Genius?

[NoPlasticRobots]

So this debate can go on forever, but what does everyone think: Was Frank Zappa a musical genius?

[Barry]

Do you think I'd be devoting websites and messageboards and money to the man if he weren't? To answer your question, most definitely: YES.
By the way, the question strikes me as sort of stupid, if I may say so  

[NoPlasticRobots]

I'm just trying to get people to talk...

[Top Cat]

Frank was a genius insofar as he did the most to combine the various disparate and eclectic musical forms of the twentieth century in a manner accessible to the masses.  I mean, how else would anyone come across Colon Nancarrow or John Cage, other than having 'heard of them'?  Stockhausen?  Stravinsky I concede, but Frank was able to take the ball from those sorts of guys, combine it with a political and socio-critical standpoint, mix it up with humour and present it in a rapidly diverse, eclectic but ultimately vastly deep body of work.

More importantly, only a genius could have dreamt up "Evelyn, a modified Dog".  'Nuff said.

TC '..'

[SOFA]

Was Frank Zappa a musical genius?
the question strikes me as sort of stupid, most definitely: YES.
I'm just trying to get people to talk...
Frank was a genius insofar as...
We could qualify FZ's 'genius' a lot of ways: musical, mathmatical, socio-political, marketing, ad infinitum. And I'm sure most of us could wax eloquent on several, if not all, of these to the same degree - and with similar results...
A debate could only occur if there was someone who held a contrary opinion - that FZ was not a genius, musical or otherwise. I rather doubt you'll find that person at these boards. I bet that's what Barry implied in his dismissal of the question.
NPR's desire to stimulate conversation is acknowledged and appreciated. However, a debate requires controversy and there's not too much that is controversial in that question (in this forum, anyway).
Anyone wanna join an Assembly O' God messageboard, pose the same question, and keep us all posted on the results? That might prove interesting.
'Nuff said.
Now, I concur.
SOFA

[frenchmen]

A debate could only occur if there was someone who held a contrary opinion - that FZ
                          was not a genius, musical or otherwise

The guy is a genius, I'm sure about that. But I have a half-question/half-statment to make.
I mean, sure, he is good, but is he a genius for sure?!  Lot of people can't see it, and any way, he is a genius because of our vision on his doings. If we have to be objective on this question, he's a genius because we (the people who like his works) are here. I mean, I wouldn't describ the men it self as a genius, but would rather say that the fact that he is supposed to be a genius is just a social construction.

I don't know much about "The Men", but what do you think about the fact that - if we consider him as genius - he became one because of his audience and fans. If no one, or just a little number of person, knew what he was doing, do you think that he would have gonne so far?

So:
 
He is what he is
He is what we are
Maybe he's a genius
Maybe because we are.

Hemmm... I play the devil's attorney on this one , but in any case what do you think about a debat on the relation FZ/Public?

seeya

[SOFA]

(Oh what the fuck, I'll bite... Now, lemme see if I can recall any of my High School Debate Class).
he is a genius because of our vision on his doings, but is he a genius for sure?
I guess our 'debate' should begin with a definition of genius then. According to Websters (caution required in this, as genius and genie are both derivatives of the same root), genius is defined as - from the Latin, a tutelary spirit or fondness for social enjoyment, and from the French, to beget:
1) an attendant spirit of a person or place; a person who influences others for good or evil.
2) a strong leaning or inclination.
3) a peculiar or distinctive character.
4) a singlular, strongly marked capacity or aptitude.
5) extraordinary intellectual power, or a person having such power.
Starting with the roots of the word, I'd say that FZ was a tutelary spirit (he desired strongly to educate his audience), who also held a fondness for sociological interactions (he often referred to his work as 'anthropology').
Continuing thru the definitions, I'd say that FZ was influential in a number of activities - music taking the highest position. I'd say he had very strong 'leaning or inclination' in regards to his music, as well as to the properties that make our universe (the big note theory, fundamental human traits, etc.). I'd say he had a peculiar, distinctive character, and a marked capacity or aptitude in many areas - most specifically music. Which leads us to the last - extraordinary intellectual power.
FZ never bothered with 'tests' of his intellect, that I'm aware. His shunning of formal education and its trappings makes this one hard to pin down. For this element, I turn to words ascribed to FZ's father (whom, I don't think, handed out compliments easily).
"[Frank's ability] was greater than mine, He's got brains to spare (this from a man who worked as a professional scientist). I don't know whether it's good to tell you, but Frank's a genius. He's totally aware of who he is."
And from Ernest Tossi, FZ's former HS Principal and 'favorite confrontation with authority': "He was a good student, if he liked the subject. In my mind if Frank had chosen to go academic to a university and get a PHD, he could. I saw his test scores and I know that Frank had the talent of a genius."
If no one, or just a little number of person, knew what he was doing, do you think that he would have gonne so far? That he is supposed to be a genius is just a social construction?
This corelates with 'If a tree falls down in the woods and no one is there to hear it, does it make a noise?' We can argue the social perceptions of genius; it is in large part a social construct. But I say, sound - any sound, even unperceived sound - is created by the disturbance of air molecules. With this definition, that tree makes one hell of a noise whether anyone hears it or not. By the same argument, I pose that FZ is/was a genius, whether socially accepted or not.
SOFA

[NoPlasticRobots]

That's what I wanted to see!  

