Fortunate Son, by Martha Thomases – Brilliant Disguise | @MDWorld
November 15, 2014 Martha Thomases 7 Comments
How was your Veteran’s Day? Did you get a day off from work? Did you shop for marked-down fall fashions?
If you’re like me, you noted that the day was made a holiday to honor those who served in the armed forces. I have nothing but respect for (almost all of) these people. I might not agree with their choices (if they had choices), but I admire their ability to literally put their bodies on the line.
To me, this is more than just a noble sentiment on a Tuesday in November. People I loved were killed while serving in the armed forces. People I love where wounded while serving in the armed forces. People I love were emotionally damaged while serving in the armed forces.
So, I was interested in the concert that was held in Washington, and broadcast on HBO. Not enough to watch all three hours of it — I have a low tolerance for celebrity speeches, even when I agree with them. But I thought it was an interesting mix of musical acts, and I tuned in and tuned out.
I did see this, a performance by Bruce Springsteen, David Grohl and Zac Brown of John Fogerty’s “Fortunate Son.”
Bruce and Grohl came out right after Brown sang Lee Greenwood,’s “Proud to be an American.” It’s a sentimental, jingoistic song, and I’m embarrassed to say that sometimes I find myself singing it. It leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
“Fortunate Son.” on the other hand, is one of my favorite Creedence Clearwater Revival songs. It’s one of my favorite songs, period. Here’s the story behind “Fortunate Son,” told by John Fogerty.
Turns out, not everyone agrees. Right-wing media was horrified that the song was sung at an event to honor our veterans. They said it was insulting, anti-American, and anti-military.
They got one right, anyway.
“Fortunate Son” is anti-military, in that it describes the impact within the armed forces from the unacknowledged class system in the United States. It was written in the 1960s, when poor kids got drafted and sent to Vietnam, while rich kids got college deferments, or safe gigs in the reserves. It was written by someone who had been drafted, and had a chance to see it for himself.
The people denouncing Bruce (mostly) are not themselves active service members, nor did they enlist. They’re just looking for a way to demean a generous effort by a known progressive.
Everything doesn’t have to be partisan. Everything doesn’t have to be exactly to my taste. I don’t denounce Zac Brown for singing the Lee Greenwood song, even though I don’t like it, politically (but it has such a great hook!). Even if you don’t like Springsteen’s politics, you can acknowledge that he hasn’t made a career out of demeaning service members.
Quite the contrary.
It’s a nuanced position, one that requires listening to his songs and paying attention to the lyrics.
Of course, if one wants to look for a Veterans Day scandal, there is no shortage. We treat our veterans horribly. They are the largest segment of the homeless population. Active-duty service members have to use food stamps because we don’t pay them enough to support their families. The VA hospitals remain a disgrace.
Doing something about these outrages requires money and effort, not just a Twitter account. So I don’t think the right wing Springsteen critics will do anything about them, other than continue trying to cut the food stamp budget and services to the homeless.
Martha Thomases, Media Goddess, would like to see people support the troops by keeping them safe, not sending them to places where they will get shot.
Neil C.
November 15, 2014 - 7:16 am
It must be exhausting to be in a constant state of outrage about everything. Then again, those were the same people who thought “Born in the USA” was also jingoistic, just because of the title, never bothering to listen to the lyrics.
travis miller
November 15, 2014 - 8:50 am
very well said. And as a vet, I agree! While initially everyone was caught up with Eminem dropping the F-bomb, what we should have been paying attention to is the message to Veterans Day and the complex laziness of hastagavistim. Bravo, Martha!
Mindy Newell
November 15, 2014 - 10:38 am
Remember when Reagan bragged about BORN IN THE USA making him proud of being an American?
Once again the Repugnanticans, most of them never having served, opened their big, fat, fucking lying mouths to scream about something of which they have no knowledge.
It really pissed me off! (As if you’ cant tell.)
But your column sure didn’t! Great work, Martha!
R. Maheras
November 15, 2014 - 6:18 pm
As part of my job, I was responsible for distributing more than 600 tickets for the HBO Veterans Day event, “Concert for Valor,” including 13 VIP tickets for the grandstands closest to the stage, and a handful of on-stage spots for the Metallica portion of the event.
