Logwritten
SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 08, 2009 9:50 AM IST

I know a lot of people are going to treat this as blasphemy so I better just come out and say this. I saw a DVD of a concert by Queen with Paul Rodgers on vocals and you know what? I didn’t really miss Freddie a whole lot. Of course, it wasn’t the same without the Mercury factor. The camp element was missing. So was the over-the-top nature of the classic Queen concert. As an Indian, I always felt a certain horrified fascination at watching a Parsi boy prance around on stage looking like a gay weightlifter in a Cusrow Baug gymnasium.

But apart from that, the concert was fine. Rodgers is one of rock’s great vocalists and while he can’t go quite as high as Freddie, he makes Queen sound like a rock band, rather than an opera queen’s little dalliance with rough trade.

Illustration: Malay Karmakar / Mint

Illustration: Malay Karmakar / Mint

It’s a funny thing about Queen, but I always felt that there were at least two bands struggling to get out from under Freddie’s leotard. My first exposure to the group came with the early hits, Seven Seas of Rhye and then, the song that broke them in the UK: Killer Queen. But, while both were full of Freddie-style whimsy (“She keeps the Moët et Chandon in a pretty cabinet/ let them eat cake, she says/ just like Marie Antoinette”), there were also harder-edged songs. Now I’m Here began like Arnold Layne, turned into full-fledged rock and even ended with a snatch of Chuck Berry’s Little Queenie.

The first time I saw Queen live, in 1977, the year of punk and the Queen’s Silver Jubilee, I was reminded of Led Zeppelin, whom I had seen at the same venue (Earl’s Court in London). Like Zeppelin, Queen had an acoustic set, a drum solo (by the prodigiously untalented Roger Taylor) and an entire section of guitar pyrotechnics by Brian May (no Jimmy Page, he). The concert sound was much heavier than the records, such songs as Killer Queen did not get a look-in and when it came to the complicated operatic bit in Bohemian Rhapsody, they played the record, went off-stage, changed their clothes and came back for the rock part (“So you think you can stone me and spit in my eye…”)

Only Freddie made it seem more than bargain basement Zeppelin. He wore a leotard, poured himself a glass of champagne and minced, “May you all drink champagne” to the audience. The following week, the music papers bitched: “In the year of punk, what could be more ridiculous than an old queen toasting his audience with champagne?”

Fair enough. But Freddie was a true original. He didn’t have the musical genius of say, David Bowie, but by daring to mix popular opera (more Gilbert and Sullivan than Puccini) and torch singing with heavy rock, he crossed genres with ease.

What most people did not realize then — mainly because Freddie lied about it — was that he was an Indian. Asked by interviewers about his ethnic origins, he said he was from Zanzibar. As no British music journalist knew where Zanzibar was, the matter was usually dropped. To the mainstream press, he said he was Persian.

I began to get suspicious when a Rolling Stone profile in 1974 revealed that his real name was Balsara. Persian? Aha, now it made sense. Obviously, he was a Parsi. But Freddie never acknowledged this. Asked why he had gone to school in India (in Panchgani), he said this was because his father was a civil servant in the service of the Raj. The Raj in the 1960s? Clearly, the man was lying.

That wasn’t all he lied about. Asked if he was gay, he insisted that his camp mannerisms were only part of an act: He was all hetero. In fact, he was a promiscuous homosexual who picked up truck drivers. In the 1980s, he even abandoned the long-haired hippie look and went for an over-muscled, gay look complete with a telltale moustache. Still, he insisted to the press that he was straight.

He had no need to do so. Elton John had come out in the mid-1970s without any damage to his career. Plus Freddie’s look and manner were so gay that you did not have to be Sherlock Holmes to work out that he batted for the other side. I saw Queen play at Wembley during their A Kind of Magic tour and wondered how Freddie could pretend that a) he was not a Parsi and b) that he was straight.

