamonds, Burning Spear, Culture, Sugar Minott, Chronixx, Tarrus Riley, Beres Hammond, and, yes, also Dennis Brown.

Dennis’s songs like Prophet Rides Again, No More Will I Roam, I Don’t Want To Be A General, If This World Were Mine, Should I, The Promised Land, from early Studio One days: I Have Got To Go, are but examples of memorable songs owing that in part to the strong melodies. Sung well, that also helps.

I am even willing to argue that, overall, Dennis Brown had more immediately catchy melodies in his songs than Bob Marley. More memorable at least, partly due to a fact that I mentioned before: the more repetitive nature of Dennis Brown’s lyrics and songs. This combined with “filler” often wordless “wailing” soul cries (“Oh yeah”, Yea-ah”, “Oh now”) making the lyrics with words – and the chorus lines! - stick out more.. The function of variation.

Bob Marley tended to stick more to the “conventional” Verse-Bridge-Chorus structure of songs, thus more multifaceted and ordered, but recognizable. Dennis Brown in some songs too, but just as often mixed this with “chanting” a main and secondary melody/vocal line, playing with them on the Riddim/music. Not unlike Burning Spear, or another Brown: Barry Brown.

Dennis could pull that off with his talent and soulful voice, but it misses some structure that many are used to in pop songs. Bob had that more (and in a good way). Another explanation for the difference in international fame or (relative) mainstream appeal.

Bob Marley said himself that he wanted to sound like the then Reggae singer Little Roy (of the 1969 hit song Bongo Nyah fame), while Dennis Brown, said his singing style was influenced by earlier Reggae singer Delroy Wilson.

Interestingly, also the relative songwriting styles seemed inspiring: Little Roy more of the Verse-Chorus school, and Delroy Wilson (like Dennis) more of the free soulful singing school.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, about the reasons for the difference in mainstream popularity between Bob and Dennis: are they commercial? Yes. Racial? Most probably too.

If there are any sensible, nonbiased reasons for the difference of popularity/commercial success, they are cultural. Dennis stuck more to Jamaican cultural interpretations of Reggae, some of which “translated” not so well to non-Jamaican audiences as did Bob’s Reggae, maybe stimulated by the deal with Chris Blackwell and Island. The Joe Gibbs “sound”, and his even “Rootsier” work with Niney The Observer knew few adaptations to European tastes. Luckily, in my opinion. It kept the groove.

That this authentic culture is not always appreciated outside of it, is a lamentable fact in this world, though it is also that there are true fans of authentic cultures other than their own.

Reggae’s international spread proved that, and Dennis Brown is known and respected among Reggae fans all over the world: Black, white, Asian, or otherwise. Several of his songs were not just hits in Jamaica, but also – among reggae fans, at Reggae parties - “inna di dance”, at sound systems, or “inna di club”, throughout Europe, North America, Japan, Africa, and elsewhere. Even well into the Dancehall era.

The translatability is therefore difficult, but not impossible.

Nobel prize for the other Bob?

Bob Dylan has won the Nobel Prize of Literature in 2016.

This was then quite controversial, as - after all - the prize was implicitly intended for literary authors, and awarded as such. More specifically, fiction-writers. George Bernard Shaw, Gabriel García Marquez, Albert Camus, and Ernest Hemingway were among the authors receiving this honorary prize, which has been awarded since 1901.

CRITERIA

It was stipulated in the will and testament of Swedish industrialist Alfred Nobel that prizes should be given “for those who confer the greatest benefit on mankind”, and in different fields. The Nobel Peace Prize is also well-known. Besides Peace, there are 4 other Nobel prize categories: Physics, Chemistry, Medicine, Economics, and the already mentioned Literature.

I guess it is some kind of honouring those with merits for mankind, and I imagine that many in the world have this idea about the Nobel prizes, as connected to some type of idealism.

NOBEL PEACE PRIZE

This is most clear and explicit with the Nobel Peace Prize, awarded to those, such is formulated, advancing the “fraternity between nations” and, well, “peace” worldwide.

Regarding the other Nobel prizes than this Peace one, though, this idealism is to a degree vaguely formulated, even cryptic, and often a matter of controversy. “Outstanding contributions” in the said fields is an explicit criterium, but “influence” or advances in a certain field – say Chemistry -, does not necessarily mean that the world got better, more equal, etcetera, as a result. This nonetheless seems to be implied in initial stipulations since the prizes started in 1901.

LITERATURE

Specifically regarding Literature the Nobel prize is equally cryptic and vague in its criteria. Literally, Alfred Nobel stated to award authors "in the field of literature, with the most outstanding work in an ideal direction".

Quite cryptic and general, and open for interpretation. Some read “idealistic” instead of “ideal” for instance.

The list of laureates of the Nobel Prize for Literature since 1901 is in fact quite varied regarding the “type of writers”: these include those influential artistically, or even popular, but not always very politically or socially engaged, say “idealistic”, writers, though the latter are certainly among the laureates.

As can also be read on Wikipedia, the controversy was always there, with some considering the awarding of Nobel Literature Prizes to certain writers/people as too biased, either too politically motivated, or too little. Others notice a European and pro-Western bias.

BIAS

An overview of all the Nobel prize laureates up to the present unfortunately confirms this pro-Western bias, regarding all the said fields. Most laureates are from the US and United Kingdom, followed by Germany, France, and Sweden. After this follow many country with fewer laureates, though the Netherlands with 21 are relatively well-represented (compared to e.g. 8 of a country like Spain).

Then there are some countries with one or a few laureates or none at all, especially developing countries. Only recently for the first time an Ethiopian became the first laureate: the Nobel Peace Prize of 2019 to Ethiopian prime minister Abiy Ahmed Ali. Nigeria also has still only one, of Literature, to Wole Soyinka, awarded in 1986.

So, hesitantly over the years it became more international, those Nobel prizes, while still remaining definitely skewed and biased.

In spite of all this controversy - including just critique - over the years since 1901, the Nobel Prize for Literature has nonetheless become the world’s most prestigious literary prize.

SONG LYRICS

As said, in 2016 musical artist Bob Dylan won the Nobel of Literature. Of course, this also met controversy, such as among more conventional “writers” (i.e. of novels), while others in turn appreciated the broadening of “literature”, to include song lyrics.

An interesting idea, to include song lyrics. It is an interesting art form, after all. As in every art form – though - there is a lot of “cliché” and kitsch among it: unoriginal, uncreative, non-innovative lyrics, with no philosophical “depth” or message for mankind. Romantic love songs recur throughout all popular music genres globally, albeit reflecting some cultural differences, of course. Disturbed male-female relationships, machismo, or feelings only betraying an egoistic worldview, or an urge for sexual intercourse, generally do not result in literary interesting texts, though there are some nice poetic texts and lyrics putting “love” or even “sex” in a more original, deeper or more humorous, perspective.

That Bob Dylan won the prize in 2016, however, shows perhaps the socially engaged aim Nobel implicitly had with the prize. Dylan is known more for his socially engaged or philosophical lyrics than for “lovey dovey” lyrics.

I find that this choice is quite arbitrary, though, as others might argue with other laureates over the years (“why this one, and not that one..”) of this prestigious award..

I argue that another musical artist named Bob, Bob Marley, would be an equally valid laureate for this Nobel prize of Literature as Bob Dylan, perhaps even more so. Purely lyrics-wise.

BOB MARLEY

In February 2020 there is some kind of anniversary as it’s the 75th birthday of Bob Marley, born the 6th of February in 1945. He would have been 75 years old, were he still alive. He unfortunately died quite young – as other great musicians – but was very influential internationally. As to be expected – as best known Reggae artist – many tribute festivities on Bob Marley will be held around the 6th of February in this year, 2020, in several countries. Also in the Netherlands, where I live.

“I and I no come to fight flesh and blood, but spiritual wickedness in high and low places..” (from Bob Marley & the Wailers – song So Much Things To Say).

