In 2003, Julius Davis, the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame’s director of educational programming, was fired for showing a group of fifth-graders a video of Jimi Hendrix serenading a partially topless girl with an explosive rendition of “Foxey Lady." Many were upset that the drug abusing, high school dropout was being put forward as a role model by the Hall of Fame, but any serious discussion as to the fitness of exposing young people to the revolutionary Hendrix was trumped by that naked breast.
Now, six years later, a more interesting side of that debate has been picked up off of the table by Carlos Garcia, a San Francisco superintendent, whose new district guidebook features images of Hendrix and challenges its educators to revolutionize education the same way Hendrix revolutionized music:
“Garcia told the San Francisco Chronicle that he was simply trying to ‘revolutionize’ the district and felt comfortable with Hendrix’s controversial image because, ‘Hey, we’re in San Francisco.’”
Nevertheless, forty or so years later, Jimi Hendrix as role model is still dicey territory. Yes, even in San Francisco. Obviously, Paul Allen is free to spend his own money on as many Hendrix shrines as he’d like, but when it comes to public funding, is Hendrix age appropriate?
I’ve always been personally fascinated by the subject of Rock and Roll and education. Do they mix? Should they mix? After all, the very thing that drew me to the music as a teen was that the music and its leading personalities were by their very nature subversive and rebellious.
I always thought that the battle line would form around the Beatles. The group’s catalog is universally beloved by both young and old. Surely, kids are much better off singing “Yellow Submarine” and “All Together Now” than whatever tripe Raffi and the Disney Channel are peddling. I was of the opinion that it was impossible to tell the story of the Beatles without acknowledging the fact that drug use was at the very core of their life and work, but I was wrong. Due to the fact that none of the Beatles perished due to their drug use (and, after all, what more benign lifetime drug user exists than Paul McCartney?), society has seemingly been able to embrace the group’s message of love and leave the more complicated subjects to experimentations of the college years.
That doesn’t appear to be possible when the subject is Jimi Hendrix.
I graduated from high school in 1984. It was the middle of the Ronald Reagan era. Nostradamus had nothing on George Orwell, who couldn’t have picked a better icon to mark the year of his predicted reckoning than “the great communicator.”
.jpg?t=20120209092158)
Article comments
1 - JC Mosquito
I heard Shakespeare died of pneumonia - but the thing is, he supposedly contracted it due to exposure as he had spent overnight passed out under a tree after an evening out on the town.
I think you can have it both ways - Jimi was a genius, but don't inhale your own puke - or anyone else's, for that matter.
2 - Evan
I think it's great that Jimi is being used as a role model for teachers. He was so innovated and creative and I think thats the message. Clearly not to live like Jimi, which I don't think was so bad. He had a lot of pressure on him in general and his managers were terrible for years, which is why his live ended too soon.
3 - jamminsue
Brad:
Awesome! We most certainly need more sane voices like yours in tis world!
4 - Glen Boyd
Here in Seattle he is celebrated on murals downtown, and even by an entire museum (Paul Allen's Experience Music Project). I really don't see what the big deal is, and agree with you that writing him, the Beatles, or anyone else out of the history books is a pretty ridiculous idea.
Their personal lives notwithstanding (and this was the sixties were talking about here), the impact on culture made by these musicians far outweighs any of their more youthful indiscretions...which many of us who were alive at the time also share.
-Glen
5 - eddie_on_drums
If you have dug a bit deeper, it is presumed that Jimi Hendrix was murdered and was 'waterboarded'. He gave 110% on his shows, something a 'junkie' wouldn't do. From the relesed 1970's studio work to the film shot on him pro or am, his playing during those last few months of his life was unlike anything of it's time. He had focus and worked his ass off as well as his guitars and equipment. You can't do that and be a 'junkie' at the same time. He was worth more to his manager, whom Jimi was going to let go, dead than alive because Jeffery had taken a $100,000+ life insurance policy out on Jimi with Jeffery as the beneficiary. Jeffry had Jimi's money tied up in The Chemical Bank and other off shore accounts. Many of these later were found to be money laundering operations set up by Jeffery. Jimi was afraid for his safety once the tours were over and he was back in NYC because when he would say or mention something it somehow always got back to Jeffy. He was tired and needed to get another bassist, finish building his studio and work on his next double LP. He had to get away and then he went to London where he was presumed murderd. There is more to this story.