I wasn’t to know it then but that was Queen’s last concert. Freddie was diagnosed with HIV/AIDS and in keeping with a life of deceit, concealed this from the world. He only admitted that he was HIV-positive a day or two before he died.

There’s no real mystery about why Freddie told so many lies: He was that kind of guy. The mystery lies in the affection with which he is remembered. The gay community has forgiven him his lifetime of denial. He’s treated as a stately homo in England. And we in India do not resent his desire to have nothing to do with his own people.

And there’s the mystery of the longevity of the music. More people remember individual Queen songs than Zeppelin tracks. Go to any bar in the Far East and they’ll play Bohemian Rhapsody or Radio Ga Ga. A dreadful musical based on Queen songs (We Will Rock You) still packs in the punters at London’s West End.

Some of it, I think, has to do with the catchy pop-song nature of many of the hits: I Want To Break Free, Radio Ga Ga, We Will Rock You, We Are the Champions, Under Pressure (with that irresistible riff) and even, the appalling Another One Bites The Dust. Freddie didn’t write all of them and it is embarrassing to go to Queen concerts nowadays and hear Roger Taylor sing Radio Ga Ga on the grounds that he wrote it.

But I think the music needs a dose of reinterpretation. Paul Rodgers brought out the rock element in such songs as the curious Tie Your Mother Down and turned We Are the Champions into his own song. Queen have never recorded a rock song of the calibre of Rodgers’ All Right Now (with Free) and when he sings his own material on stage, you recognize that gulf.

Queen will now tour the world with Rodgers. As long as they ban solos by Taylor and May, and certainly prevent Taylor from singing and let Rodgers take charge, they could well lay the ghost of Freddie to rest — in whichever imaginary homeland he’s pretending to come from these days.

Write to Vir at pursuits@livemint.com

Tags - Find More Articles On:
READ MORE ARTICLES BY:
 
Sally Said:


So what if Freddie lied! That was his human right! He was a very private person and his personal life was no one else's business. He was Queen's front man and, NO one can ever replace him...plain and simple!

Posted On 5/9/2008 8:27:07 PM
Melvin Said:


Hi Vir, Amazing how even good wirters can devaite from the main topic & pick irrelevant issues to create a seemingly "readworthy" article. It's like setting out to write about write about food, but ending up penning down the chef's lifestyle, personal habits and sexual inclinations. I am no fan of Freddie, but a common-sense, non pseudo-intellectual approach tells me 1) had it not been for him & his onstage antics, Queen would not have the fan following it has today. 2) In most performing arts, the personality & idiosyncracies of the artiste goes a long way in creating a disruption in the marketplace & getting a fan following. e.g Madonna, who by any stretch of imagination has nothing to do with great, breahthru music, but has everything to do with average music + extra ordinary marketing of the self. 3) Music fans, worldwide, if you havent realised relish the music and they relish the persona of the group / lead singer. They are not bothered too much bothered about the sexuality and other non-relevant angles. These somehow seem to have greater interest for writers & journos only. e.g. let us assume that tomorrow Mick Jagger confesses to the unconfessible as far as his sexuality is concerned. Do you think Stones fans will run away from their music in hordes ? If Shane Warne has a decadent lifestyle, hey so be it. A cricket lover enjoys what he does on the field rather than what he does in bed. Despite the transvestive run-in, if Ronaldo comes back to roaring form with his football, followers of the game will forget this incident.So why would anyone devote a newspaper column to analysing why he invited transvestivtes to his room?? 4) Lastly, if you believe in personal life as being separate from public life, why should you and me worry about why Freddie lied about his sexuality or his country of origin, as long as we enjoyed his music ? You get the drift..in a music column if you have something interesting to say about the music, say it, otherwise....

Posted On 5/10/2008 8:32:14 PM
Pesi Said:


Hey VS why so bitchy...you taking over from Shobha ?a De? A Persian from Aussie.