I am a Reggae fan, and write a lot about Reggae on this blog, including some articles/essays on Bob Marley. In some, I criticize the commercial exploitation OF him (not BY him, but OF him), and his watered-down sound for White audiences. At the same time, I expressed respect and appreciation for Marley as overall a great artist, and person, “keeping it real” with his message as much as possible, while helping to popularize and spread Reggae music world wide.

Personally, though, I am a broader Reggae music fan, and not just of Bob Marley. Not even primarily. Other Reggae artists I listen more to, and find more authentic, and Marley was just another great Jamaican artist and songwriter. As there were several since the 1960s.

“Why can’t we be what we wanna be. We wanna be free” (from song Rebel Music).

His fame “above Reggae” can be attributed to commercial manipulations by Island boss Chris Blackwell. Some assume racial motivations, with Marley being promoted for being half-White, whereas other contemporary Reggae artists – even with already some popularity – who were more fully Black, less so.

Others, while recognizing these commercial influences, still point at “special” musical talents or gifts of Marley, making his fame not fully arbitrary or racial. His outstanding charisma (also on stage) is mentioned by many – in Jamaica and outside -, even his physical attractiveness, in reaching people.

More musically, some point at his strong songwriting skills – even since he was a teenager -, showing throughout his many catchy, appealing songs. Jamaican producer Lee Perry, who had worked with Marley, specifically indicated how Marley “had the best melodies”. Some also like Marley’s singing.

“Life is one big road with lots of signs. So if you ride into the ruts, don’t you complicate your mind” (from Wake Up And Live).

I recognize all these things, but only partly. They do not explain his fame “beyond other Reggae artists”. He was a fine singer, but his singing voice was not the best one in Jamaican Reggae, at least in my opinion. He used it well musically, though. There were further other great songwriters in Jamaican Reggae, some even almost as prolific, such as Bob Andy, Dennis Brown, Gregory Isaacs, John Holt, Ijahman Levi, Ken Booth, and others. Some of these had strictly speaking better singing voices than Bob. Like Bob, they had good musicians around them too, rendering some great Reggae songs. Also, other artists were just as charismatic as Marley.

“Mysteries I just can’t express. How can you ever give your more to receive your less” (from Misty Morning).

BOB MARLEY'S LYRICS

There is one quality, though, that I am willing to accept as being outstanding of Bob Marley, even within the varied and culturally rich Reggae field. A quality described by Lee Perry as well: good, conscious lyrics, but “worded in simple ways, so that everyone can understand”.

“When it’s time to have your fun, you see the tears run on down from your face. Then you stop and think a little, oh.. you’re the victim of the system” (from I Know).

I agree with that: Marley’s lyrics were in my opinion his strongest point, not so much his voice, his guitar-playing, or even his songwriting. His songs are mostly fine and good, but do not always “blow me off my socks” because of their musical strength, as other Reggae songs achieved with me. Ijahman Levi, the Mighty Diamonds, the Abyssinians, the Wailing Souls, Burning Spear, Dennis Brown, the Viceroys, Hugh Mundell, and several other Reggae artists, had great beautiful songs that even mesmerized me, taking me magically to other spheres.

A few songs of Marley, I admit, achieved that with me too. I like for instance Ride Natty Ride, Rebel Music, Misty Morning, Guiltiness, Trench Town, and Forever Loving Jah. Fine, engaging musical pieces, that touched me, but also because of their lyrics..

“Only a fool leans upon his own misunderstanding” (from Forever Loving Jah).

However, what I personally mostly recall and appreciate from Marley’s entire oeuvre, are lyrics and phrases that stand the test of time, even if the songs are not among my favourites, or could be produced “edgier” musically or rhythmically, etcetera. That is the field of “literature”, these lyrics.

“Every man’s got a right to decide his own destiny.. And in this judgement there is no parciality” (from Zimbabwe).

Bob had many good, seemingly simple lyrics, about the human condition, especially regarding poor people of colour, in Jamaica and other developing countries, with many references to Rastafari and Africa. Yet, I contend, that these lyrics were universal regarding the human and world conditions. They were educational and insightful beyond the Rastafari movement, or the Jamaican ghetto. Inspired by it, but broadened and made accessible for all kinds of people, all over the world. Bob had the talent to do that with his lyrics and songwriting.

“No bullet can stop us now. No need to beg, no we won’t bow. Neither can we bought nor sold. We all defend the rights. Jah Jah children must unite. Life is worth much more than gold..We’re jamming..” (from Jamming).

SPOKESPERSON

Not for nothing, his lyrics appealed so much to many people, especially poor people, world wide. They recognized his struggle, and he even spoke for them. In Africa and elsewhere. Not unlike the roles of Fela Anikulapo Kuti, or Bob Dylan, but perhaps even more international. Kuti and Dylan have fans worldwide, like Marley, but with a stronger regional specialization. Dylan in the US and Kuti in Nigeria and Africa, even if later broadened.

Marley’s lyrics touched “sufferers’“ themes that needed to be touched, combined with the right to-the-point formulations, at the right places within the songs. This showed his songwriting talent.

“They say it’s hard to speak. They feel so strong to say “why we?” (from Trench Town).

RHYME

In addition Bob’s lyrics mostly rhymed well, as is the norm for pop songs: sentences in lyrics have to rhyme. Take the lyric from Bob’s Misty Morning: “The power of philosophy floats through my head.. Light like a feather, heavy as led”.. Good, deep lyrics, and at the same time rhyming well. Marley was a maestro in those kind of lyrics. Dylan maybe too, but the other Bob too..

“They’re sailing on their ego trips.. on their space ships. million miles from reality. No care for you, no care for me..”(from So Much Trouble In the World).

Even from his love songs. Also his “lovey dovey” lyrics often stood the test of time: early in his career the sweet, sensitive lyrics of I’m Still Waiting, to interesting reflections as on Is This Love, nice sensuality as in Turn Your Lights Down Low. These songs, and the fine Waiting In Vain, also appealed to people worldwide, and from different cultures. There must be a reason for that. Some songs I heard by now too much, I admit, such as Is This Love, and the bland, watered-down Island production does not help, but I still see their quality and potential appeal.

“Love to see when you move in the rhythm. I love to see when you’re dancing from within..” (from Jump Nyabinghi).

Bob’s Rastafari-inspired and “conscious” lyrics also go beyond formulaic Biblical quotes, just repeating wise words of others, like Marcus Garvey, or repeated standard Rasta sayings or phrases, stated as well by other Jamaican artists. They rather have an uniqueness and sense of direction in them, making them even open eyes and minds. The line “These songs of freedom, is all I ever had”, the line in Redemption Song, one of Bob’s latest studio recordings before he deceased, is of course of an intense beauty.

“Never let a politician grant you a favour. They will only want to control you forever” (from Revolution).

INFLUENCES AND CONTEXT

Granted, not all lyrics of Marley were unique. Like other Rastafari-inspired Reggae artists he quoted Marcus Garvey and Haile Selassie I, repeated tested Rastafari and Black Power expressions, used Biblical allegories and references, or even just general expressions known in several European languages.

Lines such as “big fish (always) eat up the small fish” – in Bob’s great song Guiltiness - is a standard expression that I know from Spanish: I remember my Spanish mother saying it sometimes, even before I heard Guiltiness. I imagine it is also an expression in English, or maybe it is mentioned in the Bible. The same might apply to “how can you give your more to receive your less”, while a phrase like: “the rich man’s soul is in the city, but the poor man’s heart is in his family..”, is nice, but from the Bible..

The famous line “Emancipate yourself from mental slavery, none but ourselves can free our minds” is a great line, but is a quote from Marcus Garvey, one of the inspirers of the Rastafari movement and Marley.

In these cases, it is rather “how” and with what purpose Marley used these standard expressions. That purpose was redemption and liberation of Black people, Africa, and poor people, or even stimulating “fraternity” between nations, as also formulated as aim for the Nobel Peace Prize.

