However fortunate our world has been since the advent of the nuclear age, however, there looms a cloud of possible nuclear annihilation in the mind of every human familiar with the nuclear bomb. With each crisis, society becomes more and more scared, painfully realizing that ...(as the) local crises are survived, it seems as if the decisive moment has been postponed and pushed further into the future. But what has been pushed forward is always worse..the weapons more terrible, the means for their delivery more clever. The notion that a war might be fought to Ôadvantage,' that it may be won, gains ground. (Thompson & Smith, 1981.
Scarier yet is the notion that nuclear weapons may not be used in an effort to defend our country but because our bet was called by another nation. In each of the crises mentioned above, Thompson and Smith (1981) noted that in none of those cases "was there apprehension among U.S. officials that nuclear war might be initiated by an adversary"(p. v). Instead, they said, the threat of using nuclear weapons was used "to coerce in urgent circumstances a much weaker opponent that possessed no nuclear weapons at all." What might happen if such blatant coercion does not bring a weaker country to it's knees? Will the United States be forced to make good on it's threat and use nuclear weapons? Are there other situations which could lead to the use of nuclear weapons, perhaps where both countries possess them? These questions and many more have haunted humanity since those fateful August days in 1945. These questions have all been asked with the hope that the answers will help the world to avoid reliving the horrors experienced in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
While the world has thus far avoided it, nuclear war seems ever more possible and it seems that very little is being done to avoid it. With reports that "the U.S. is not only planning for Ôprolonged' nuclear war but has as its aim to prevail in it, in plain language, to win it", nuclear war seems likely. There are, however, strategies to avoid nuclear holocaust which have been developed which recognize the fact that the threat of nuclear war is omnipresent. A strategy which exemplifies this is the strategy of Little Theater Wars. It is based in the belief that superpower confrontation can be avoided if nuclear wars are played out in a "theater," most likely Europe, and will be confined to the level at which it started because the "threshhold of deterrence prohibits upscaling". While loss of life will take place, it is believed that a total apocalypse can be avoided. This is consistent with NATO's deterrent strategy which is based on the principal that peace and stability can be maintained only if a potential aggressor is convinced that it would lose far more than it could hope to gain by use of force (Central Office of Information, 1986). Current nuclear weapons, more than 30,000 in the United States alone are kept by the superpowers to remind each other that no one can expect to win a nuclear war. These strategies to avoid war, though offering some hope, have been widely criticized.
Meanwhile, with policies in place based on these strategies, countries are looking for more frontiers to conquer to build on these strategies. For instance, the United States under Ronald Reagan wants to militarize current space satellites from their "passive" roles in communications, surveillance, navigation and weather forecasting to "lay the path to perpetual peace" (Koppes, 1984,). But to militarize these satellites will actually put the United States at an advantage which it presently does not enjoy. As Koppes pointed out ...space, once touted as an escape from or sublimation of Earth's quarrels, now looms as an extension of terrestrial hatreds. Choices are being made that threaten to open a dangerous, expensive, and new phase of arms race in the once peaceful vastness of space. (p. 20)
While the strategies mentioned above are supposedly keeping us out of war, even the most faithful still wonder whether or not we will actually avoid it. Indeed, they should wonder. The nuclear peril is the most dangerous of our time, threatening with extinction the very species which created it. In the last few years, Schell (1984) said, "much of the public, having very largely ignored the nuclear problem for almost four decades, has been reexamining life itself" (p. 8). Schell pointed to a movement at Trafalgar Square in London which drew 70,000 people "to signal their outright opposition to every measure of nuclear menace and weaponry" (p. 6). He wrote that the public is becoming concerned with the most important questions of our time and is becoming less willing to accept the current situation.
How did it happen that we have become the underwriters of the slaughter of billions of innocent people? Can such a slaughter ever be justified? How? What is the meaning of human life? ..Our acceptance of nuclear weapons is a default of parenthood, of love, of friendship, of citizenship, in which we all, like hijackers of airplanes, take one another hostage and threaten to kill one another.