There was such demand amongst the uniformed folks that I ended up farming them all out, including any two I could have legitimately kept for my wife and I to enjoy. Since my uniformed days have long passed, I figured that the younger uniformed folks deserved a shot at the concert more than I.
I live just a few Metro stops from the Capitol Mall, where the concert was held, so going would have been relatively painless, but I’m glad I did what I did.
As for the choice of song, and performers, it was what it was. If Eminem is on the slate, it doesn’t matter if there were lots of young kids and families present — there are going to be f-bombs. As for the Boss’ song choice, while it was still to be expected, giving his anti-war leanings, if he and I were at a cocktail party afterwards, I would have told him he was a bit of an asshole for choosing “Fortunate Son” for that particular crowd. Any other concert, no. That concert, yes.
And while it doesn’t meet the definition of jingoistic, “Fortunate Son” certainly fits the definition of leftist propaganda.
Mike Gold
November 15, 2014 - 7:18 pm
Gee, Russ, I thought Fortunate Son was simply a tribute to George W. Bush!
Kudos, pal, for doing the ticketing work. And for not taking your due — that’s a class act. That’s a hard gig to pass up.
Before Veteran’s Day was Veteran’s Day, it was called Armistice Day, celebrating the end of the war to end all wars. Sadly, war doesn’t seem to end war. But we’d all do well to familiarize ourselves a bit with World War I: the sacrifices made during that war were beyond belief, even grading on a curve. Let us remember George Santayana lived through WWI; Santayana being the man who co-opted Edmund Burke’s “Those who don’t know history are destined to repeat it” from over a century before the Great War.
As if any war could, indeed, be great.
Basil Reid
November 15, 2014 - 7:40 pm
Music has always been a part of the military tradition. Particularly the irreverent and satirical ones. “Drunken Sailor”, comes to mind. Personally I would have preferred to hear him sing “Mother McGrath”, or “Youngstown”, as I consider CCR the only ones worthy of singing “Fortunate Son”. Disrespectful on Springsteen’s part? To some, sure. Appropriate, hell yes. I’ve gone into combat with that song blaring from speakers almost as many times as I have to “Let the Bodies Hit the Floor”. Perhaps they could point their outrage at actual issues, such the twenty-two a day veteran suicides or homelessness.
Neil C.
November 15, 2014 - 10:26 pm
Basil,
Being outraged is much easier than having an ideas.
Martha Thomases
November 16, 2014 - 7:50 am
I yield to no one in my admiration for CCR and John Fogerty. That said, there is a long and proud tradition in rock (and other genres) of covering songs one likes. Sometimes it’s terrible, but occasionally one finds a version that illuminates and complements the original.
So covers don’t offend me, even if I don’t like them.
And Russ, if you think “Fortunate Son” is only leftist propaganda, you didn’t read the link I included about how Fogerty wrote it (from his own experience), nor do we have the same definitions of “leftist” or “propaganda.”
R. Maheras
November 16, 2014 - 11:17 am
“Fortunate Son” may have had elements of truth to it during the Vietnam era, but it doesn’t reflect the composition of the military today — despite leftist insistence that things now aren’t much different for military people than they were back then. In that regards, using it as a contemporary anti-war anthem is, in fact, leftist propaganda.
The makeup and motivations of military members today is much different than in the Vietnam era days where most of its members were made up of many poorer, unlucky losers in the draft lottery.
We’ve had this discussion before, and the fact is, it’s probably harder now to qualify for military service than at any time in US history.
And every single person who’s joined in the past nearly four decades has been a volunteer.
Martha Thomases
November 16, 2014 - 1:59 pm
Nothing in my piece was intended to disparage those who serve in the military. To the contrary, I think it is a disgrace that we treat these men and women like “welfare frauds” (such people exist, but in much smaller numbers than the media would have you believe. Also, a lot of them are doctors and other business people). It is a fact that many need food stamps to support their families while they serve. It is a fact that the majority of the homeless are veterans. It is a fact that the VA hospitals are run so inefficiently that people die.
If anything, Russ, I would think you would agree.
George Haberberger
November 16, 2014 - 2:14 pm
“Gee, Russ, I thought Fortunate Son was simply a tribute to George W. Bush!”
*Sigh* You know I wasn’t going to jump into this thread until you posted that Mike, because I always heard that Fortunate Son was about Al Gore.