“You must have had the wrong interpretation, mixed up with vane imagination” (from Stiff Necked Fools).

One also might - justly – argue – do not worry I’ll do it for you, haha – that other Reggae artists had good, unique lyrics too. Many even. I was however talking before about the international influence as criterium of the Nobel prizes, for mankind as a whole. Bob simply reached more people worldwide because of his fame as “King of Reggae”, while great and talented Jamaican artists like Culture, Ijahman Levi, Bob Andy, Dennis Brown, the Abyssinians, Israel Vibration, or Burning Spear became more international, but mainly among knowledgeable Reggae fans. You might even say that Marley “represented” them internationally with his fame. This makes a Nobel Prize for Literature for him even more sensible and appropriate: representing Rastafari-inspired Reggae lyrics globally.

“We refuse to be, what you wanted us to be..”(from Babylon System).

Marley shares as mentioned with e.g. Bob Dylan and Fela Kuti that he was a “spokesperson” for the poor and rebels with his lyrics, with the added aspect that Marley’s lyrics were more varied regarding the range of human emotions, like good literature. It was not just narrow “preaching”. Rebellious and angry were many of his lyrics, but some also “dreamy, reflective”, about daily life, some sincere and vulnerable, and some truly spiritual.

CONCLUDING

Okay, I more or less made my case in the above text, yet it might be necessary to analyze what makes Bob Marley’s lyrics so special, as to “deserve” a Nobel Prize of Literature? A good question.

According to Nobel prize criteria such as “outstanding contributions” and promoting fraternity between nations and peace globally, Marley’s mere international fame – as most famous Reggae artist, and first “Third World rock star” – make his lyrics meet those criteria more easily, after all reaching more people, while “crossing over” to many interracial groups on all continents, that before never listened to Rastafari-inspired Reggae lyrics, or even Caribbean music. He thus had international influence.

“No matter what games they play, we’ve got something they could never take away… And it’s the fire..that’s burning down everything” (from Ride Natty Ride).

He made the plight – and history - of the poor people and of Black people known more widely in the world, and made them more or less acceptable. To degrees, as some lyrics were considered “safer” than others (nonpolitical or nonrebellious love or party songs, for instance). Marley’s lyrics were partly censored in South Africa during Apartheid, especially those calling for African resistance and unity. His “lovey dovey” songs are mostly more accepted in mainstream (Western) Pop than his more conscious ones, that is also true.

Bob Marley was still known and had fans on all continents, having thus even a wider reach than other worldwide known “rock stars” (e.g. Michael Jackson, Bob Dylan, or the Rolling Stones), who are more connected to the Western world than Marley.

“You’re running away. But you can’t run away from yourself” (from Running Away)..

COUNTERING BIAS

Marley's nomination for a Nobel Prize for Literature would moreover counter the criticism of Western bias, the prize received in the past, which according to facts are a just critique. It would be the first Jamaican laureate of a Nobel prize too, and have a nice symbolic meaning: just shortly after an Ethiopian became the first laureate of a Nobel prize, Ethiopia being so important in the Rastafari movement.

LITERARY AND ARTISTIC

There are also purely literary and artistic arguments I can give, to further make my case. Of course, other musical artists have interesting and varied, and poetically and well-formulated lyrics too, including with social or deeper messages. I can name, besides Bob Dylan, Stevie Wonder, Bruce Springsteen, Jimi Hendrix, the Talking Heads, Lou Reed, U2, and also artists like Tom Waits and Nirvana have interesting, mind-provoking lyrics. They lack, however, the mentioned universal appeal and spokesperson role of Marley, and the consistency of his social and global rebellious – and uplifting! - message.

“Why do you look so sad and foresaken. When one door is closed, don’t you know, another is open” (from Coming In From The Cold).

As I already said, Marley could formulate his message well, even rhyming, with the right word choice, and fitting these lyrics well musically in the songs in a varied way, referring to a wide emotional range of a strong personality. From rebellion, anger, and sadness, to love, celebrating life, and relief, and deeper philosophical and spiritual reflections.

These lyrics contained besides Rastafari references, recurring universal positive messages, identifiable for all kinds of people, not just Rasta brethren or Jamaicans, rendering them inclusive. That’s an important literary quality, not to be underestimated. Many cannot overcome “preaching for their own kind” even within higher art, but Marley could and did, appealing to different kinds of people.

In addition, they were indeed positive lyrics, lacking demeaning or patronizing stances toward women, and while pro-Black and Rastafari-inspired, the lyrics were not racist against other races, or persuasions. Rastafari adherents often have own ideas about “proper” lifestyles and morality, but even when discussing e.g. prostitution, as in the song Pimper’s Paradise, or other people “losing themselves”, he expresses human compassion.

“Every need got an ego to feed” (from Pimper’s Paradise).

For all these reasons combined, I can honestly not think of a better nominee for the Nobel Prize of Literature, according to its criteria of “international humanity”, than Bob Marley.

“Have no fear for atomic energy, cause none of them can stop Jah time” (from Redemption Song).

Yet, only 4 years after an exceptional musical artist and lyricist (Bob Dylan) - as opposed to usual novelists – won that Nobel prize, another musical artist as laureate might result in controversy, and (again) objections of “conventional” writers.

Still, in my opinion the idea stands solid as a rock.

Subtle or subdued? : percussion in Bob Marley songs

In reality, it is a matter of connecting the dots. I am a reggae fan for over 30 years now, since I was about 11 years. Aside from this, some years ago, I took a more active interest in playing percussion, notably acoustic instruments. Before this I made music too (in fact since my teens), but through keyboards, MIDI, and singing.

My first encounter with reggae music back then (mid-1980s) included – as for so many people – Bob Marley albums, but also by other artists, such as the Wailing Souls. Over the years, my taste expanded to the entire Jamaican music scene. I specialized in reggae, you can safely say, and became (as other longtime fans) quite knowledgeable about it. This seems a natural progression.

In time I started to play percussion (hand drums, scrapers, bells, shakers etcetera) more actively, about 5 years ago. I was by then already a seasoned reggae fan, of course (listening of course at times also other music genres). I started with the Afro-Cuban bongó, followed by congas, the Yoruba ashiko drum, the African talking drum, djembe, bells, shakers, güiro, and other instruments. I also took lessons. Though I am broadly interested, I chose to focus most on Afro-American and African percussion instruments, with some slight Spanish/Flamenco influences. Since then – the last years as I write this - I played and jammed regularly with different musicians in the Amsterdam area. Mostly, though not exclusively, reggae musicians or music.

PERCUSSION IN REGGAE

Of course, as can be expected, I started to focus on different aspects of reggae songs from then on, paying more detailed attention to the use of percussion in songs. This also to learn from, for educational purposes. I learned that some reggae songs had more prominent percussion, other reggae songs relatively less. This could depend on the producer, studio, time period, specific musicians, albums, artists..

It is here where “connecting the dots” comes in. In a former blog post of mine (on this blog) I studied the “güiro”, a scraper instrument, originally used in Afro-Cuban music, including son and salsa. I found that this güiro scraper was in fact used quite often by percussionists in reggae music, even throughout some entire albums. Often also quite “noticeable” (loud, audible) in the mix. Lee “Scratch” Perry seemed sympathetic to this scraper instrument’s sound, as were other artists and producers, like the band Culture, Burning Spear, the Congos, or influential Augustus Pablo and Sly & Robbie productions. More generally, they liked to add percussion sounds, also beyond the güiro scraper.

BOB MARLEY

Bob Marley & the Wailers, by contrast, used the güiro scraper – and other percussion - relatively less prominently. There are some exceptions (Africa Unite, Crazy Baldhead, Get Up Stand Up, some songs on the Survival and Uprising albums). More generally, beyond just the güiro, on most Bob Marley songs percussion is used, but relatively sparse and limited, it seems, and often soft or somewhat “drowned” in the mix.