The only answer to these perpetual questions, the only way to cleanse oneself of the horror, according to Thompson & Smith (1981), is to protest, "the only realistic form of civil defense."
While idealistic-sounding, the anti-war movement has been a useful tactic for a population faced with such questions. During the Vietnam era, when social awareness was at a high in America, demonstrations and sit-ins were effective methods of voicing dissent to governmental actions and are largely credited with driving U.S. presence out of Vietnam. Another effective method of voicing dissent was in song, Desinoff, (1973) suggested that similar methods must be employed to bring the threat of nuclear holocaust to an end.
The question which must be answered with regard to these protest songs is this: Do these songs influence the attitudes to any degree or do they simply reflect the already-possessed attitudes of those who listen to them? While this question cannot be answered for certain, one study supports the claim that songs actually influence attitudes and behavior, but only when they are sung in combination with a speech on social action which corresponds with the song's message (no recent studies have been performed to measure attitude or behavioral change resulting from songs in combination with film or video). While this study showed that songs alone influence behavior and attitudes, it was not determined that the influence was significant (Kosokoff & Carmichael).
Politically, Roger Waters can be described as a left-wing pacifist bordering on anarchistic whose music is consistent with the peace movement described above. Though little, if anything, is written about his political views, a look at one of his pre-K.A.O.S. musical credits provide a fairly comprehensive look at those views. George Roger Waters, born on September 9, 1943 in Cambridgeshire, England, provides his listeners with a look into his life with a narrative autobiographical album he produced as leader of Pink Floyd, Specifically, Waters sings on this album about a very important event in his early life that helps to explain his extreme political views; the death of his father in World War II.
On The Final Cut, which is dedicated to the memory of his father, Waters viciously attacks world leaders ("incurable tyrants") whose policies have supported the buildup of militaries and nuclear arms since WWII. On a song titled "The Post War Dream," Waters sarcastically asks British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher
What have we done, Maggie?
What have we done to England?
What happened to the Post War Dream?
Oh, Maggie, what have we done? (1982)
Waters' stake in this "Post War Dream" is deep when one remembers that his father died in that war. A promise of peace was England's justification for his fathers death and Waters believes that England has broken that promise with it's support of NATO's deterrent strategy for nuclear arms. Waters, like others mentioned earlier, is critical of such strategies because, while seeming to give protection, they are based on faulty logic. He then delivers a message to those who have forgotten that World War I, "The war to end all wars," was soon followed by World War II
They flutter behind you
Your possible pasts
A warning to anyone
Still in command
Of their possible futures
To take care
It is vital to understand that Waters' strong anti-war sentiments stem directly from the death of his father - an event he will never be able to forgive or forget (Waters, 1982). This is important to because it helps to explain why Waters would produce albums which express such strong sentiments as he did on The Final Cut and Radio K.A.O.S. It will also help to explain why he is trying to convince others that our current course may lead to another war.
Waters' musical approach in communicating his anti-war and anti-government sentiments has always been considered unique. Known as the master of the "concept" album, his albums possess a cohesive set of themes, all interrelated and complimentary, to provide the listener with a complete, realistic story. His albums are continuous with segues of real-life sounds that pertain to the subject matter. This approach allows Waters to produce albums which communicate the complexity of that chosen set of human problems and allows him to explore those problems dependent on each other. On Radio K.A.O.S., he uses the same approach to examine our nuclear society and to, very clearly, try to influence listeners to protest against the world's current situation.
Another reason this album is unique is because Waters utilizes another tool which allows him to exhibit the interdependency of his ideas on each other. This tool, the "concept album," allows someone who is analyzing the album to consider the themes individually, but the themes mean more in relation to the other themes. Waters is concerned with the interconnectedness of the themes and how each of them impact the others. These tools present a unique opportunity for someone analyzing the album because the analysis cannot be focussed on deriving meaning. Instead, because Waters is more concerned with making sure his meaning is communicated, it would be helpful to analyze the tools Waters uses to communicate to see if they are effective.
