RUSH: SELECTED INTERMEDIATE COMPOSITION WORKS BY GABRIEL BERNING
TABLE OF CONTENTS
-PREFACE
-BIOGRAPHY -ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY -GENRE & DISCOURSE ANALYSIS -DISCUSSION BOARD POSTS -PRAXIS: THE CULT OF RUSH -ABOUT THE AUTHOR
3 5 13 19 27 33 39
GABRIEL BERNING
PREFACE When it comes to talking about or even writing about music, the topic that always beats
other potential topics out is my personal favorite rock band. The selected works that you are about to read in this portfolio will evidence that claim. When I began composing this portfolio in my Intermediate Composition class in college, I was asked to write about a topic surrounding popular music criticism. Within that scope, I was permitted to write about a band, an artist, a genre, or just an album. Despite the extent of topics I could choose from, I did not put much thought into which topic I would choose. As you will read in the first of my discussion board posts, I immediately knew that I was going to write about my all time favorite rock band. As you can probably tell from the cover, this selection of works collects the history, research, stigmas, and discourses surrounding the Canadian progressive rock trio, Rush.
My initial interest in Rush began when I was fourteen. As you will read more
thoroughly near the end of this portfolio in “Praxis: The Cult of Rush,” I enjoyed rock music very much before I discovered Rush, but I definitely took more interest in them more than I had any other band or genre of music, and as a result, I learned that there was more to rock music than I could possibly imagine. When I initially became interested in the band, I immediately began listening to all of their music and researching them. That said, my writings about Rush are merely recordings and extensions of my knowledge and thoughts surrounding the band.
As mentioned before, I already knew plenty about Rush before I began writing these
compositions, so I tried to keep my research extensive and diverse. The resources range from simple written biographies to modern film documentaries. Some of the more unique resources include lists, a critical collage, and an illustrated history. As I have assured in the Genre and Discourse Analysis, modern topics such as Rock music can be documented in modern ways that contain visual and audible documentation. This is only fitting for a time when musicians can audibly document their songs for their audience’s listening leisure. Unfortunately, I cannot reference films, pictures, and sounds in the exact same way one can reference writings with writing, but to diverge from the typical biographies, I am able to write about my perceptions of these resources, much in the same way I perceive Rush’s music. 3
PREFACE
As alluded to in earlier references, this portfolio is broken down into six other works.
These works are in the order they are listed in the Table of Contents on page 2. The first work is a biography about the band. While the biography seems to contain as much about the band from its humble beginnings to present day as possible, most of the focus lies in their first nine albums from 1974-1982, a time that is sometimes considered the “golden age” of Rush. This case reflects the amount of resources surrounding Rush in respect to their general popularity. In case you, the reader, have little knowledge of Rush, this work is intended to inform you about the history of Rush based on my research. This biographical composition is then followed by two academic pieces that revolve around the aforementioned research. The first is the Annotated Bibliography, which lists, cites, and summarizes twelve of the sixteen resources. The second is the Genre and Discourse Analysis, which places the resources into a sort of conversation about the stigmas and the factual evidence surrounding Rush. After the somewhat artificial discourse in the previously mentioned work, the next item in this portfolio, the Discussion Board Posts, contains several literal discussions initiated by me among peers on an online forum. After these posts is “Praxis: The Cult of Rush.” This is a creative work displays Rush being a cult band, hardcore Rush fans potentially being a literal cult of their own, and ultimately where I place myself as a Rush fan. Finally, after my compositions about Rush and my admiration for them at the end of the praxis, About the Author shortly states information about me that does not pertain to Rush.
You can go directly to any of the aforementioned works by simply clicking on the links in
the Table of Contents on the previous page. If you ever wish to return to the Table of Contents, click the off-black ribbon below.
As I have already mentioned, Rush is my favorite band, and while I have since found other
bands and artists to follow, I still continue to listen to, research, and talk about Rush. Whether you love, like, despise, or do not even know of Rush, I hope you will enjoy my compositions about them.
rush-25. cygnus-x1.net. jpeg. April 10, 2017.
4
GABRIEL BERNING
BIOGRAPHY “Would you please welcome, from Canada: Rush!” This line is announced in an arena full
of excited fans awaiting the band many of them live a large margin of their lives for. As the trio runs onto the lighted stage, the audience roars with applause. This is one of the first scenes from the 2010 musical documentary Rush: Beyond the Lighted Stage. This scene captures the essence of nearly every Rush show as well as the band itself. It further establishes as Rush as “the greatest cult band” as one of the members, Geddy Lee said himself in a scene shown in the film’s trailer. Geddy, like the other members of the band, is not being boastful: Rush is a very successful band and they have their loyal fans to thank for that. “Ranked third for most consecutive gold or platinum studio albums after the Beatles and the Rolling Stones” Rush is considered “one of Rock’s most influential bands.
Coincidentally, before Rush was known for being a successful live band promoting studio
albums, they started off as a live band that played in community halls, church basements, and bars after they turned nineteen (the legal drinking age in Canada at the time. At this time they were mostly influenced by the British blues music of the early seventies such as the Who, the Yardbirds, and Cream (Waddell.)