Posted On 5/12/2008 5:37:48 AM
Jay Said:


Wow, this is a horrible non-review. Clearly you aren't much of a Queen fan , if any at all--why bother? For some of us, rock isn't ONLY about gruff manly vocals or a no-genre-bending place. If only this critic were as open-minded as the band he reviews...

Posted On 5/12/2008 7:06:51 AM
Charlie Said:


I believe that Queen should have finished with the release of Made In Heaven. Roger's and Brian's attempts at prolonging their fame are getting tiresome, and my admiration goes to Deacon, who has reclused with the fond memories of Freddie and the band playing at their greatest. I think Freddie is the greatest singer ever to grace the rock/pop scene, and no matter how good people find paul rodgers, i admit that he is a good singer, but can he really compare to Freddie? I think the answer, we all know, is no he can't. This is not his fault, as his range is not the same as Freddie Mercury's, for instance in Hang On In There, on The Miracle album, Freddie reaches a top F in his chest voice, something unprecedented by many, certainly, and his tone is amazing in the upper reaches of his voice. As I am only 17, I realise many will question what I am saying, with the age-old argument that I am too young to know what I am talking about, but as an aspiring singer (I have had lessons at the Royal Academy of Music), I certainly take in his ability, and try to include some of his vocal qualities into my singing. I think for anybody to criticise Freddie is a travesty, many people do not realise just how much of an impact he had on so many people, and even the "young generation" such as myself, who unfortunatly never had the oppertunity to see Queen live, have realised that he was in fact possibly the greatest performer in the 2nd half of the 20th century. Queen + Paul Roger's should not be labelled as that, instead they should choose a different name, for they are only half of Queen, as John will never play again for commercial purposes, and the heart and soul of Queen has passed away. Before anybody says Paul Rodgers is as good as Freddie Mercury, please listen to The Millionaire Waltz(Day at the Races), Seaside Rendezvous(Night at the Opera), I Can't Live With You (Innuendo), and possibly Let's Turn It On (Freddie Mercury Solo), and then contrast Paul and Freddie's voices.

Posted On 5/12/2008 2:16:36 PM
cyrus Said:


Dear Vir Sanghvi: You are really, totally out of your depth with this anti-Freddie tirade. Freddie never lied about where he was from. He was truly born and brought up in Zanzibar, where his folks were posted under British raj. He came to study in an Indian hill-station school, near Mumbai. He was a very private person and did not want to spoil his image with his community and fans and so he kept the AIDS out of the public glare. Many close-in people and London celebs knew!!! Lastly, he was a most brilliant rocker and many consider the complexity of his compositions/work and voice-range, to be one of the most spectacular in R&R history. Bowie is like a cut chicken compared to Freddie...A TRUE R&R GOD! PS: Am sure you prance around in your dhoti to his songs, which would be a real sight to see compared to a Khushrow Baug Parsi on the world's biggest satge at Wembley, carrying it off in a singlet ganji for a most memorable performance!!! Cyrus Bulsara

Posted On 5/13/2008 10:04:03 PM
Narayanan Said:


Paul Rodgers is no doubt a good vocalist but to even compare him to Mercury is not just. With regards to his personal life, I don't think anyone had any business. What he wanted to do was his problem, whether he accepted it or not. The point is he churned out some of the best music we've heard, not just rock. And the true emotion with which he potrayed his words no one else could do. It's also bring in his personal sexual preferences into it. Who knows maybe if he were not gay the music would not have been the same. I guess your guess is as good as mine

Posted On 5/16/2008 8:13:19 PM
Jeff Said:


Queen never made a rock song as good as All Right Now? Are you freaking kidding me? Clearly you've never listened to I Want It All, Stone Cold Crazy, Hammer to Fall, March of the Black Queen, Sheer Heart Attack, and on and on... Who cares if Freddie kept his sexuality a secret? It doesn't matter to the music one iota. I think he kept it quiet out of respect for his bandmates as it's obvious that much of the world still can't deal with a non-straight rock singer. Queen were the real deal. Paul Rodgers can't hold Freddie's champagne glass. Love live Freddie.