This methodology, which is similar to Michael McGuire's structural/thematic approach in "ÔDarkness on the Edge of Town: Bruce Springsteen's Rhetoric of Optimism and Despair" (McGuire, 1984), will be used to look at the concept that apocalypse is inevitable if current political and market trends continue and if communications technology continues to be abused. I use this approach not to paint a picture or give a profile of Roger Waters, as McGuire did of Springsteen. Instead, I will analyze how Waters recreates reality on the album. Such an approach could also be useful in analyzing other concept albums such as The Final Cut and The Wall by Pink Floyd, and could even be used to analyze films.
In Radio K.A.O.S., Waters communicates that he has seen the culprits who will be responsible for starting World War III: nuclear arms, competitive market forces, and misuse of communications technology. In a recent interview, Waters described his concerns portrayed in K.A.O.S. this way:
I feel we could be doing a lot better than we are if we off-load the idea that the only route to progress, the cause of human happiness, is competition. I'm concerned in [Radio K.A.O.S.] with the idea that rampant, unrestricted market forces are trampling over everybody's lives and making the world a horrible place to live in. (I'm concerned that) we are increasing the potential risk of blowing ourselves up because we've become so frustrated in our efforts to compete with each other . . . one of these people who think they're not getting a fair slice of the cake is going to get hold of these weapons and let them off. What's Reagan going to do if one of his frigates is blown up by Gaddafi using nuclear weapons? I hate to think (Salewicz, 1987).
Uncle David, who worked on the atomic bomb during World War II, is haunted by this fact and vows to redeem himself . Billy comes to understand his uncle's ghosts and he, too, becomes cynical of the current state of the world since World War II. Saddened by the fact that so few people realize just how bad off the world is, Billy accesses all military computers of the world and takes control of them. He then simulates a worldwide nuclear attack but de-activates the military capability of "the powers that be" to retaliate. Billy calls Jim to tell him that "we have four minutes . . . they pressed the button . . . the big red button," and hangs up, leaving Jim and the rest of the world to deal with their impending doom. But, when the four minutes are over and nothing happens, the world unites in the realization that the world's course preceding the illusion is wrong. Billy has forced the tide to turn (Waters, 1987: Album sleeve).
Utilizing the album sleeve rather than the album itself , Waters illustrates that he wants to use every available tool to communicate his concerns. Another example is when Waters uses an actual news recording of a hostage being held in the Middle East pleading with Ronald Reagan not to attempt to rescue him and his fellow hostages.
We as a group do most importantly want to beseech President Reagan and our fellow Americans to refrain from any form of military or violent means as an attempt, no matter how nobel or heroic, to secure our freedom.
As the hostage says this on the right channel of the stereo, Waters uses the left channel to simultaneously quote a statement about Hopalong Cassidy, making obvious connections with Reagan. "Hoppy's faithful sidekick says
Guess you don't know Hopalong Cassidy, Mister. Adventure's his bread, excitement his butter, and danger, why to him that's like strawberry jam to top it off (Waters, 1987: Segue between "Me or Him" and "The Powers That Be.").
In case the listener cannot understand the two contradictory statements being made at the same time, Waters has provided the words to all songs and segues. in addition to the synopsis, on the the album sleeve. The sleeve, for Waters, by detailing relationships, interactions and motives, provides a useful tool for making his messages clearer.