The band did not have much success until they released their eponymous debut album
in 1974 and began touring as an opening act with KISS. At this stage in their career, the band consisted of Geddy Lee (born Gary Lee Weinrib) on bass guitar and vocals, Alex Lifeson (born Alexsandar Zivojinovich) on guitar, and John Rutsey on drums. While the album was not well-received by critics or the multitude of record labels who refused to sign them, they found underground success as an opening act and in their first hit single “Working Man.” Interestingly, the single was not initially a success in Toronto, the band’s home city, but in Cleveland, Ohio. This song, which was welcomed by a very industrious city received significant airplay after DJ Donna Halper played it on Cleveland’s WMMS (Ryan.) It also gave Rush an American record label and re-release with Mercury Records. Shortly after the release of Rush, John Rutsey was asked to leave the band due to health problems and creative differences.
5
BIOGRAPHY
Only a few weeks before going on tour, Geddy and Alex found a new drummer: Neil
Peart. At this point, Geddy Lee, Alex Lifeson, and Neil Peart became the permanent lineup for Rush for the remaining four decades of their career. Aside from becoming one of the greatest drummers of all time, Neil, an avid reader, also became Rush’s lyricist.
In 1975, Rush released their second album Fly By Night to moderate acclaim. The
album spawned the hit title track as well as their first progressive rock epic, “By-Tor and the Snowdog.” Despite still maintaining somewhat solid success as a classic hard rock band, their next album went more in the direction of the latter of the aforementioned songs. Later in the same year, Rush released Caress of Steel a five-track album with “The Necromancer” a 12-minute progressive rock epic at the end of side one and one twenty minute suite, “The Fountain of Lamneth” on side two. While the band had high hopes for the album, Caress of Steel sold fewer copies than Fly By Night and was accompanied by diminishing audiences, scathing reviews, and disappointment from their record company. This catalyzed pressure toward Rush from the record company as well as other peers to return to their older sound from the likes of their first album. However, Rush did not give in to anyone’s demands but their own, and recorded their next album the way they wanted expecting criticism and the potential end of the band. Fortunately for Rush, their steadfast fans, and loyal fans to come, this was just the beginning of a new era for band.
In 1976, Rush boldly released 2112, an album named for its title track, a twenty-minute
progressive rock epic that filled the entirety of side one. Much to the band’s surprise, the album was a huge success and remains their second most successful album to date behind 1981’s Moving Pictures. According to reader’s poll from Rolling Stone, the title track is considered their second best song behind “Tom Sawyer” despite clocking in at 20 minutes and 33 seconds. According to the AllMusic for Rush, “2112 was the first in a long line of gold and platinum releases -- while critics dismissed it as overblown and pretentious; either way, it established a formula from which the band rarely deviated throughout the duration of its career” (Ankeny.) This fusion of progressive rock and heavy metal would provide the basis of their sound for most of their following albums.
6
GABRIEL BERNING
While 2112 contained light use of a synthesizer in the title track’s overture and string accompaniment in the song, “Tears,” Rush’s next studio album would contain significantly more instrumentation. In 1977, the band released A Farewell to Kings which contained “Closer to the Heart,” their first hit in the United Kingdom. The album exhibited Neil Peart playing tubular bells, orchestra bells, temple blocks and other eclectic forms of percussion; Geddy alternating between a Minimoog synthesizer and his usual bass guitar while still providing vocals; and Alex playing various guitars and bass pedal synthesizers. In lieu of the past two records, this album also contains two progressive rock epics: the cult favorite “Xanadu” and “Cygnus X-1 Book I: The Voyage” the first song in a duology.
The song “Cygnus X-1 Book II: Hemispheres” opens Rush’s on their 1978 album,
Hemispheres. This record is considered the height of their progressive rock phase containing the aforementioned sidelong epic, eclectic instrumentation, complex time signatures, and their first instrumental, “La Villa Strangiato.” Due to the complexity of the album, the band was dealing with a lot of stress in the creativity and amongst their families. Their next album would be more of a push toward a more accessible sound and format than that of the long epic songs while still retaining progressive rock roots in somewhat complex time signatures and unique instrumentation. Rush released Permanent Waves in January 1980. Its move toward more radio-friendly
songs was met with increased record sales. The album reached #4 on the Billboard 200 becoming the first Rush album in the top five in the U.S. and spawned three hit singles: “The Spirit of Radio,” “Freewill,” and “Entre Nous.” The record still had two epics, but neither exceeded ten minutes nor contained too many complexities. Overall, the album was the band’s fifth “gold” selling album making it yet another commercial success for Rush. The album later became “platinum,” and while it was a major achievement, Permanent Waves was unknowingly paving the way for the pinnacle of Rush’s success the following year.
7
BIOGRAPHY
In April of 1981, Moving Pictures was released. It is Rush’s best-selling album receiving
quadruple platinum certification in both the United States and Canada. According to a reader’s poll by Rolling Stone Magazine, three of the record’s tracks were ranked in the top five with “Red Barchetta” at number five, “Limelight” at number three, and “Tom Sawyer,” the band’s signature song, at number one. While still containing the similar progressive rock instrumentation, time signatures, and the last of Rush’s long epic songs (“The Camera Eye,”) the album uses the same New Wave and Reggae motifs from Permanent Waves. Another staple of the album is Rush’s second instrumental “YYZ” named for the IATA Airport Code for Toronto Pearson International Airport. The song is a hit at concerts and was nominated for a Grammy for best instrumental, losing to The Police track, “Behind My Camel.” The album was played in its entirety during the “Time Machine Tour” in 2011. After Moving Pictures, Rush retained some success throughout the eighties. Their next album, Signals included two big hits, “Subdivisions” and “New World Man,” both of which reflected the album’s move toward a more technical sound with increased synthesizer usage and even more New Wave and Reggae influences from the likes of The Police and Talking Heads. While the album sold well, some consider it a let down as the band steered further away from their rock roots while others believe it is underrated due to the success of Moving Pictures and praise it for advancing Rush’s sound instead of duplicating the formula of its successful predecessor.