Posted On 6/2/2008 5:50:34 PM
medway Said:


what an utter lot of crap you write about freddie mercury. of course he was as much a genius as david bowie, if not more and for many years he was with mary austen so was not a fully fledged gay but may have been struggling coming to terms with the truth. as for paul rodgers, he is not one of rock's greatest .... he was with a band called free who had a few hits in the charts many moons ago and most people haven't heard of him anyway .... and lots of us Queen fans, we love freddie and always will .... it just ain't the same without him.

Posted On 6/8/2008 9:18:41 AM
Ashish Said:


very good and objective article...a person has alway the option of 'no comments' or not answering the question...there is no need to tell lie....i may like his music...but now i don't like him as a person...what kind of a man he was who was ashamed of his homeland

Posted On 6/17/2008 9:51:50 PM
Max Said:


This is one of the worst "articles" I have ever read. The writer is obviously an insecure, overly patriotic, oppressed human being who should never be allowed to write about ANYTHING in the future for any reputable media. I am still stunned at the suggestion that paul rodgers, with his "manly" voice, makes Queen sound like a real rock band. That is one of the most ridiculous points I have ever read. Overall I give this article a very predictable 0/10.

Posted On 6/28/2008 10:21:30 PM
Jeanne Said:


I am a Queen purist. The minute FM died was the death of Queen. That May and Taylor continue to tour as Queen with the talented Paul Rogers is ludicrous and sad. Queen was a very talented, successful band. Each member wrote at least one no. 1 hit. Not many bands achieve that.The integrity and significance of the group is diminished with May and Taylor still performing as Queen. Taylor has his own band, "The Cross," and May has a Ph.D.in astro-physics and is a chancellor at Imperial College and just co-authored a book about the universe. Mr. Deacon, will you please tell your former bandmates how ridiculous they look and how rewarding retirement can be? Don't they realize that however talented they are, if it were not for the influence of FM in everything from costumes to staging, not to mention his showmanship and incredible voice, Queen NEVER would have become as famous as they did? Hang it up guys. The world will respect you for it. Queen's music will live forever. What more could you ask for?

Posted On 7/22/2008 6:40:28 AM
Re: Jeanne Said:


Where was my brain? I meant to write each member had at least one top 10 hit--a big difference but still a feat few bands have achieved.

Posted On 7/23/2008 4:19:55 PM
Dave Said:


Roger Taylor a "prodigiously untalented drummer"...?!?!? Guess you have never played the drums let alone know the first thing about them. And remember the Freddie tribute concert where every singer (save George Michael and the guy from Extreme) fell on their face, cracked their heads off even with keys of the songs lowered in some instances trying to sing the tunes... mmmhmmm.. Sure, Freddie couldn't rock. Boy are you ignorant. Go back to playing guitar hero or singing karaoke.

Posted On 8/9/2008 1:04:29 AM
paul Said:


One questions why the band chose to continue with Queen after FM's death. I assume greed basically and just the desire to keep the band name going. The lead singer is nearly always the front hauler of the whole thing and esp so in FM's case. The rest are very expendable. A lookalike would have been a better choice. Check out the electric six video version of radio ga ga!

Posted On 9/6/2008 2:37:12 AM
Els Said:


What?? i like the bit where you obviously mixed your words.. Jimmy page is no and never will be Brian May!! and Freddie well lets face it you can't beat him you should be proud he put India on the map! LONG LIVE QUEEN Rock In Peace Freddie!!!!!!!

Posted On 2/21/2009 2:52:46 PM
Meeko Said:


This article is stupid and a waste of time. Freddie Mercury was way better than David Bowie, obviously. Freddie had the voice of an angel. He was a beautiful person and his personal life was none of your business. By the way Roger Taylor is very talented. He wrote a lot of hits. I think you need to reconsider things and maybe get your head checked.

Posted On 4/10/2009 5:47:57 PM