Africa Unite, a great song from the Survival album, is a case in point. There is a güiro audible, along with other percussion instruments, but barely audible without headphones. To really hear it well and prominent, one needs to listen in detail and preferably with headphones. That way I also found out that there is an African-type “talking drum” on the song Zimbabwe. I find those percussive details interesting.

So, not just that güiro, but the other percussion used in Bob Marley songs – at least on the well-known Island albums - tends to be soft, subdued (volume-wise) in the mix, compared to the other instruments. The woodblock (or jamblock) is used more in Bob Marley songs – quite regularly even – but somewhat hidden (read: soft) in the mix, as are bells and triangles. Only on a few songs of Bob, percussion was allowed to become more prominent. The bottle on the song Jamming, the audible cuíca friction drum on Could You Be Loved, and the interesting güiro scraper-woodblock interplay by Bob’s percussionist Alvin “Seeco” Patterson, on the song Crazy Baldhead (from the 1975 Rastaman Vibration album). These are exceptions, rather than the rule in the overall song book of Marley.

Many reggae fans may know that there is a bottle sound in Jamming, or a güiro scraper in the final part of Crazy Baldhead (or on Max Romeo’s Chase The Devil). They may also remember hearing a bell in several Bob Marley songs. They might, however, never have noted the talking drum in the song Zimbabwe. This is because it got “subdued”, drowned in the mix, amid the other (some say “main” instruments), namely the trap drums and electric instruments (bass, guitar, keyboard).

Zimbabwe is actually an interesting example. Most prominent is the (cow)bell, which is audible even through superficial listening. That bell (mainly a triple and double tone interchanged) is even kind of “driving” the energy of the song’s flow. Yet, upon closer listening it becomes evident that several percussion instruments are used on Zimbabwe, including hand drums (probably nyabinghi kete drums and congas), wood blocks, talking drums, and varied shaker sounds (cabasa, maracas).

The irony is that the song Zimbabwe is relatively “full” with percussion, yet that this is not very prominent or noticeable. Superficially, anyway, without giving it detailed attention. Nonetheless, it gives a song a depth, perhaps even subconsciously, that has an effect on the listener. That is a mark of good quality, in and by itself. It nonetheless still leaves the question open why the percussion could not sound louder in the final mix.

PERCUSSION

In the remainder of this post I want to focus on how percussion plays a role in Bob Marley’s songs, being the best-known reggae artist, world wide. Bob played a main role in internationalizing reggae, that is evident. Several of his songs are known all over the world.

Bob’s natural charisma and personality played a definitive role in his worldwide fame and appeal, yet, also Island and Chris Blackwell’s commercial thinking and promotion. The translation to the mainstream, non-reggae markets can only affect reggae’s authenticity. In fact it did affect this authenticity, although Marley – especially in (Rastafari) message and lyrics - largely kept his integrity. It did musically, though. Especially since Chris Blackwell and Island took Bob under their wings since 1973, his music became – at least partly - more “Westernized”, and mainstream. It got to differ – albeit to differing degrees - from the kind of Roots Reggae Jamaicans themselves preferred, already in the 1970s. The more culturally authentic, or “raw” Jamaican reggae, with some “rough edges” from the ghetto, as some describe it. Or “Blacker” as some also call it.

Does this difference relate to the relatively subdued percussion on Bob Marley songs?

PERCUSSION FUNCTIONS

Percussion in the African and Afro-American traditions, from which reggae developed, has (simply put) two main functions: one is a rhythmic one (driving, leading the/a main rhythm), the other is more, well, additional, filling up, or “embellishing”. Decorative, and more marginal. Overall, in African-derived music, percussion is relatively important, especially in music with – in part - sub-Saharan African roots. That may be a known fact, as African drumming traditions are quite well-known, even among non-experts. Africa is the most “percussive” continent (also maintained by anthropologist scholar Robert Farris-Thompson), so the balance of percussion’s function in African music often goes toward “leading” and “driving”. To a lesser degree, percussion can have also derived, more decorative functions in African music.

ALVIN “SEECO” PATTERSON

Especially in the context of this particular post, Bob Marley’s steady percussionist Alvin “Seeco” Patterson has to be mentioned. Throughout most of his career, since the 1970s , Seeco was Bob’s steady percussionist, until the end.. He was actually named Francisco Willie (Seeco as nickname derived from the Spanish first name), and was born in Havana, Cuba. Cuba is percussively influential globally, but I do not know whether this influenced Seeco’s instrument orientation.

Looking at album liner notes, however, one sees mentioned that percussion on several albums (Exodus, Uprising and others) also Aston & Carlton Barret - and occasionally Bob himself - were credited with playing percussion, alongside Seeco. Nevertheless, Seeco remained the main percussionist. Besides this role, Seeco was also influential early in the Wailers’ career, introducing them to Studio One owner Coxsone Dodd, for an audition, around 1964 (in the Ska era). Seeco knew Dodd and the Jamaican music scene already quite well, being then already some years active as musician, also in the Jamaican folk genre Mento (though he had to work in a mine on the side).

It is interesting to focus on Seeco’s (and sometimes others’) percussion contributions to Bob Marley’s albums and songs, including the well-known ones and big hits.

The said main – if simplistic – distinction between rhythmic, “carrying” percussion on the one hand, and atmospheric or decorative/embellishing on the other, is I think useful when listening to percussion on Bob Marley songs . The distinction cannot always be made, must be said. Especially in the African and Afro-American traditions, a counter-rhythm can be part of the overall call-and-response structure defining the song in its totality.

Though I am a percussion aficionado, I am not that biased or narrow-minded that I think that all reggae songs should have percussion, or that songs can only be good with added percussion. Some trap drummers are very creative with hi-hat patterns or added hits or rimshots, filling songs up quite nicely, as can dub/echo effects, or more rhythmic keyboard/synth or added guitar patterns. So much percussion is not always that indispensable. I like music in general (“soul”, melody, lyrics, harmony, rhythm), though I admittedly focus a bit more on rhythm, generally speaking. Probably, because I like to dance or move to music.

I have enjoyed songs, not really consciously aware of percussion present in it (or not). On the other hand, I do also encounter regularly songs, in reggae and other genres, of which I think: that could have used (more) percussion, to make it (even) better. Just to spice it up, groove it up, or fill it up, haha (I don’t even know if “groove it up” is an expression, but let’s continue). Some songs by the St Croix reggae band Midnite are examples of songs I thought could use more percussion, sounding somewhat “empty” to me.

Likewise, I “missed” more percussion also on some Wailers’ songs from the 1973 Catch A Fire and Burnin albums. These two “earlier” crossover albums were aimed at a White rock audience (in part) in Europe and the US, explaining perhaps the subdued role of percussion on the albums. Maybe Island records boss Chris Blackwell (co-producing these and later Bob albums) thought too much percussion was too, well, Black, Afro-Caribbean, or “ethnic”. In fact, Blackwell was the Executive Producer on Bob’s albums since 1973. I am afraid that Exeutive means something like “the final say”.

It is true that on most Bob albums Seeco was free to add percussion. This became, however, often soft in the mix, but upon closer/headphone listening – simply necessary to hear it well – even in earlier Bob Marley songs, some variety of percussion instruments can be heard. Not on all songs, however.

INSTRUMENT CHOICES

Among these percussion instruments, there seemed to be some preferences. Cowbells, other bells, and wood/jam blocks recur regularly, shaker instruments, jingle sticks/tambourines too, a bit less regular also an Akete hand drum or conga’s. Occasionally a rattle can be heard (on the songs Satisfy My Soul and Sun Is Shining for instance). Less heard (though not absent) is the scraper or güiro instrument. This is interesting, because scrapers were used quite commonly in other Jamaican Roots Reggae at the time.