Van Loon, Alex. ahoy81-27. 1981. cygnus-x1.net. jpeg. April 18, 2017.
8
GABRIEL BERNING
The eighties saw the release of three more albums in a similar vein to Signals. Their 1984
album, Grace Under Pressure, arguably has a darker sound than their other albums as well as darker themes in the lyrics. The opening track “Distant Early Warning” charted at number three on the Mainstream Rock Charts. The album was also promoted by a tour that featured some of Rush’s first use of lasers and other visuals in their shows. Power Windows from 1985 lyrically dealt with power as a theme, especially in the songs “The Big Money” and “The Manhattan Project.” It also features additional musicians for keyboards, synthesizers, and choral arrangements. In 1987, Rush released Hold Your Fire, which was similar to Power Windows. The record featured two mainstream Rock hits “Force Ten” and “Time Stand Still,” the latter of which became the first Rush song to feature a guest vocalist, Aimee Mann, from the New Wave band ’Til Tuesday. Despite the success of these hits, the album only received “gold” status for its sales making it the first Rush album to not sell platinum since Caress of Steel. This drop in success is often credited to the continued use of dominant synthesizers on the album After Hold Your Fire, Rush continually made efforts to return to a more guitar-oriented Rock sound. Presto from 1989 and Roll the Bones from 1991 both did fairly well with both albums’ opening tracks, “Show Don’t Tell” and “Dreamline” respectively reaching number one on the Album Rock Charts. In 1993, Rush finally achieved a Hard Rock sound with Counterparts with the rise of alternative rock in the early nineties. While it only received a “gold” certification in the U.S., the album charted at number two, making it one of Rush’s highest charting albums in the States. Three years later, Test For Echo was released before a large tour. Shortly after, Neil Peart’s wife passed away from cancer and his daughter died in a car accident, both in the course of two weeks. Due to these tragic events, the band went on hiatus.
9
BIOGRAPHY
The break from touring and recording lasted six years before Rush released Vapor Trails
in 2002. While the album itself was a solid comeback, the band’s return was strongly revived in their touring after the record’s release. The Vapor Trails Tour involved Rush going to South America where the concert video Rush in Rio was recorded. Two years later, Rush went on “R30,” their 30th Anniversary Tour. After returning from the Tour, Rush recorded Snakes and Arrows their 18th studio album. The band then went on the Snakes and Arrows Tour shortly after, as well as The Time Machine Tour in 2011 to promote their upcoming album. In 2012, the band released Clockwork Angels, which was very well-received by fans and sparked their first big tour to feature string instrumentalists on stage with them. After this big tour, rumors were circulating that Rush planned to stop touring (Hiatt.) Before then, the band gave one last major tour in 2015: R40, their 40th anniversary tour, in which they played some of their biggest hits in reverse chronological order. The end of the band was affirmed in Rush: Time Stand Still, a documentary that follows the band on their R40 tour, fills in on some smaller details about the band, and covers some of their biggest fans.
Aside from album sale certifications, Rush has received various awards. While they have
only received nominations at the Grammys, the band received multiple Juno Awards in Canada and was inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in 2013 after years of their loyal fans impatiently waiting. With these and plenty of other accomplishments under their belts, Rush has definitely proved themselves as “one of Rock music’s most influential bands” (Rush: Beyond the Lighted Stage.)
Bargain Betty. Rush Star on Hollywood Boulevard. 2012. flickr.com. jpeg. April 10, 2017.
10
GABRIEL BERNING
Works Cited AllianceFilms. “Rush Beyond The Lighted Stage Trailer (HD).” YouTube, YouTube, 20 Aug. 2010, https://youtu.be/TKDPdcWdpvc. Ankeny, Jason. “Rush | Biography & History.” AllMusic,
www.allmusic.com/artist/rush-mn0000203008/biography. Web. 6 Feb. 2017.
Eddy, Chuck. “Rush Biography.” Rolling Stone, The Rolling Stone Encyclopedia of Rock & Roll,
2001, www.rollingstone.com/music/artists/rush/biography. Web. 6 Feb. 2017.
Greene, Andy. “Readers’ Poll: The 10 Best Rush Songs.” Rolling Stone, 4 Mar. 2015, www.rollingstone.com/music/lists/readers-poll-the-10-best-rush- songs-20150304/2112-20150304. Hiatt, Brian. “From Rush With Love.” Rolling Stone, Rolling Stone, 16 June 2015,
www.rollingstone.com/music/features/from-rush-with-love-cover-story-20150616. Web. 6
Feb. 2017.
Marco R. della, Cava, @marcodellacava, and TODAY USA.
“Rush joins Rock Hall, though it didn’t happen in a ..” USA Today. n.d.:
Academic Search Complete. Web. 8 Feb. 2017.
Norris, Chris. “Rush Never Sleeps.” Rolling Stone 1056/1057 (2008): 56-68. Academic Search
Complete. Web. 8 Feb. 2017.
Popoff, Martin, and Richard Bienstock. Rush: the Illustrated History. Minneapolis, MN,
Voyageur Press, 2013.