The actual radio broadcast of the hostage serves another purpose. Because the album, the characters, and the station K.A.O.S. are all fictional, Waters fits the actual broadcasts into the story to illustrate that the line separating his fiction and his listener's reality is thin. To completely understand how such a thin line can be exhibited on a rock-and-roll album, one need only consider how the songs on the album are presented. The album itself, unlike any popular album ever released, is structured as though it were an actual, live radio broadcast. If one weren't familiar with the album and was hearing it for the first time, s/he might believe that it is a tape recording of an actual radio broadcast in Los Angeles. Radio K.A.O.S. has a disc jockey who talks between the songs, takes requests, and spins the discs. The only element of realism not present is commercials (and he has those in his concert!). So, when actual live news broadcasts are used on the album, it is easy to draw connections between fiction and reality.
The radio station also serves a few more purposes. Because FM-type radio broadcasts are familiar to the types of people who would listen to the album, recreating an FM format makes the possible traumatic events depicted on this album more real to the listeners. The station provides a frame of reference for listeners. Even the call letters, K.A.O.S., refer to the confusion that Jim, the DJ, and his listeners experience when nuclear destruction is four minutes away. Finally, the station K.A.O.S. is used as a channel to show how communications technology is being misused by politicians. In what Waters calls the "soap opera of state," news events are staged to lure voters into polling booths to vote for a given politician. In his concert tour book (another tool!) Waters is quoted as saying
One of the other parallel concerns in the record is the idea of politics as entertainment. The idea that by isolating the high profile enemy like Gaddafi you can entertain the electorate to put the "x" in the right place is what I call the soap opera of state (Salewicz, C. 1987).
While K.A.O.S. is a "renegade rock station fighting a lone rear guard action against format radio," the popular format radio stations entertain the electorate by playing the soap operas of state. Though K.A.O.S. also plays the news recordings, it does so simultaneously and in connection with the contradictory statements such as the one where Waters likens Reagan to Hopalong Cassidy. In contrast, the format radios play the events as they are presented and we seemingly always defeat our enemy as we did with the bombing of Tripoli. This entertainment, according to Waters, trivializes the important issues in the world and desensitizes people to the idea that these events can be turned against us (Salewicz, 1987).
Billy, the hero of the story, personifies Waters views that this desensitization is dangerous. Learning much from his Uncle David ("who speaks the truth"), Billy decides that he must use his gift to wake the world up and atone for Uncle David's sins. Misusing communications technology and entertaining the world in his own way, Billy simulates Armagedon by seizing control of military computers through his telephone. Through Billy, Waters has produced an idiot-savant, someone who is functionally insignificant but is brilliant when it comes to anything radio-related.
Jim, as I mentioned earlier, represents for Waters a tool for exemplifying the confusion experienced by his listeners. With Jim he can illustrate just how confusing messages sent across the radio waves can be. In the segue before the song "Four Minutes," when Billy has told him the bombs are about to go off, Jim, not knowing how to react to the news himself, makes light of the situation and attempts to perform his job as though nothing has happened.
It's a beautiful, balmy Southern California summer day. It's 80 degrees and . . . I said balmy, not bomby . . . Ha, ha . . . With only four minutes left, let's use this time wisely. Out at Dodger stadium it's the bottom of the seventh, the Dodgers are leading three to nothing over the Giants, and for those of you looking to go surfing tomorrow, too bad . . . I'm kind of lost in here to tell you the truth. (Phone rings.) Okay, good . . . uh, Ladies and gentlemen, if the reports I'm getting are correct, this may be it (Waters, 1987).
Jim does not act competently as an announcer. When Jim says he thinks the time should be used wisely (a statement by Waters that we should always use our time wisely), he ironically gives the score of a competitive event. One should also remember that it is usually a radio station or other communications medium people turn to in the case of a disaster. When Jim rambles about nothing noteworthy, only to say ""this could be it," he represents the chaos in the airwaves. Scared himself and suspecting that Billy is the culprit of this impending doom, Jim pleads over the airwaves "Billy, if you're listening, please call."
While it isn't immediately clear in the segues why Billy has created this illusion of doom, the lyrics of "Four Minutes" hint to parallels Waters would like his listeners to draw.