Through a representative sample from different Bob Marley’s albums I can draw some general conclusions about preferred percussion in Marley songs.

-bells (cowbells) are used relatively often
-the triangle (!) can be heard regularly
-woodblocks/jamblocks are also used relatively often
-cabasa and other shakers also quite regularly
-tambourines and jingle sticks recur as well

Their presence reflects general trends in both pop and reggae music (apart from maybe the triangle use, more common in European classical music and Brazilian music forms than in pop).

More specific to reggae as an Afro-Caribbean and Afro-Jamaican genre:

-hand drums (especially akete/nyabinghi drums) regularly too
-rattles and güiro’s share a somewhat rasping, scraping sound and are quite commonly used in reggae, in other Caribbean genres (e.g. Cuban and Dominican ones) even more, but less so in pop, rock, soul, or funk. In Marley songs, the rattle is used more than the güiro scraper, but not so much.

Exceptionally some other, “extraordinary” instruments appeared, such as a cuíca friction drum, a bottle/glass, or a talking drum.

Quite some variety in percussion instruments, not unlike other reggae or perhaps even more varied in instrumentation, though with some specific accents. Marley songs used relatively more metal percussion when compared to other reggae (bells, triangles), and also the woodblock/jamblock. The güiro, however, seems relatively neglected. Tellingly, earlier/other versions of Small Axe, a song appearing on the Island-produced Burnin’album too, had a quite prominent güiro pattern, that however disappeared from the Burnin’album version.

These might show a slight preference for “safe”choices, derived from Western pop music, besides perhaps the akete drums. Yet, overall there is quite some percussive variety in Marley songs, I must admit. The variety of instruments is not so much the problem. It is more the way it is played and recorded/mixed: simple, not very “full” patterns, that furthermore ended up soft and subdued in the final mix.

PRODUCTION CHOICES

A matter of choice, and maybe not even that important. The musical composition as a whole has to have quality, has to impress artistically, that’s what is most important. The combination of sounds and vocals. Quality is however largely subjectively defined. Furthermore, tastes of the public, of listeners, can be “shaped”, or at least influenced. Blackwell and others shaping the Bob Marley reggae sound – as known, more commercial and aimed at the mainstream than other Roots Reggae – made choices, which included – apparently – subduing percussion. Percussion was added, but was usually drowned and softened in the final mix.

Other producers in reggae since the 1970s, especially the more experimental ones like Lee “Scratch” Perry, Niney The Observer, or Augustus Pablo, made other choices. This includes often more prominent percussion. Especially on 1970s Roots Reggae albums produced by Lee Scratch Perry, percussion instruments were made deliberately prominent (scrapers, bells, hand drums, wood blocks, rattles, etcetera). Often even with “carrying” or “driving” rhythmic roles. Also the Rockers era, such as Henry “Junjo”Lawes productions, from around 1980 (the Wailing Souls album Fire House Rock, for example), did regularly have quite prominent roles for percussion.

On most Bob Marley songs, however, percussion is softer in the mix, drowning it more sonically. On the plus side, this has on several songs a nice atmospheric effect of “filling up”. Subtle, but notable. Adding indeed “depth”. I personally like this subtle effect of percussion on Bob’s song So Much Trouble In the World, and several other songs on especially the later albums Survival and Uprising. Also on earlier songs I liked the subtlety of added percussion, such as on the fine song Guiltiness (from the Exodus album), or the nice touch percussion (bell, block, rattle, hand drum) subtly adds to the excellent musical piece Misty Morning (on the 1978 Kaya album). Subtle and tasteful, similar to adding just the right amount of a spice to a dish, not too much and not too little.

I notice that the percussion became more varied in the later Bob albums Survival (1979) and Uprising (1980). More varied percussion, but generally not “louder” in the mix, and still subtle (or subdued). It adds to the nice feel of some songs like We and Dem (scraper/güiro, cowbell a.o.), Zimbabwe, Africa Unite, Forever Loving Jah (hand drums, triangle a.o.), and other songs, if partly subconsciously. An interesting approach to “playing with sound” found in other genres (like the “wall of sound” idea), but a bit less common in most reggae. There has to be variety in reggae, and there are different ways to add percussion, all effective and good in their own way, I guess. In most Bob Marley’s songs, especially for Island records, thus, the percussion was subtle and subdued.

Regarding the aforementioned “percussion roles” distinction, I think that the balance on most Bob Marley songs (with several exceptions) tipped toward “decoration” or “embellishing”, rather than more prominent “carrying” or “driving” rhythmical roles. An European influence, simply said.

There are exceptions, though, such as the great, relatively acoustic, Nyabinghi-based song Babylon System (on the album Survival), the glass sound on Jamming, or the groovy effect of the friction drum cuica friction drum on Could You Be Loved. The already mentioned song Crazy Baldheads had quite prominent percussion, and also on a song like One Drop (on the relatively “percussive” 1979 album Survival) the percussion is quite “carrying” and rhythmic, rather than just embellishing, due to a driving jam/wood block pattern in it.

CONCLUSION

Like I said, I found it interesting to study these subtle roles of percussion in Bob Marley songs. Especially because he was a relatively well-known reggae artist, internationally, reaching the mainstream. Plus, it is a nice change for me to analyse from another perspective songs I often know already well by now.

The Bob Marley sound, as Island and Chris Blackwell helped shape it, did not become a dominant influential model in Jamaica itself. The concessions to White, European tastes were probably all too evident and deemed inauthentic by most Jamaican musicians, preferring instead to “keep it real” and original culturally. Only some acts went a similar crossover direction, through modern, Western influences, notably Third World and Chalice, and to a lesser degree artists like Prince Lincoln Thompson. Most artists however wanted to sound original, Jamaican, and “real”, even sacrificing for that commercial success. You can consider this a self-sacrifice, or even in a sense “culturally heroic”.

The soft, subdued percussion on most Bob Marley songs were, I argue, part of a wider approach by Island and Chris Blackwell, to promote Bob Marley’s music to a more mainstream audience. They may have even have considered it more “sophisticated”. This combined with a greater role for the electric guitar in Marley songs (compared to other reggae) – to appeal to Rock fans? – synth additions, other influences from genres like blues and funk, relatively modest drum parts (Carlton Barret was certainly skilled as drummer, but kept it mostly steady, rather than being too experimental or polyrhythmic), and a not too low or prominent bass guitar. The “heavy bass”- common in a part of Jamaican music, influenced by Dub and Rub-A-Dub subgenres, was mostly avoided on Marley albums.

This bass guitar, though, was still quite prominent in Bob Marley’s music, when compared to other genres, and - as main chord instrument - at least audible and musically “leading”. Percussion was compared to the bass more often relegated to the background, subdued and soft, and even mostly marginal/decorative, at least on many songs. Also compared to the guitar. Percussion still added to the overall feel of Marley songs, but subtly. Occasionally, I appreciate this subtle approach to percussion on some Marley songs, I must admit. More often, though, I find it too subdued or too understated.

I think that the “wall of sound” notion, popularized by Philip Glass, and which suggests “Western sophistication” (justly or not), made the percussion be “drowned” or “buried” more in Bob Marley songs, when compared to other reggae. Most other reggae since the 1970s was “rawer” – so to speak – but also “sparser” in sound, with more open spaces sonically . Author Michael Veal noted this openness or “spatiality” in sound too, when studying Dub Reggae. Any percussion added to this more “open” or “spatial” sounding reggae, would therefore be more easily audible and identifiable.

Moreover, also important of course, many artists in reggae, increasing with the Roots Reggae period starting around 1972, preferred to use different percussion instruments regularly. This probably was in part due to cultural or spiritual reasons. The Rastafari movement focussed on Africa, and influenced Roots Reggae strongly in the 1970s. Using hand drums like the (Nyabinghi) Akete, or Congas, assured at least a symbolical connection to the African roots and Rastafari, but also other rhythmically used acoustic instruments like scrapers, shakers, or wooden instruments, had connections to the African motherland, and to “traditional culture”. The latter meant also a connection to the “folk”, away from too much attachment to Western -Babylon, as Rastas call it - modernized culture and technology, even though the use of it seemed inevitable in modern pop music. Percussion became thus part of a way to “keep it real”, differing from the polished, commercial approach aimed at Euro-Western cultural that the Island-shaped Bob Marley sound represented.