RockCritics.com, Admin. “Critical Collage: Rush vs. the Critics.” Rockcritics.com,
RockCritics.com, 6 Mar. 2013,
rockcritics.com/2013/03/05/critical-collage-rush-vs-the-critics-2/. Web.
8 Feb. 2017.
“Rush.” Contemporary Musicians. Encyclopedia.com. 9 Feb. 2017. http://www.encyclopedia.com. 11
BIOGRAPHY
“Rush.com.” Band | Rush.com, www.rush.com/band/. Web. 26 Jan. 2017. Rush: Beyond the Lighted Stage. Directed by Sam Dunn and Scot McFadyen, Banger Films, 2010. Rush | Time Stand Still. Directed by Dale Heslip, Fadoo Productions, 2016. Reed, Ryan. “10 Facts You May Not Know About Rush.” Ultimate Classic Rock, ultimateclassicrock.com/rush-facts/. Titus, Christa, and Ray Waddell. “Steady As They Go.” Billboard 122.44 (2010): 42-47.
Academic Search Complete. Web. 26 Jan. 2017.
Waddell, Ray. “Rush: Legend Of Live.” Billboard 122.44 (2010): 35-38. Academic Search Complete. Web. 8 Feb. 2017.Works Cited
Double Neck Guitars. 2016. 2112.net. jpeg. April 27, 2017. 12
GABRIEL BERNING
ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY AllianceFilms. “Rush Beyond The Lighted Stage Trailer (HD).” YouTube, YouTube, 20 Aug. 2010, https://youtu.be/TKDPdcWdpvc.
This video is a trailer to the 2010 documentary film Rush: Beyond the Lighted Stage.
It opens with the words “one of Rock’s most influential bands” and “ranked third for most consecutive gold or platinum studio albums…” The rest of the video shows various artists as well as the members of Rush themselves talking about Rush juxtaposed with scenes from concerts.
Second to the documentary itself, this trailer does an efficient job of briefly explaining
Rush’s relevance to Rock music, listing a few notable accomplishments, and talking briefly about the band’s origins. Ankeny, Jason. “Rush: Biography & History.” AllMusic,
www.allmusic.com/artist/rush-mn0000203008/biography. Web. 6 Feb. 2017.
This source is a biography of Rush made for the AllMusic website. It begins with a brief
history of the bands origins then focuses on the chronology of their studio albums from their eponymous debut to Clockwork Angels from 2012.
This article is basically a timeline of Rush’s discography. It is not the most informative
source, but I think succinctness will come in handy. Also, It is from a music review website that will provide a background for each of their albums in greater detail. Eddy, Chuck. “Rush Biography.” Rolling Stone, The Rolling Stone Encyclopedia of Rock & Roll,
2001, www.rollingstone.com/music/artists/rush/biography. Web. 6. Feb. 2017.
This short biography focuses on Rush’s praise, criticism, and phases during their four-
decade career. The author describes the music adjectively, mentions how many copies of various albums were sold, delves lightly into the bands personal life. It begins with their 1976 album 2112 and ends with their interview with Stephen Colbert as well as their cameo in the 2009 movie I Love You, Man.
This biography was very much focused on Rush with only two links to other articles at the
very bottom. Compared to the AllMusic biography, this one was less of a list and contained more analysis of the albums mentioned in the article.
13
ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Greene, Andy. “Readers’ Poll: The 10 Best Rush Songs.” Rolling Stone, 4 Mar. 2015, www.rollingstone.com/music/lists/readers-poll-the-10-best-rush- songs-20150304/2112-20150304.
This article is a reader’s poll of the top ten Rush songs. The top three songs are: 3.
“Limelight,” 2. “2112,” and 1. “Tom Sawyer.
This information is important especially on behalf of a band such as Rush where much of
their praise is attributed their fans. All ten of the songs are from seven of their first nine albums, including three from their 1981 album Moving Pictures. Hiatt, Brian. “From Rush With Love.” Rolling Stone, Rolling Stone, 16 June 2015, www.rollingstone.com/music/features/from-rush-with-love-cover-story-20150616. Web.
6 Feb. 2017.
This Rolling Stone article by Brian Hiatt was written during the summer of 2015 when
Rush was giving their 40th anniversary show “R40.” This show was rumored (and is now confirmed) to be their last tour, so the article describes a rehearsal and a show while also reflecting on the band and each member’s life.
Aside from several ads on the side and on a couple of the pictures throughout the article,
this was a focused work on Rush. The author did a fairly successful job of superimposing the band’s history while also talking about where the band was recently. This source is fairly long for an article and will likely be beneficial to my biographical work. Marco R. della, Cava, @marcodellacava, and TODAY USA. “Rush joins Rock Hall, though it
didn’t happen in a..” USA Today. n.d.: Academic Search Complete. Web. 8 Feb. 2017.
After many years of Rush’s fans impatiently waiting, Rush was finally inducted into the
Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in 2013. While Rush did not care too much about the induction, this moment marked a key time for many of Rush’s staunchest fans who felt that their induction was long overdue and well-deserved.
This news article shows how the fan base feels about Rush’s induction and especially the
band’s response to the fans’ joyful response. The band did not see the induction as a big deal, but they were happy that the fans were so pleased.
14
GABRIEL BERNING
Norris, Chris. “Rush Never Sleeps.” Rolling Stone 1056/1057 (2008): 56-68.