[frenchmen]

Arf everybody,

Sure, the guy is a genius. I have to agree.

"This corelates with 'If a tree falls down in the woods and no one is there to hear it, does it make a noise?"
I didn't understand it that way. For me, FZ worked so much because some people where intersted by what he was doing. I don't think that he would have go on without some one to who he can show his work.
The question is more:
 Would have he done so much in recording, playing, arranging, writing songs if no one would have listen to it?
Would any musician play without some one to listen to it?
I mean, sure, the guy is a genius. He has the capacity to do a great work if he wants, but would he have done it without some one who asked for it, without a public who wanted more material to listen to?

seeya...

[frenchmen]

Arf everybody,

Sure, the guy is a genius. I have to agree.

"This corelates with 'If a tree falls down in the woods and no one is there to hear it, does it make a noise?"
I didn't understand it that way. For me, FZ worked so much because some people where intersted by what he was doing. I don't think that he would have go on without some one to who he can show his work.
The question is more:
 Would have he done so much in recording, playing, arranging, writing songs if no one would have listen to it?
Would any musician play without some one to listen to it?
I mean, sure, the guy is a genius. He has the capacity to do a great work if he wants, but would he have done it without some one who asked for it, without a public who wanted more material to listen to?

seeya...

[SOFA]

"This corelates with 'If a tree falls down in the woods and no one is there to hear it, does it make a noise?"
I didn't understand it that way. For me, FZ worked so much because some people where intersted by what he was doing. I don't think that he would have go on without some one to who he can show his work.
The question is more: Would have he done so much in recording, playing, arranging, writing songs if no one would have listen to it?
I suggest you broaden your understanding of the man. Read some books on him, better yet, read some of his interviews.
FZ maintained thru countless interviews over the years that he composed music for his own enjoyment and no one else's. Sure, he wrote songs designed to "pay the bills", but that's not why he composed music. He did that because HE wanted to hear what it sounded like. So yes, Frank would have done it even if no one listened.
And my analogy, which is excellent, holds - whether you understand it that way or not...
SOFA

[Barry]

FZ maintained thru countless interviews over the years that he composed music for his own enjoyment and no one else's. Sure, he wrote songs designed to "pay the bills", but that's not why he composed music. He did that because HE wanted to hear what it sounded like.
SOFA
This quote, I think, illustrates FZ's point of view on the topic quite eloquently: "The crux of the biscuit is: If it entertains you, fine. Enjoy it. If it doesn't, then blow it out your ass. I do it to amuse myself. If I like it, I release it. If somebody else likes it, that's a bonus." - Playboy, May 2nd 1993

[Lonesome Cowboy Squirt]

Howdy, folks.  I just wanted to say that I think FZ was definitely a very intelligent man.  According to SOFA's direct and thorough definition of "genius," yes, Frank Zappa was surely a genius.  I'd heard years ago that according to a poll of sorts (no idea which or when or from what source), Frank Zappa was one of America's 100 most intelligent men.  SOFA also aptly pointed out FZ's "shunning of formal education" making him a hard one to pin down.  Is not that, in itself, a prime example of his intelligence?

My mother is a teacher and I have seen plenty of examples that prove how the American education system caters to the stupid ones and "clips the wings" of exceptional or gifted students.  Dumbasses are rewarded, especially if they have a talent for some particualr sport.  Smart kids are basically expected to sit down, shut up, don't make waves, be patient and wait for the rest of the morons to finally grasp the concept being taught.  There are in most cases no incentives or challenges for a smart student to test his or her skills.  Many kinds of "advance placement" classes are implemented, but in my past experience these classes are basically geared for providing additional "busy work" for those who attend.  Yes, you got it, more occupational therapy.

A friend of mine once asked me, "what if an epidemic virus spread across the world that killed just stupid people?"

I replied, "who would be left to run for president?"

 

[noolie]

I considered myself a FZ efficionado until I visited these pages and saw the comments of you FZ scrutinizers and contributors.  I thought I had all the qualifications:
36 FZ discs
numerous FZ photos
countless friends that don't understand FZ
a 3 month stay in a psychiatric facility
a handful of Zappaisms that I interject, for my own enjoyment, in business meetings
and on occassion a tributory FZ goatee

You all appear to be geniuses to me, and as for FZ, without a doubt!!

[sheibb]

is the question of any revelancy>?

shalomm