This is not to say that Bob Marley’s songs lacked quality. Bob Marley released several great albums and songs, that not entirely, but at least in part kept a musical integrity and represented Jamaican reggae. A bit more polished, but hey.. Bob Marley had good songwriting skills and talent, and proved this. Lee “Scratch” Perry especially appreciated his melodies. Marley also had good, effective lyrics, seemingly simple, yet full of wisdom. His singing voice was also okay, although there were – in my opinion – better singers in Jamaican music at the time (Alton Ellis, Dennis Brown, Horace Andy, Ken Boothe and others) with a wider, or more soulful vocal range. Overall, however, Bob was very talented as songwriter, musician, and artist.

I merely contend that the too commercial, “slick” and polished production and arranging and mixing choices of Bob Marley songs, made at Island by Chris Blackwell cum suis, diminished the power and “raw authenticity” of this talent. That’s what the relatively subdued percussion of Bob Marley songs in my opinion represents.

The tragedy of race : the documentary 'Marley' (2012)

Something seemed dubious to me from the start. The very first time I heard about the then upcoming documentary on Bob Marley, called ‘Marley’ – to be released in 2012 –, directed by Kevin MacDonald (known for among other things the movie ‘The last king of Scotland’), I had an unpleasant feeling about it. This feeling combined confusion and fear. It is in a way similar to meeting persons involved in criminality: you sense that something is not communicated. No eye contact, no open communication, you encounter subtle intimidation or what can be termed “avoidance behaviour”. In the same way I thought there was something tricky going on with this newest documentary on Bob Marley.

DEFINITIVE?

My mistrust was triggered by a few things. Not the least of these was the word “definitive” used in promoting the documentary film ‘Marley’: “the definitive Bob Marley story”. This is annoyingly arrogant, but can be excusable when this statement can actually be backed up somehow. The term “definitive” is however vague. Regarding Bob Marley you can ask whether “definitive” applies to the person Bob Marley, then what aspects of him and his life? Or definitive regarding him as person but also as musician, as well as his location within Jamaica and reggae music? And within Rastafari? Can it really be definitive in all these fuller senses, and can this be impartially measured? I doubt it. Does it really add that much to earlier documentaries on Marley? Or are we dealing here with commercial tricks?

I understood that the main makers of the documentary were not really reggae experts (though they were advised by some), which makes the boast “definitive” all the more astonishing. It is comparable to when, for instance, a white, non hip-hopper – an outsider not having lived the culture – would say he will make the “definitive hip-hop song”. Thereby insulting much of the scene. This is I guess the difference between a sense of superiority and a (healthy) sense of competition.

NEW INSIGHT?

I had these feelings of unease, but had not seen the documentary itself as yet. So I still tried to look at it impartially. Is it really that new and good? Do I really get a new, insightful perspective on Bob Marley after having seen the documentary film? It was relatively lengthy - close to two and a half hours -, so maybe there’s a lot of new information.

I’ve covered the topic of Bob Marley, his image, and his role in reggae’s internationalization before on my – this - blog, so I could let it rest. It was, however, exactly the boastful propaganda and apparently extensive marketing surrounding the documentary that made me decide to review this documentary. I will among other things broadly (in my own mind!) compare with (some) other documentaries on Bob Marley, of which there have appeared several already, as well as with was has been written about Bob up to now. Like with documentaries – I think “biopics” is a word some people use – several written, biographical books/works have also appeared on Bob Marley (and unfortunately very few on other reggae artists).

This latest documentary ‘Marley’ (2012) is different from earlier ones on Bob in that it is aimed at the cinema and movie theatres, whereas most other documentaries may have been shown in theatres, but were intended for television or video/DVD. This suggests another, broader target audience of this latest ‘Marley’ movie, which seems to confirm my fear of excessive commercialism. Yet it is premature to assume that on forehand, so I’ll just start analyzing the documentary/movie.

INTERVIEWS

The format chosen is of a sequence of interchanging people connected to Bob Marley being interviewed. Most probably this is edited in a certain way, as is common in many documentaries. Somehow exceptional is that there is no “narrative voice” as such. Then there are many photographs, as part of the visual aspects, shown according to the makers for the first time. This way the close to two and a half hours were filled.

These aspects in themselves do not make a good documentary. Yet, the list of people interviewed seems relevant and interesting: Bunny Wailer, Rita Marley, Ziggy Marley and his other children, girlfriend Cindy Breakspeare, other reggae musicians, producers, friends, family and others. I think his children (now older since earlier documentaries) are relatively “new” in Marley documentaries, and potentially most insightful. Not just potentially, as I viewed the film I found it was relatively more newsworthy what Bob's children (like Ziggy and Cedella) had to say, though some of the others interviewed had interesting stories and facts as well, such as Bunny Wailer. Also Rita Marley had interesting portions and stories.

The information on Bob’s white father – early in the documentary - was hardly new. The age difference with Bob’s mother of Bob’s father during the “conception” (an older, 60 years-old white man thus slept with a black girl/young woman of 18 years old) was even bigger than told earlier, but that also has been known already years before this documentary.

I hate to admit it but I had an unpleasant feeling about Cindy Breakspeare, the once Miss Jamaica who became Bob’s girlfriend (while Bob was married to Rita), and accompanied him on tour as well. She spoke relatively often in the documentary, and indeed knew him intimately. I felt a certain irritation and mistrust about her, maybe irrationally. Not because she was a “home wrecker”, since Bob had several girlfriends “on the side”. It was more her general demeanour and subdued arrogance that told me she had something to hide. “Everybody wants the girl” (if she’s a beauty contest winner?) she said without modesty about Bob’s interest in her. I am almost certain that she chose him – subtly of course – not the other way around, even if she presents it that way. But maybe she is a good person, I don’t know. Why the winner of a beauty contest in a predominantly black country should be a light mulatto type like Breakspeare is also beyond me, but that’s another issue.

SUPERFICIALITY

The pace of interviews and of the changing of speaking people in the film were kept high and kept entertaining me, I must admit, even throughout the relatively lengthy documentary. In this I notice the hand of a feature film/fiction movie director – Kevin MacDonald – rather than a documentary maker’s. The pace was high, the suspense always there, and there was excitement, ”action”. Yet a disadvantage of such an approach became clearer to me as the film progressed: superficiality. Most things said I heard already in other documentaries on Bob, some even as public as nowadays viewable on YouTube. Some of the things were written before in books. Okay, maybe it is meant for another target audience (who have not seen the other documentaries, nor read those books), but still... This way it does not lead to new or even deeper insight.

Occasionally a remarkable comment was made, such as when the early Wailers manager Danny Sims stated that Bob was “chosen” to be the famous front man by record label Island amongst the original Wailers band (which also included Peter Tosh and Bunny Wailer), probably because of his (lighter) colour. Those suspicions were longer around, but seemed confirmed here! Unfortunately this was not followed upon in the documentary. The subject was changed (read: abandoned), following the time line of Bob’s life. My opinion is that this is too interesting and socially relevant to not discuss in more detail.

RACE

The reason why further delving on this is avoided may be to spare Bob, and not give him a bad name. Racially privileged, yet presenting himself as the black rebel in Jamaica and world wide. But one thing I respect about Bob is the absence of this hypocrisy. Having read and heard much about Bob’s career and life – and knowing most of his songs - my conclusion is this: Bob was genuinely a pro-black rebel (not just pretending to be), a real proponent of black rights and freedom (and of all people), and at the same time – ironically – he was in a later stage privileged over blacker musicians or “rebels” around him, because he looked more European. But this was mostly later in his life and beyond Bob’s control: international, commercial interests dictated this.