After a near miss on a plane(Waters, 1987).
You swear you'll never fly again
After the first kiss when you make up
You swear you'll never break up again
And when you've just run a red light
Sit shaking under the street light
You swear you'll never drink and drive again
Apparently , Waters is hoping his re-creation through Billy of a "near miss" with nuclear annihilation will make listeners swear not to allow for the use of nuclear weapons. But, while Billy is a fictional character who creates an illusion of apocalypse , thus "scaring" listeners into recognizing the dangers of current trends, market competition to Waters, in combination with chaos in the airwaves, is a reality which may create an actual apocalypse. Using primarily lyrics to illustrate this view, Waters sings on "The Powers That Be":
The powers that be(Waters, 1987).
They like a tough game
some you win, some you lose
Competition's good for you
They like order , make-up, limelight, power
Game shows, rodeos, star wars, TV
If you see them come you better run
Sisters of mercy better join with you brothers
Put a stop to the soap opera state
On "Home" he asks listeners to recognize who our real enemies are - - the men and women of the competitive market place. He sees a future, should we continue on our current course, in which there will be a "nation of waitresses and waiters" who "will mix the martinis" for the "powers that be."
When the cowboys and arabs draw down(Waters, 1987).
On each other at noon
In the the cool dusty air of the city boardroom
Will you stand by a passive spectator
Of the market dictator
Will you accept your second class status
Will you stand still for it
Or will you take to the hills
Will you hear when the lion within you roars
Will you take to the hills
Waters is apparently trying to move his listeners to action in his lyrics, asking them to recognize their subservient status and to stop accepting their class. He's asking for a revolution through his lyrics and trying to scare listeners into a revolution with his re-creation of the radio station, characters, segues and fake-holocaust.
Besides these tools, Waters also realizes the power of sound effects and music to communicate the urgency and drama of the situation at hand. Immediately after Billy calls to tell Jim that "we have four minutes," clocks are heard ticking those minutes away. With the clocks ticking and Jim explaining that he is "kind of lost," Waters uses confused, erie music for the next four minutes in what I would describe as "dramatic waves." Rising and falling in urgent, yet confusing, chords, the music builds to a powerful end. Unlike the rest of the album, which employs the normal instrumentation found on a rock album, Waters employs an orchestral approach to lead up to the bombs going off.
Meanwhile, Waters simultaneously uses what I call an "audio-collage" as the music builds to the dramatic climax. The collage is made up of recordings of the characters earlier in the album making sometimes relevant statements with regard to the situation at hand. This collage of voices also uses a live radio broadcast of Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher saying "Our own independent nuclear deterrents have helped to keep the peace." Here, Waters is illustrating hindsight, the concept of "my life passed before my eyes."
The combination of music and the audio collage communicates urgency, despair, disbelief, bewilderment and chaos. Played together in the final ten seconds, the music builds, the clocks tick and the voice of Billy can be heard counting down the final seconds. "Six . . . five . . . four . . . " The hostages voice can be heard in another channel. ". . . do want to beseech President Reagan . . ." The tempo of the music increases, signifying greater urgency. ". . . three . . . two . . . one." The music stops playing in a thunderous ending, the clocks stop ticking, and not a voice can be heard.
Waters used music, sound effects, actual news recordings, radio station K.A.O.S., and Jim to depict the utter helplessness the world might experience if nuclear war does actually happen. Remembering the lyrics of "Four Minutes," it is even more clear that his depiction is meant to make listeners swear never to allow this to happen. He's hoping this vicariously experienced nuclear war will be enough to stop it from becoming reality. Waters then uses primarily lyrics on the final song of the album, "The Tide is Turning (After Live Aid)" to depict how this "near miss" has affected his world. In this song, Waters communicates that a world without the threat of misused communications technology, unrestricted market forces, and nuclear destruction is a better world.
Satellites buzzing through the endless night(Waters, 1987).