Academic Search Complete. Web. 8 Feb. 2017.
This article begins with “Thanks to epic songs, fantastical lyrics and extravagant drum
solos, the great nerd band of the Seventies rocks on through the 21st century.” The rest of the article contains dialogue and information about the band that emphasizes this notion of Rush being a “nerd band.”
While most articles are written in retrospect of Rush as one of Rock music’s greatest bands
(including this one) many of them hardly mention that Rush was more of a nerd band in their early years with experimental instrumentation and then obscure references to Tolkien and Ayn Rand. While being a nerd and a fan of Rush is more common today, Rush was not exactly the cool band of the seventies. Popoff, Martin, and Richard Bienstock. Rush: the Illustrated History.
Minneapolis, MN, Voyageur Press, 2013.
Since their beginnings as a bar band, Rush has left a long visual legacy paired with their
musical legacy. From their ticket stubs and gig posters to their album covers and films, this book accompanies biographical texts with plenty of pictures of Rush’s memorabilia, propaganda, and photos.
This book was written during the height of Rush’s culmination shortly after the
documentary Rush: Beyond the Lighted Stage and around the release of their last studio album Clockwork Angels. Aside from their last two tours, this book covers just about everything from the band in pictures and words. Reed, Ryan. “10 Facts You May Not Know About Rush.” Ultimate Classic Rock, ultimateclassicrock.com/rush-facts/.
Terry Brown produced every Rush album from Fly By Night (1975) to Signals (1982). Even
the though the band is from Toronto, there first big success was in Cleveland. These two facts as well as eight others are in this list “10 Facts You May Not Know About Rush.”
This list from Ultimate Classic Rock serves to fill in 10 interesting yet small details one
may not know about Rush that might not make it into the usual Rush biography.
15
ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY
RockCritics.com, Admin. “Critical Collage: Rush vs. the Critics.” Rockcritics.com,
RockCritics.com. rockcritics.com/2013/03/05/critical-collage-rush-vs-the-critics-2/. Web.
8 Feb. 2017.
While Rush is now considered one of Rock music’s greatest bands and perhaps the most
popular “cult band,” Rush has endured much negativity from critics. Critics criticize Peart’s “silly” lyrics, Alex’s buzzing guitar sound, and especially Geddy’s high tenor screeching vocals.
This webpage collages snippets of scathing reviews of Rush from various rock critics. Since
it compiles outside reviews, there is not much rhetoric or discussion but merely factual evidence that there has been a lot of criticism of Rush. “Rush. Contemporary Musicians.” Encyclopedia.com. http://www.encyclopedia.com. Web.
9 Feb. 2017
Unlike a lot of bands who maintain modern relevance for their praise from critics and fans
alike, Rush has successfully retained relevance from their staunch fan following despite negative criticism. Well after the seventies and eighties, Rush has influenced modern bands and gained the respect of the critics who used to slander them.
This web article is formatted like an encyclopedia. It organizes the band’s biography in the
body of the page and lists details about the band members and their discography. It even lists the sources at the bottom. “Rush.com.” Band | Rush.com, www.rush.com/band/. Web. 26 Jan. 2017.
This short biography is from the official Rush website. It is a chronological work that that
breaks their career down into sections titled “The Early Days,” “The Breakthrough,” “Moving Pictures,” and “The Return.”
Although there were no ads for anything unrelated to Rush, the article was full of links to
other articles from the site as well as Wikipedia. Overall, this source is very organized but might contain potential bias since it is from the band’s website.
16
GABRIEL BERNING
Rush: Beyond the Lighted Stage. Directed by Sam Dunn and Scot McFadyen, Banger Films, 2010.
Rush started as a small bar band in Toronto, Canada. Through the years, the band
developed a following as a progressive rock trio that experiment with various types of music and instrumentation. The band, musicians that know the band, and the band’s family make comments along throughout the film.
This documentary covers Rush without having one particular narrator. All of the dialogue
is given in the form of interview responses from various people. This balances out any bias and gives the audience the privilege to hear the band’s story from the band members themselves, people close to them, and musicians acquainted with them. Rush: Time Stand Still. Directed by Dale Heslip, Fadoo Productions, 2016.
This film covers Rush’s recent R40 tour and the relationship Rush has with their loyal fans.
It contains interview with the band, their fans, and other musicians. It also has plenty of footage from the tour.
This film will make a great source in showing not just biographical fact, but also subjective
accounts from fans showing that they are passionate about Rush whether the critics or the mainstream are or are not. Titus, Christa, and Ray Waddell. “Steady As They Go.” Billboard 122.44 (2010): 42-47. Academic
Search Complete. Web. 26 Jan. 2017.
Unlike many artists and bands, Rush has never felt the need to appeal to the latest
marketing trends. This is because the band has always done what they want to do versus what the masses want. Despite the band’s independence, the group is still very successful and influential.
This periodical draws emphasis on Rush’s nonchalance to success. They have consistently
done their own thing yet have been successful. This is an important part of the band’s identity that is worth mentioning because it makes their endurance for four decades even more phenomenal.
17
ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Waddell, Ray. “Rush: Legend Of Live.” Billboard 122.44 (2010): 35-38. Academic Search
Complete. Web. 8 Feb. 2017.
In this interview with Geddy Lee, the frontman of Rush shares the story of Rush’s
development as a live band in the years before and during the recording of their first four albums. Geddy and the interviewer also bring up the increasing technicality of the band’s sound and how it affected live performances.