It was confirmed by Peter Tosh in an earlier documentary that the group the Wailers was “one/united” from the start (i.e. when it were up to Bob). Another interesting anecdote is also illustrative in this regard: Bob used shoe polish to make his hair blacker, and to not stand out too much in Kingston’s ghetto Trench Town. Other stories relate about some negative remarks he got because of his lighter colour among blacks in Trench Town.

One of the tragedies of Bob’s life is thus race. A defining tragedy, that was beyond his control. It excluded him (sometimes) from people around him, while he was just as poor, and it made him be favoured without really wanting, ultimately resulting in distance from his old friends Peter Tosh and Bunny Wailer, who left the Wailers. Had he been white he never would have grown up in the Trench Town ghetto. Had he been fully black, he probably would not be as (internationally) famous, and would have not internationalized reggae and Rastafari as much. Yet he never sold out, and kept true to his message. This is admirable.

This philosophical, sociological theme and contradiction could have been a major thread in the documentary, raising its intellectual level. It also would have shown how strong a personality Bob Marley was. Unfortunately the makers chose a thrill-based, Hollywood-like approach, too superficial for such deeper dilemmas. Bob was revered in the documentary as above human, larger than life, but in the insincere, superficial way of superstardom. More like Prince or Bruce Springsteen than like Martin Luther King.

REGGAE

Bob Marley was presented as somehow above ”reggae”, as the unreachable top of reggae. As I argued elsewhere on my blog: Bob had several good songs, good lyrics, charisma, and certain talents for music. But the same applies to several other reggae artists in Jamaica! He was essentially just another talented reggae artist, no more no less. With, maybe, the difference of relatively more commercial influences in his work, and better connections. I know there are other documentaries more dealing with reggae than with just Bob Marley, but you simply cannot make a documentary about Bob which is not substantially about reggae and Jamaican music. The same applies to the Rastafari philosophy and beliefs, which were very important for Bob.

This makes it extra troublesome that one of the more ignored aspects related to Bob in the documentary was his place within reggae, within the broader reggae scene. There was some attention to Rastafari – though not as adequate as it could have been. Reggae producer Lee “Scratch” Perry appeared for a while, without much substance, as well as Clement “Coxsone” Dodd, but not so long.

An interesting fact, for instance, that one does not get to know from this documentary, neither from other documentaries I must add, is this: there were US soul artists, like the Impressions, who influenced Bob musically and vocally, that is more widely known. The main Jamaican vocal influence on him is not mentioned. According to Bob himself this was Little Roy (b. Earl Lowe), a Rastafari-inspired singer with soulful, anguished vocals, active since the 1960s. One listen to a Little Roy song would make this similarity apparent. Bob was influenced by him, not the other way around. Bob himself in turn would later inevitably influence later singers. Apart from his sons (which may have genetic reasons), newer artist Nasio Fontaine sounds vocally “Marley-esque”. So do several other artists, especially outside of Jamaica. Marley’s vocals sound rather “Little Roy-esque”. You dig?

One of the people interviewed about Bob, especially telling about his Trench Town years, was Lloyd “Bread” MacDonald, member of the roots harmony reggae band the Wailing Souls: a band – I dare to argue – with as much an excellent body of work as Bob Marley & the Wailers. But the documentary aims to revere Bob well above reggae, it seems, as international star in a broad sense. His place within reggae and Jamaican music is unjustly sidelined.

I contend that the reggae scene defined Bob more than a sensationalistic aspect the documentary partly focused on: the fact that Bob had children with several women, had several girl friends and affairs while being married to Rita.

Regrettable, maybe, and probably inconsiderate toward Rita, but not saying too much about his personality. He was often approached by women, not the other way around, as said by some in the documentary (and as my common sense makes me assume). He was a heterosexual and the women were willing adults. Not so extraordinary, neither very immoral (essentially). At most irresponsible.

I think, for instance, that what is at least equally relevant is the question whether he ate meat: many Rastas opine that Rastas should not eat meat (who call it “deadas”); some say Bob ate chicken sometimes, so he seemed (if this is true) to take it loosely, and share part of his diet with common Jamaicans. He also criticizes meat-eating in his own (strong) song ‘We and Dem’ on the album Uprising. I assume that womanizing is probably considered more sensational for a broad public than dietary traditions.

Like I said, the stories and comments by his children were among the more interesting, including on how he was a distant father because they had to “share Bob with the world”, and he had always plenty people around him. Also the story of his cancer treatment in Germany was interesting, though not much new information was given. Also the coming death and actual dying of Marley in 1981 was related movingly, I must admit. This for a change included some new information, namely on how Bob and the other musicians lived the concert given in Zimbabwe in 1981, when the cancer was already strongly affecting Bob’s body. This was at least “new” in the sense of “expanding” on what we know.

Marley novices probably learned more from this documentary, but still not as much as they could have. They are in a few aspects even misled, I argue, though often the information was correct, if superficial. If the target audience indeed included Marley novices or newbies, some more information on reggae could have been given. Now its origins were sketched so broadly that it was almost the same as saying: you have funk, soul, jazz, and in Jamaica originated reggae, after rocksteady and ska. Okay, it was explained a bit more than that, and I also liked how Bunny Wailer describes reggae. However: the quick, too concise way reggae was overall treated made it seem like an irrelevant side path to Bob. I do beg to differ..

Rastafari was more or less explained, especially what it meant to Bob, but also quite superficially, in line with the rest of the documentary.

CHRIS BLACKWELL

After the documentary the end credits rolled, which showed the name of (record label) Island producer/strongman Chris Blackwell as also involved in the documentary. That explains certain choices, I think. Blackwell had some merits for reggae, especially internationally, but I also am very critical toward his commercial watering-down of reggae, which was too excessive up to the point that it violated authenticity. I’ve argued this before on my blog. He was relatively influential, so his choices in commercializing and “whitening” reggae were likewise influential. Ultimately this contributed to almost permanent damage to reggae’s authenticity and international image. Just because Chris Blackwell wanted to make money. Placing Bob above and not within reggae is part of that, and is unfortunately also the norm in this documentary ‘Marley’. As a true reggae fan, and being very knowledgeable on Bob Marley, I can only deplore this. But maybe true reggae fans were not the target audience of the documentary.

Despite all this, I was entertained and “kept busy” during the documentary, and it had its outstanding moments. Nonetheless, after it was finished I asked myself: what have I learned about Bob that I did not know before? Not very much, I am sad to conclude.

OTHER DOCUMENTARIES

As the reader may have noticed, I did in the above text not compare “in detail” with earlier documentaries that were specifically on Bob Marley. And yet, in a way I did. I departed from what I have learned already from earlier documentaries – and on what has been written - , and then analysed from that perspective the documentary ‘Marley’. It seems only fair to say what documentary on Bob Marley’s life and career I have seen has been the most insightful for me: it was ‘Rebel Music : the Bob Marley story’ from 2001, directed by Jeremy Marre. This was partly an Island production, but was luckily no “Chris Blackwell show”: it was interesting, with relevant people being interviewed, relevant information given, well-structured, entertaining, and educational: information given was then mostly new. The recent documentary ‘Marley’ adds little to this. (Hereunder a link to 'Rebel Music').

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dr3O5MFVjBE

The documentary ‘Catch A Fire’, which I discussed elsewhere on my blog, mainly dealt with Bob Marley’s breakthrough album ‘Catch A Fire’ and was more superficial than ‘Rebel Music’, and of overall lesser quality, I argue.

There are of course several other documentaries on Bob Marley, especially when taking into account television documentaries. Some of these can be found in their entirety on YouTube. Some seem comparable in quality to ‘Rebel Music’, though not everything related is new. Information and stories seem to be repeated from documentary to documentary. You can even speak of recurring “Bob Marley documentary clichés” . At times, though, documentaries expand on known information. Perspectives can also differ, such as through different people interviewed on the same matters.

