Rush, Rock Music, and the Middle Class: Dreaming in Middletown

3 “The Work of Gifted Hands”: Professionalism and Virtuosity in Rush’s Style

A s a teenage Rush fan in the 1980s, I had a voracious appetite for reading newspaper and magazine interviews with the band members. In retrospect, I am struck by how odd this obsession seems now, given that these pieces were fairly dull, at least by rock ’n’ roll standards. Led Zeppelin fans could revel in the mythology and mystique of their favorite band, centering on group’s reputed excesses of sex, drugs, and the occult. Fans of Guns ’N Roses and Mötley Crüe could trade sensational stories about all sorts of band misbehavior and controversy. Bruce Springsteen, for whatever reason, brought out the best in rock critics, serving as the subject of some of the most celebrated essays in the field. Pop artists like Madonna kept their fans guessing about their next moves and their motivations. In “The Work of Gifted Hands” Professionalism and Virtuosity in Rush’s Style 3 102 Rush, Rock Music, and the Middle Class contrast, articles and interviews with Rush centered—fairly unglamorously —on the band’s processes of composition, the rigors of touring, the routines of rehearsal and practice, as well as the delicate matter of balancing career and family. There was no question that Rush was living the rock ’n’ roll dream—platinum albums, successful tours, video and radio air play—but based on what the band members told journalists in countless interviews over the decades, they lived it in an oddly straight-laced, lowkey manner.1 As Neil Peart told Sylvie Simmons of Sounds magazine, “We like to get away from the panoply and glitter that surrounds this business. When you’re driving down the highways of America every day you can’t help but get the pulse of the streets and keep in touch with reality. We’re a pretty low-key bunch.”2 Rush’s manager, Ray Danniels, once quipped, “These guys are pure boring to most music people.”3 The band members consistently emphasized the work involved in being rock musicians, rather than the frills and glamour, in their interviews. There was no innuendo, biographical or psychological undressing, or controversy discussed. Nevertheless , like most Rush fans I interviewed, I was riveted by the band members’ explanations of their musicianship and career. Why were we drawn to this? A plausible preliminary answer may lie in the “everyman” persona that the members of Rush project. In many discussions with fans, I found that Rush’s appeal was linked to the down-to-earth way the band stood apart from the image-obsessed ethos of the 1980s. One of Rush’s most celebrated songs, “Limelight” (1981), a reflection on being a professional performer and grappling with fame, speaks of a need to remain grounded and “in touch with reality,” lest one become absorbed into the fantasy and artifice of stage performance. Neil Peart has echoed this sentiment in a number of interviews; for example, in 1988, he told Metal Hammer’s Malcolm Dome, “I never wanted to be famous and people just don’t seem to understand that. All I wanted was to be a musician, to be good at playing my chosen instrument.”4 In 1984, he told Off the Record’s Mary Turner, “I don’t enjoy fame in any of its manifestations. I enjoy, of course, being respected for the work, anyone would, and that to me is where it begins and ends.”5 As this “The Work of Gifted Hands” 103 latter quote suggests, Peart is ambivalent about fame, valuing recognition for his work as a musician, but expressing discomfort with being recognized as a celebrity. For years, Rush’s desire for privacy was a dominant theme in interviews—especially with Peart—and it figures into discussions of Rush’s creative process as well. Peart once stated, “No one has the right to exert any pressure on us. We’ve never allowed anyone else in the studio. No record company people are running around offering opinions and no one hears our demos but us. It’s very much a closed shop.”6 This closed-door policy is clearly part of Rush’s claim on artistic freedom and the privileged distance the band members maintain from their record companies. Eschewing artifice, cultivating a down-to-earth persona, claiming to make music for the sake of art rather than fame, and declaring artistic autonomy from the music industry—all these mobilize a number of welldiscussed discourses...