Not wanting to just post any old crap that come into my head, I decided to investigate so I went to Snopes which has this:
“At our remove of two generations from the song’s original release, there is really only one son of a Vietnam-era U.S. senator who was of draft age in the late 1960s and has a name prominent enough to be widely recognized: former U.S. senator and U.S. vice-president Al Gore, Jr., whose father represented Tennessee in the U.S. Senate from 1953 to 1971.
The Gores don’t really fit the thrust of the song’s message, though, as Al Gore, Sr., was not a Vietnam War supporter (indeed, his opposition to the war is one of the factors commonly cited as contributing to his defeat in the 1970 elections), and Al Gore, Jr. didn’t duck military service through his father’s influence, but rather enlisted in the U.S. Army and served (as an Army newspaper reporter) in Vietnam.Fogerty had already written the song by the time the younger Gore enlisted, though, so it’s not completely implausible that Al might have been one of the inspirations behind the lyrics.)” (emphasis mine)
As for the George W. Bush inspiration Snopes has this:
“The name of U.S. president George W. Bush is sometimes mentioned in connection with “Fortunate Son” (albeit far less often than Al Gore’s), as he too is a prominent political figure who was the son of a Vietnam-era politician. However, his father, George H.W. Bush (himself a former U.S. president), had been representing the state of Texas in the U.S. House of Representatives for just a little more than one two-year term when “Fortunate Son” was written in 1969, so it’s unlikely that either father or son was notable enough at that time to be the focus of John Fogerty’s attention. (Also emphasis mine.)
As it turns out the likely political progeny that influenced Fogarty is David Eisenhower who was Dwight’s grandson and Nixon’s son-in-law. David Eisenhower enlisted in the Naval Reserve in 1970 and served 3 years active duty aboard the USS Albany. Since his enlistment was after Fortunate Son charted it is possible that the song influenced Eisenhower’s decision.
So it seems the George W. Bush in not who Fogarty was writing about
R. Maheras
November 17, 2014 - 10:54 am
Martha — I do agree with you regarding the latter topic discussions you raise in your essay. I just don’t agree with Springsteen’s choice to play “Fortunate Son” at this particular concert.
By the way, I have a dozen or so CCR songs on my phone’s playlist — more than any other artist, most likely — and one of them is “Fortunate Son.”
So it’s not the song, it was the context of its usage. One thing that makes my blood boil is when some liberals “support the troops” by saying/inferring stuff like, “You can’t help it you were some poor, ignorant disadvantaged person who the military got their claws on and took advantage of you.”
That’s a holdover stereotype from the Vietnam era, in my opinion.
Rene
November 18, 2014 - 4:34 am
Russ,
There is one thing that didn’t change since Vietnam (actually it got worse, if anything).
Even though the military is now made of volunteers, you STILL won’t find the sons of any hawkish politicians serving in the front of any wars, that is for sure.
As far as they’re concerned, war is still a glorious thing, as long as it’s other prople’s sons risking their lives.
So yeah, the song is still relevant.
R. Maheras
November 18, 2014 - 8:23 am
Rene — I disagree. During my 20 years on active duty, if I wanted to, I could have opted not to re-enlist multiple times. In addition, I could have stayed in four more years at the rank I’d achieved when I hit the 20-year mark. But I decided it was time to move on, so I opted to retire.
Personally, I think members of Congress should have at least one hitch in the military so they can better understand the decisions they make regarding the armed forces. About six or seven years ago, I had a long drawn-out discussion on the Comics Journal message board about this exact same subject with Fantagraphics publisher Gary Groth, who is not known for having any pro-war propensities.
Part of Groth’s take was as follows (typos corrected): “Actually, I think it’s a serious character flaw when an elected public official requires his own personal revelation to comprehend and understand the consequences of policies he pursues, or ought to pursue. The fact that (then Chicago Mayor Richard M.) Daley’s son could be deployed to Iraq should not affect US policy in that region; what is good for Richard Daley’s son as seen from the perspective of the son’s Dad is not necessarily what is good for my country. We need elected officials who can transcend their own private self interests, empathize with others, and scrutinize public policy based on a firm philosophical grounding that can be articulated to the people who elected him (and who didn’t)”
So Groth appears to disagree with your assertion that the tenets of “Fortunate Son” are relevant, or even desirable, for a politician who is deciding whether or not to support military action.
In that regards, you and I probably agree more than we disagree.