This interview places emphasis on Rush as a live band. A crucial part of it at the beginning
talks about Rush’s origin in their early years from 1968 to the release of their debut album in 1974. The interviewer asks Geddy great questions and Geddy gave seemingly honest answers that speak not just for himself but also for the rest of the band.
Rush Poster. 2012. cygnus-x1.net. jpeg. April 11, 2017.
18
GABRIEL BERNING
GENRE & DISCOURSE ANALYSIS Over the course of four decades, nineteen gold, platinum, and multi-platinum records,
and numerous tours, Rush has established themselves as one of the greatest rock bands. Despite struggles to build themselves up from a small bar band and scathing reviewws from rock critics, Rush is often considered the best cult band. As evidenced in biographies, interviews, and album reviews from their beginnings in 1968 to present day, their loyal fans, ever-changing sound, visually thematic live performances, and their willingness to continue all played a part in their persistence.
Like many other bands in the 1970s and 1980s, Rush developed an image to accompany
their sound. One of the fortunes of musical acts in the 20th century is that their works, progress, and highlights can be documented on film. That said, Rush: Beyond the Lighted Stage captures the story of Rush and puts it on display with sound and vision. Film can also increase the credibility of the source itself. While anyone can claim that they interviewed Rush in person and did not tamper with the answers given to them, this movie shows Rush talking about what they remember and what they thought at the time.
In addition to Rush, one can see and hear interview responses from other musicians who
follow, worked with, or personally know Rush. This is profitable for the viewer in some ways because not only do they see the perceptions of the band and their esteemed fans, but also others whose feelings for Rush fluctuated. For example, Terry Brown produced every Rush album from Fly By Night to Signals, but quit producing for the band because he did not like their augmented use of reggae and synthesizers. Therefore, the viewer can see that this documentary is not just one long fanfare for the band, but rather an honest biography of the band.
Another visual
advantage of film is that opposed to a concert review that tries to describe a show that the reader may or may not have seen or an article that tries to display the band’s image or fashion, this film can lightly summarize these with mere visual documentation. In the film, the audience does not just hear that the band bought silk kimonos in California to deviate from the default style of t-shirts and jeans, the viewer gets to see them performing in the oriental garb at one of their A Farewell to Kings Tour shows. Not only is the viewer told that their shows became increasingly visual during the 80s, he or she is shown film documentation of the band performing in front of large television screens and green lasers. 19
GENRE & DISCOURSE ANALYSIS
While film shows the ups and downs of Rush ranging from praise and success to criticism,
the trailer to the film has a more biased discourse. While the film still displays Rush in a very positive light, the trailer removes any trace of the bands hardships and criticism. This makes sense because the trailer is meant to market the film as opposed to educating the viewer to the extent of the two-hour documentary. This is displayed at the very beginning of the trailer with the words “one of Rock’s most influential bands” and “ranked third for most consecutive gold or platinum studio albums behind the Beatles and the Rolling Stones” (Alliance Films) while the intro to “Closer to the Heart” plays. At the end of the intro, a voice says “Would you please welcome, from Canada: Rush!” At this point, the trailer is clearly intended to entice the viewer. After the intro, concert clips and musicians sharing their positive thoughts about Rush are shown keeping the positive tone of the trailer and reinforcing Rush as a popular band with loyal fans and great live shows.
While films bring visuals to life with sound, a lot can still be said in the form of writing
when displayed with still images on paper. In the book Rush: The Illustrated History, Martin Popoff provides pictures to aid the story of Rush. Even without reading the text, the reader can see Rush’s enduring legacy in the form of ticket stubs, album covers, and fan collections of memorabilia, as well as still photos to capture seeable highlights of concerts and studio sessions.
Though films entertain many audiences and the respective band’s avid followers read
articles, by far the most accessible media surrounding a band is their music. In a list article compiled by Andy Greene from Rolling Stone Magazine titled “Readers’ Poll: The 10 Best Rush Songs,” the songs are not just listed; they are accompanied by descriptions of why they are impactful. From the first on the list, “Subdivisions” (at Number 10), Greene writes “Much to the shock of many in the industry, Rush began scoring actual radio hits in the early 1980s.” While this is mentioned under the song’s listing, it actually tells the reader more about the band, reinforcing Rush’s steady climb to popularity and alluding to their change of style to more accessible radio-friendly songs. This is further supported under Number 9: “La Villa Strangiato” at the end of the description with “the next song that Rush fans heard after this was “The Spirit of Radio,” a very different kind of tune for a very different decade.” Another staple of the article is under Number 4: “Working Man” where it is stated that consistent airplay from Cleveland rock station WMMS helped make the band popular. 20
GABRIEL BERNING
Though the aforementioned paragraph explains how the list talks about the band in
respects to songs, the biography from Allmusic.com does a similar trick with albums while forming a chronological, straightforward biography. It begins with their eponymous debut album and their pair of hardly successful albums from 1975 (Fly By Night and Caress of Steel). Then, it mentions 2112 as Rush’s progressive rock breakthrough album, and describes Rush as consistently gaining success afterward, obtaining greater mainstream success with the albums Permanent Waves and Moving Pictures and becoming a live phenomenon during the early eighties. When mentioning the albums from the late eighties Hold Your Fire and Presto, it describes the band’s decrease in popularity as the band produced more “slicker, synth-driven efforts” and “cut back on touring”(Ankeny). From then on, it describes Rush’s return to heavier sound with albums like Counterparts and Test for Echo in the nineties. Overall the author of this article does a succinct job of chronicling Rush’s rise to success and their change of sound.