Not that the earlier documentary ‘Rebel Music’ was flawless – neither was it “definitive” -, but overall it was good and informative. ‘Marley' on the other hand was entertaining, but overall mediocre, and – after other documentaries and books – very limitedly informative.

Beyond Bob

The importance of Bob Marley for reggae is without question. There is no doubt about it: reggae’s internationalization is mostly due to Bob Marley’s popularity. Reggae was a local music genre that evolved from earlier forms ska and rocksteady in Jamaica, originating as such (with the term “reggae”) first around 1968.

An almost unanswerable question is: if it were not for Bob Marley’s popularity, would reggae have remained a mainly local Jamaican genre? The only external/foreign people “into it” then would be restricted to very unusual and radically alternative “niche” seekers, cultural anthropologists, or those connected through social or familial bonds with locals (somewhat similar to the Surinamese genre ‘kaseko’, or Indonesian ‘gamelan’).
This question, while intriguing, is nonetheless useless. For several reasons: not only did Bob pave the way for reggae’s international spread, he was also the first “third world musical super star” paving the way, in a sense, for the World Music genre as such. It’s hard to overstate this importance: an importance which is not absolute or singular, but certainly definite and proven.


Photo left: “Government Yard” (means state-provided housing) where Bob Marley used to live in Trench Town, Kingston. When he had become famous, he went to live in wealthier uptown (see below)

I myself heard some reggae “before Bob”, but really got into reggae in my teens beginning with a Bob Marley album. Bob was by then deceased, but his music lived on, and helped me make me the reggae fan I am now. Not just Bob, however: another album soon following Bob Marley and the Wailers albums I really got into was, for instance, by the Wailing Souls, a band then certainly qualifiable as “authentic” roots reggae (“ghetto sufferers sound”).

In Jamaica there is a Bob Marley Museum (in Kingston) and a Mausoleum (with his Ethiopian-style grave) in his also birth village Nine Miles, parish of St Ann, as well as several other referents, which of course are mostly - but not always – tourism-driven.
I’ve been to the museum and mausoleum, as well as to Bob’s once place of residence in the West Kingston ghetto of Trench Town (where the line “inna government yard in Trench Town” in Bob’s song No Woman No Cry refers to).
Jamaicans recognize Bob’s importance, as do reggae musicians, evident in many tribute songs and cover versions.



Entrance to the Bob Marley museum in uptown Kingston




View of the Bob Marley museum. Bob lived here later. It also was the home of the Tuff Gong recording studio

Still, despite Bob’s undeniable importance I have an ambivalence about this superior status attributed to Bob within reggae.
This is also evident in Jamaica itself where there is a Bob Marley museum, but as yet no broader ”reggae museum” or “reggae centre”, despite the, for a small island, many reggae recording studios (some say about 200!) and many – past, recording, or aspiring - reggae artists, in Jamaica. My ambivalence thus also relates to the fact that I in time got to know a lot of other, earlier, and later reggae artists besides Bob Marley. I got to locate Bob within reggae, rather than above it.

Secondly, because of what I got to know about Bob’s career. Particularly emblematic is a documentary I saw under the title: ‘Classic albums : Catch A Fire’ (it is in parts on YouTube). This was on the crossover/breakthrough album of Bob Marley ‘Catch A Fire’ (1973), with which Bob Marley and the Wailers first reached an international audience, such as in the US and Europe. Specifically, it is stated, it reached “rock” fans (however that can be defined…heavy electric guitars come to my mind).
White producers, including Chris Blackwell, and white musicians, even active in genres as country, were trying to make the translation to the broader, non-Jamaican “rock” audience, and reach other markets. “Making radio friendly” (outside of Jamaica) was another typical expression made by producers in this documentary.

For some reason I felt irritated by this. Maybe it’s because of the obvious, in essence commercial, “crossover” attempt which can only violate authenticity. Maybe it’s, relatedly, because of the “fooling the public” element in it.
As I thought about it I concluded that another reason for my irritation – about an otherwise interesting documentary – was the self-congratulation the producers only barely occulted.
Possibly, in addition, I was annoyed because it seemed to tell something I did not want to hear: all the time I considered myself rebellious and open-minded for becoming a true reggae fan, now it turns out that (white) Island producers “prepared” my white man’s/European ears for this exotic sound. That’s too much honour for these Island producers, and I don’t think that this is the case. Even though I must admit that the first Bob Marley album I heard was post-Catch A Fire.

Besides this the documentary showed another important thing about Bob’s career: Bob did not really have the intent to adapt his work to “cross over”, they more or less made him/convinced him to do this. That further convinced me of Bob’s authenticity: this shined through in his work, even if adaptations for other markets were partly audible.

Moreover, another interesting aspect of Bob’s career is the fact that he (himself, not producers) expressed his hope to cross over not just to whites, but also to African Americans in the US. “For obvious reasons” one can say. This effort was overall limitedly successful. Some of his albums seemed to be more popular among (US) African Americans than others, but all in all white liberal university students – not seldom with an affinity for marijuana – seemed a relatively more secure fan base in the US.
Bob’s other aim – spreading his music to his motherland Africa – for even more “obvious reasons” (seeing his Rastafari beliefs) was more successful. This was stimulated by concerts in Zimbabwe, Ethiopia and elsewhere in Africa in the latter years of his life, and that certainly helped in making reggae popular in Africa, which it continues to be in the present.

In the very nice and interesting written biography ‘Bob Marley. A life’ (2008) by Gary Steckles Bob’s authenticity was evident, even though he knew he “adapted” to reach a non-Jamaican market. In this biography it is related how Bob Marley played another type of reggae in Jamaica than outside it. Also, it is related how Bob had an interesting life and personality, showed perseverance, and certainly did not have a privileged background, despite having a white father and a lighter skin, which in Jamaica usually was and is associated with higher-class status and more wealth.

All in all, my respect for Bob remained intact.

I have objections, however, toward his altered status of “best reggae musician”. This “best” is all too often conflated with “best selling/commercially and internationally successful”, which says little about musicianship or artistry per se. It says – maybe – something about appeal, and much more about marketing. Also those who don’t know much about reggae thus tend to opine this: he was the best reggae artist.
My personal opinion is this: he was a very talented (above average) songwriter, with a charismatic and strong personality, who remained connected to the poorer Jamaicans. His strongest musical quality was inventing good melodies, as reggae producer Lee “Scratch” Perry once said about Bob. Besides strong melodies, he further had good, intelligent and appealing lyrics, combined with strong backing music (made with other musicians and the Wailers of course). He had timeless music, such as for the song ‘Heathen’ or other songs, music which I still find to have a magic appeal. The Heathen “riddim” (instrumental), for example, has been recently reused (read: sung/chatted over) by current deejay/singer reggae artists, often to good effect. Also a way to live on..





To my taste, Bob didn’t have the best singing voice in reggae, though it was good enough. Better singers to my opinion in reggae? Donald “Tabby” Shaw of the Mighty Diamonds,


Ijahman Levi, Little Roy, Dennis Brown (R.I.P.),

Don Carlos, Michael Rose, Bushman and several others.
These, and others, like Bob have a talent for writing several good songs.

In addition, as online reggae reviewer Mark H. Harris once wrote, Bob "didn’t put out golden material all of the time”: he had more mediocre songs between them, as well as (some, not all) albums with a too “slick” or polished production and sound, possibly reflecting the tension between “crossing over” and authentic roots.
A strong point is Bob’s productivity. Unfortunately, he lived only 36 years, but released, since young, a song book of about two hundred songs. Most of these were good. But also that is not so uncommon in reggae.

However, despite this, I can live with the epithet of “king of reggae” for Bob: due to the unusual combination of talent, charismatic personality, and (international) influence.