Rolling Stone calls the Beatles’ Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band the most important rock & roll album ever made.” In the internet age, however, Sgt. Pepper sits 100­ percent ­context-­free alongside the countless blatant rip-offs recorded in subsequent years by everyone from the Rolling Stones to Panic! at the Disco. The Flaming Lips seemingly take this one step further on With a Little Help From My Fwends, a track-for-track remake of the album. If Sgt. Pepper is the Mona Lisa, Fwends functions like Marcel Duchamp’s L.H.O.O.Q., reproducing an idol with the express purpose of defacing it. Like Duchamp, Lips founder Wayne Coyne seems more interested in exploring the idea of violating an untouchable icon than in rediscovering the artistic merit that made the work iconic in the first place. In lieu of scribbled facial hair, Fwends features EDM beats and the artist formerly known as Hannah Montana, but the effect is pretty much the same: The defacement becomes the focus. Unlike Duchamp, Coyne and co. haven’t stopped at simple graffiti. In recreating the album, they’ve gutted and restitched it inside-out to create a masterpiece of misappropriation, warping another artist’s signature work into something unmistakably the product of the plagiarist. In short, Fwends essentially does with Sgt. Pepper what Erykah Badu accused Coyne of doing with her voice and image a couple of years ago: unapologetically exploits it to ends never originally intended. Fortunately, the result in Fwends’ case is infinitely less nausea-­inducing than the music video Badu disowned: Sgt. Pepper is not a person but an icon, and icons can be scribbled on.


In essence, Fwends is a thorough and artistically useful dismantling of a redoubtable classic that was, in RS’ terms, “rock’s ultimate declaration of change.” Would either album even have been attempted by artists who actually considered (or cared about) society’s interpretation of their actions? John Lennon, who co-shepherded Sgt. Pepper to its dizzying creative heights, was the kind of guy who’d offhandedly tell reporters that his band was “more popular than Jesus” in 1966, who met his songwriting partner’s schoolboyish complaints about uncool teachers in “Getting Better” by confessing to hitting women. Fwends, made great by exactly the caliber of arrogance that probably makes Coyne unbearable IRL, only confuses the issue by easily being the most interesting full-length album the Lips have released since 2002’s Yoshimi Battles the Pink Robots.

The album opens by aping the original’s orchestral tune-­up/crowd­-chatter ambiance, but 15 seconds in, when the first of countless syncopated synth blips begins to bubble, you might already begin suspecting the Lips of musical trolling—especially if you’re familiar with Coyne’s history of offstage assholery, or, for that matter with the band’s recent musical output, which includes not one, but two, poorly executed covers of another classic rock icon, Pink Floyd’s Dark Side of the Moon, one of which “improves” the wall of chiming clocks in “Time” by adding a bunch of lasers to it.

For its first few minutes, Fwends sounds like another collection of laser blasts, guest collaborators, and quite possibly every GarageBand effect ever created (though the tracklist is identical, the Lips’ version of Sgt. Pepper runs more than 10 minutes longer than the original). The Fab Four themselves, who were just figuring out how to use two four-track recorders as an eight­track in 1967, would’ve probably found this kind of post­Girl Talk maximalism as incomprehensible and unlistenable as big­band fans once found psychedelic rock. There is a Rosetta Stone, though: “Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds.” In 1967, the song’s drug accompaniment was LSD, but in 2014, the severely screwed Fwends version is probably best enjoyed while sipping sizzurp or maybe, as often advocated by guest vocalist Miley Cyrus, puffing medical marijuana.

But, as with the original, the use of mind-altering drugs is not required to enjoy the experience. The song’s lyrics are every bit as silly and innocent as the children’s drawing that Lennon claimed inspired it, and the same can be said for almost every song on the album. With the exception of scattered allusions to domestic violence (“Getting Better”) and suicide (“A Day in the Life”) made all the more disturbing by their brevity and seeming randomness, Sgt. Pepper is a revolutionary album on which little of consequence happens, lyrically at least. A hole is fixed. A meter maid is catcalled. The minutia of an average Englishman’s daily routine is detailed not once but twice.

Yet this lyrical banality caused some critics to write-off Sgt. Pepper as mere studio wanking. Village Voice critic Richard Goldstein panned the original Sgt. Pepper, claiming the album was no musical revolution but “an elaboration without improvement” on what came before. Goldstein’s earlier, more negative takedown in The New York Times alleged the album was largely ruined by its overuse of “special effects, dazzling but ultimately fraudulent.” Pitchfork’s dismissive Fwends review charges the Flaming Lips with similar crimes, of “tripping up the songs’ rhythmic momentum and weirding up the basic melodies with hammy vocals” and of having “little regard for thematic resonance or big-­picture atmosphere.”

Both criticisms seem to miss the point of Sgt. Pepper’s appeal as an auditory funhouse, a celebration of musical form over lyrical content, a cosmic abstraction anchored to the deliberately mundane and quotidian. Both albums trigger pre­language pleasure centers that most pop artists don’t even know exist. For better or worse, this headspace is somehow both shared and subjective, redefined and redecorated by controlled substances (whether they’re taken by the listener or the musician seems almost immaterial). This visceral give-and-­take between artist and audience is the real secret to Sgt. Pepper’s infinite appeal and it defies critical intellectualization.