While articles, films, biographies, and analyses of songs are all fruitful to the dialogue,
a very important voice in the discourse of a band is easily one of the band members. In Rush: Legend of Live, Ray Waddell interviews Geddy Lee, the lead vocalist, bassist, and keyboard player of Rush. While staying surprisingly chronological, the interview covers just about everything in the discourse that commonly surrounds Rush. Geddy and Ray talk about the band beginning as a bar band, gaining popularity, becoming more mainstream technical, and how all of that affected and augmented the band as a popular live phenomenon. Toward the end, they also talk about this Rush’s loyal fan base and how they have maintained Rush’s relevance to music despite the criticism and lack of accessibility they had to face.
As the previously cited article mentions, Rush has a great relationship with their fans who
are both grateful for each other’s endurance through the years. This is shown very well with the 2016 film Rush: Time Stand Still. As stated in the beginning of this analysis, biographical film documentation can add great credibility and bring discourse to the audience with visuals and audio. While the film goes into brushes up some details about the bands development and shows interviews with the band themselves, the film also shows many interviews with fans, as well as footage of “RushCon” and the band’s last show.
21
GENRE & DISCOURSE ANALYSIS
After retrospectively looking back on Rush in the form of media and personal accounts
one may often see the band in a very positive light and take their success and fan base for granted. However, a crucial part of the discourse surrounding Rush is the degree of criticism they received from music critics. These criticisms are organized in “Critical Collage: Rush vs. the Critics” by the administration of RockCritics.com. The article is introduced as “a by no means comprehensive or conclusive survey of a Canadian power trio who once upon a time (much less so now) got under the skins of more rock critics than any other rock or pop artist going.” This statement alludes to Rush gaining popularity in time, but the rest of the webpage solely compiles critical slander against the band that further grounds them as one of the biggest “cult bands.” Ironically, one of the snippets alludes to the discourse surrounding Rush’s success: “… their love of tricky time signatures and busy solos is what hypnotizes fans and bores everyone else. Lyricist Peart’s mystifying cosmic bent and lead singer Lee’s Donald Duck-on-acid howl inspire similar love-it-or-loathe-it debates.”
It is one thing to merely mention that Rush has risen and endured as an influential cult
band with loyal fans and hear from the band what the fans and success mean to them, but it is another thing to display the literal impact. In “Steady As They Go,” a web article Christa Titus and Ray Waddell, the authors give examples of Rush’s relevance despite the band’s steadfastness. Thanks to their fans, business, and nonchalant attitude toward popularity, “The Time Machine tour [in 2011] grossed $25.6 million and sold 359,563 tickets to 36 North American shows, according to Billboard Boxscore” [Titus & Waddell.] Even during a time of “bad business,” the band was successful without jumping on the latest marketing trends or discounting tickets. Aside fromrecognition on tours “2112” was featured in its entirety in the videogame Guitar Hero: Warriors of Rock and 2112 and Moving Pictures were both featured in Eagle Rock Entertainment’s “Classic Album’s DVD series.
22
GABRIEL BERNING
It is often said that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. However, this has not always been
satisfactory for Rush’s fans who want Rush to gain a great degree of prestigious recognition. This is especially apparent in “Rush joins Rock Hall, though it didn’t happen in a hurry,” a news article from Marco R. della Cava. “I’m relieved for our fans, who took it personally each time we were overlooked,” said Geddy Lee in response to Rush’s announced induction into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. While the band felt honored, they also mentioned that their career is at a high with the success of “The Time Machine Tour” and the release of their 19th studio album Clockwork Angels. As a news article this not only adds to the discourse surrounding Rush’s success, endurance, and a fan base, but by its nature shows that Rush is still relevant in the pubic sphere.
Aside from writing about the discourse surrounding Rush, simply writing about Rush
in general today says enough about their relevance and affiliated fandom in high places. In the Rolling Stone article “From Rush with Love” by Brian Hiatt, the author goes into great detail about where the band is at now as they consider bringing their careers to a close. The article ends with “they’re still enjoying themselves, these old friends, and it suddenly feels unthinkable that this is the end” (Hiatt.) Even though the article is more about the band personally than it is about the discourse surrounding the band’s success, endurance, and fan base, the long article still adds crucially to discourse surrounding Rush in general with its content and especially for the links to related articles it contains. Strewn throughout the article, the writing is interrupted by “RELATED: Hear Geddy’s thoughts on ‘ 2112,’ the Hall of Fame jam and bad haircuts,” “RELATED: The Canadian rockers’ followers celebrate a long-awaited victory,” and other ways to get the reader into related articles about the topic.
23
GENRE & DISCOURSE ANALYSIS
As mentioned in the aforementioned paragraph about “From Rush with Love,” and
especially the paragraph about the trailer for “Beyond the Lighted Stage,” the discourse can be used to market more discourse. While sometimes this is done in a trailer or a full-length article, sometimes all it takes is an enticing title. The article “10 Facts You May Not Know About Rush” by Ryan Reed from UltimateClassicRock.com certainly has that kind of title. Even though a fervent Rush enthusiast may not be amused by the article’s data, it brings some little-known facts surrounding the band’s discourse to the common listener. In case the reader never knew how the band made the leap from being a bar band to a moderate success with studio album, to “their fans in high places,” the viewer can read in succinct list items the dieted version of small details within the band’s discourse.