Exclusive to moonshots and world title fights
Jesus Christ, imagine what it must be earning
Who is the strongest, who is the best
Who holds the aces, the east or the west
This is the crap that our children our learning
Waters is putting his hope in children, a hope that future generations won't be exposed to the problems he's addressed in this album. He hopes that his children will see the insanities of raging international competition and "soap operas of state" for entertainment. Most of all, he's hoping for a world his children can live in.
I used to look in on the children at night(Waters, 1987).
In the glow of their Donald Duck light
And frighten myself with the thought of my little ones burning
But oh, oh, oh, the tide is turning
Waters' final statement on the album is a cynical jab at the idea of war for entertainment purposes. Referring to Sylvester Stallone, popularly known for his super-patriot , anti-communist movie role as "Rambo," Waters states simply, "The tide is turning, Sylvester."
These motives illustrate the importance of producing a marketable, popular album which will sell in a competitive marketplace. To gain more political and financial support, Waters produced Radio K.A.O.S. utilizing some of the most sophisticated communications technology. He then followed the release of his album with a concert tour, which also featured sophisticated communications technology, in an effort to gain more political and financial support for his cause. The irony lies in the fact that a competitive marketplace and misusing communications technology to expouse ones political views seems to be what Waters is protesting against on this album. One could theorize that he is doing so in an attempt to defeat the "powers that be" by using their own weapons ("fight fire with fire"), but the question remains whether or not this is his motive. It could be that he is diverting the attention of people to realize that he is just as guilty of the sins he has spoken out against. While the question remains unanswered, it sheds new light on the tools he and the superpowers have used to communicate their rhetoric.
(As to the conclusion reached by REG member Tony Livernois, in this article; While, indeed Roger Waters uses "Communications Technology" to communicate his ideas, and yes, in truth, this is how he makes his living and earns money, one of the points Roger makes on Radio KAOS is about the MISUSE of communications technology!!! Using Communications as a form of mass social conditioning, and brainwashing propaganda as do the Ð "Dis-Information" media. This is wholely and entirely different from the type of communications done by any recording artist.
I would hardly call Rogers' artistic genius to communicate his ideas and opinions a misuse of communications technology! Rather without pipers, minstrels, or soothsayers of the like who have the ability to reach millions of people, and communicate other perspectives, truths and warnings, many of the sheeplike masses in the world would never question anything they were told, nor the reality of the world they live in.
In my opinion the kind of communication that Roger does is one of the right uses for communications, and I for one wish there were many more like him. ed.)
EXCELLENT RESPONSE! I do not see your editorial response as a criticism of my work; indeed, it was exactly the sort of response I was hoping for because it opens up the discussion about APPROPRIATE USE of communications technology. We're exchanging ideas, we're communicating. Part of the definition of communications is a "two-way exchange of ideas", and I tend to agree with your assessment that people/governments that control the mediums so it's only a one way exchange of ideas has created no communication at all.
Actually, I would not have sent this article to you if I hadn't expected that you would critique it; that was the entire point. We're exchanging ideas, we're communicating! I would be a hypocrite if I had critiqued Roger's work but was offended by someone else's critique of my own. I also believe Roger would agree with the concept of a "free exchange of ideas" ... that's why I welcome your thoughts so much. Had you bashed me personally for saying something I believed or thought or pondered, then I have reason to get offended. But that's not what you did. You took the dialogue further than it was originally by challenging my thoughts, not me. I like that.
Overall, I appreciate that you acknowledge the points in my conclusion before refuting them because I believe it lends credibility to your response overall. And, believe it or not, I agree with your response! My personal challenge as I wrote the paper was how to end it with a throught-provoking issue or question. Judging by your response, I believe I succeeded. If this is true, and I offer this only as a suggestion, you might want to open it up to the readership by posing a question about the appropriate use of communications technology and soliciting responses from the readers. Roger might get a kick out of the dialogue his work generates. [Tony Livernois]