With the monoculture long since dead and rotting, the Flaming Lips have no hope of equaling Sgt. Pepper’s success, but by scouting out a comparable headspace in 2014 with the likes of Cyrus, Phantogram, and Foxygen in tow, Fwends could have more impact on the future of psychedelic pop music than a tribute album recorded to benefit a regional animal rescue organization has any right to.

That’s an issue for anyone seeking easy dismissal of a problematic figure like Coyne, or for that matter, Lennon—whose homophobic statements to Rolling Stone in 1971 are enough to make us want to tell the “Give Peace a Chance” writer to shut up and sing. The internet’s unblinking gaze at celebrities’ every move creates a weird familiarity that can sometimes border on contempt when we feel they’ve disappointed us, and media sites fan the flames of the feud du jour. But while holding douchebags accountable for their actions is rarely a bad thing, the internet’s instant outrage machine makes it increasingly difficult to separate challenging art from the hard­to­like people who sometimes create it. Fortunately for the likes of Coyne and Lennon, music that defies intellectualization also seems to circumvent our resistance to its unsympathetic creators, even if we find it impossible to relate to them outside of Pepperland.

  • Man’s dog suddenly becomes protective of his wife, Internet clocks the reason right away
    Dogs have impressive observational powers.Photo credit: Canva

    Reddit user Girlfriendhatesmefor’s three-year-old pitbull, Otis, had recently become overprotective of his wife. So he asked the online community if they knew what might be wrong with the dog.

    “A week or two ago, my wife got some sort of stomach bug,” the Reddit user wrote under the subreddit /r/dogs. “She was really nauseous and ill for about a week. Otis is very in tune with her emotions (we once got in a fight and she was upset, I swear he was staring daggers at me lol) and during this time didn’t even want to leave her to go on walks. We thought it was adorable!”

    His wife soon felt better, butthe dog’s behavior didn’t change.

    pregnancy signs, dogs and pregnancy, pitbull behavior, pet intuition, dog overprotection, Reddit stories, viral Reddit, dog instincts, canine emotions, dog owner tips
    Otis knew before they did. Canva

    Girlfriendhatesmefor began to fear that Otis’ behavior may be an early sign of an aggression issue or an indication that the dog was hurt or sick.

    So he threw a question out to fellow Reddit users: “Has anyone else’s dog suddenly developed attachment/aggression issues? Any and all advice appreciated, even if it’s that we’re being paranoid!”

    The most popular response to his thread was by ZZBC.

    Any chance your wife is pregnant?

    ZZBC | Reddit

    The potential news hit Girlfriendhatesmefor like a ton of bricks. A few days later, Girlfriendhatesmefor posted an update and ZZBC was right!

    “The wifey is pregnant!” the father-to-be wrote. “Otis is still being overprotective but it all makes sense now! Thanks for all the advice and kind words! Sorry for the delayed reply, I didn’t check back until just now!”

    Redditors responded with similar experiences.

    Anecdotal I know but I swear my dog knew I was pregnant before I was. He was super clingy (more than normal) and was always resting his head on my belly.

    realityisworse | Reddit

    So why do dogs get overprotective when someone is pregnant?

    Jeff Werber, PhD, president and chief veterinarian of the Century Veterinary Group in Los Angeles, told Health.com that “dogs can also smell the hormonal changes going on in a woman’s body at that time.” He added the dog may “not understand that this new scent of your skin and breath is caused by a developing baby, but they will know that something is different with you—which might cause them to be more curious or attentive.”

    The big lesson here is to listen to your pets and to ask questions when their behavior abruptly changes. They may be trying to tell you something, and the news may be life-changing.

    This article originally appeared last year.

  • Throughout history, women have stood up and fought to break down barriers imposed on them from stereotypes and societal expectations. The trailblazers in these photos made history and redefined what a woman could be. In doing so, they paved the way for future generations to stand up and continue to fight for equality.

  • ,

    Why mass shootings spawn conspiracy theories

    Mass shootings and conspiracy theories have a long history.

    While conspiracy theories are not limited to any topic, there is one type of event that seems particularly likely to spark them: mass shootings, typically defined as attacks in which a shooter kills at least four other people.

    When one person kills many others in a single incident, particularly when it seems random, people naturally seek out answers for why the tragedy happened. After all, if a mass shooting is random, anyone can be a target.

    Pointing to some nefarious plan by a powerful group – such as the government – can be more comforting than the idea that the attack was the result of a disturbed or mentally ill individual who obtained a firearm legally.


Explore More Articles Stories

Articles

Man’s dog suddenly becomes protective of his wife, Internet clocks the reason right away

Articles

14 images of badass women who destroyed stereotypes and inspired future generations

Articles

Why mass shootings spawn conspiracy theories

Articles

11 hilarious posts describe the everyday struggles of being a woman