Like the media that surrounds Rush, the band varies in its own (musical) genres and Neil
Peart discusses various themes in their lyrics. With traces of Blues, New Wave, Reggae, Pop, and Alternative, as well as lyrics ranging from the philosophical writings of Ayn Rand to the poetic references in “Xanadu” and “Limelight,” it is hard to imagine what Rush has not done within the realm of progressive rock throughout the years. However, despite their ever-changing sound, Rush has enjoyed rising consistency in their success, endurance, and fan base. Now that the band is better known than in their beginning years of obscurity, this is even more evident in the trace of written biographies, films, lists, articles, and other works. Therefore the discourse surrounding Rush’s success, endurance, and fan base is displayed visually, in writing, in example, and in sound.
24
GABRIEL BERNING
Works Cited AllianceFilms. “Rush Beyond The Lighted Stage Trailer (HD).” YouTube, YouTube, 20 Aug. 2010, https://youtu.be/TKDPdcWdpvc. Ankeny, Jason. “Rush | Biography & History.” AllMusic,
www.allmusic.com/artist/rush-mn0000203008/biography. Web. 6 Feb. 2017.
Greene, Andy. “Readers’ Poll: The 10 Best Rush Songs.” Rolling Stone, 4 Mar. 2015, www.rollingstone.com/music/lists/readers-poll-the-10-best-rush- songs-20150304/2112-20150304. Hiatt, Brian. “From Rush With Love.” Rolling Stone, Rolling Stone, 16 June 2015,
www.rollingstone.com/music/features/from-rush-with-love-cover-story-20150616. Web.
6 Feb. 2017.
Marco R. della, Cava, @marcodellacava, and TODAY USA.
“Rush joins Rock Hall, though it didn’t happen in a ..” USA Today n.d.:
Academic Search Complete. Web. 8 Feb. 2017.
Popoff, Martin, and Richard Bienstock. Rush: the Illustrated History. Minneapolis, MN,
Voyageur Press, 2013.
Reed, Ryan. “10 Facts You May Not Know About Rush.” Ultimate Classic Rock, ultimateclassicrock.com/rush-facts/. RockCritics.com, Admin. “Critical Collage: Rush vs. the Critics.” Rockcritics.com,
RockCritics.com, 6 Mar. 2013,
rockcritics.com/2013/03/05/critical-collage-rush-vs-the-critics-2/. Web. 8 Feb. 2017.
Rush: Beyond the Lighted Stage. Directed by Sam Dunn and Scot McFadyen, Banger Films, 2010. Rush: Time Stand Still. Directed by Dale Heslip, Fadoo Productions, 2016. Titus, Christa, and Ray Waddell. “Steady As They Go.” Billboard 122.44 (2010): 42-47.
Academic Search Complete. Web. 26 Jan. 2017.
Waddell, Ray. “Rush: Legend Of Live.” Billboard 122.44 (2010): 35-38.
25
Academic Search Complete. Web. 8 Feb. 2017.
GENRE & DISCOURSE ANALYSIS
A Show of Hands Cover. 1989. worldwidetorrents.eu. jpeg. April 27, 2017. 26
GABRIEL BERNING
DISCUSSION BOARD POSTS Post 3: “Who do you love? What artist, band, song or music genre are you researching? Why? My Post:
I decided from the moment I heard that this course was based around rock music
criticism that I would write about Rush because they are simply my favorite band of all time. Before I heard Rush, I mostly listened to mainstream music from the radio or whatever my brothers and sisters showed me (most of which was mainstream music from the radio.) After listening to a couple of their more popular songs, I was hooked, and I not only sought out their obscure experimental works, but also their various influences over the course of their long career. I credit Rush for getting me into progressive rock (King Crimson, Yes, Genesis, etc.), new wave (Talking Heads, New Order, etc.), and other less-mainstream (yet not too avant-garde) experimental styles of music. Aside from enjoying what they opened me up to, I love the band’s music in general. I have seen both of their theatrical documentary films and own 17 of their 19 studio albums (some on CD, some on audio cassette, or both.) Overall, they have changed the way I look at music for the better, I love their music, I believe I am knowledgeable of them, and I am looking forward to hopefully learning more. Naomi Guth:
I have never listened to Rush, but after reading your post I definitely will. I like how you
were able to describe this band by naming other bands and genres that fit alongside it. I also liked how you already had your topic figured out from the first day of class, it’s great that you have a band that you are able to connect with on a number of different levels.
27
DISCUSSION BOARD POSTS
Daniel Wedig:
Cool topic! I have always liked Rush a lot. I love their progressive sound and as a bassist
I can really get into Geddy Lee’s driving basslines that stand out in a mix. He also has a great voice that sets them apart from most bands. I saw one of their 40th anniversary tour shows in Columbus and it was a great concert. It sounds like you will have a good time researching. Joshua McQuilkin:
Rush sounds like a great choice for you. What I’ve always loved about them is how they
can make three guys sound like five. Their sound is so big for three people. Allison Binegar:
Rush will be a really good choice. They have a lot of good, classic pieces like “Tom Sawyer”
and “Limelight.” Geddy Lee has a really distinct voice and I feel this will be a fun project.
Sirota, Peggy. Alex Lifeson, Geddy Lee, and Neil Peart of Rush. 2015. RollingStone.com. jpeg. April 11, 2017. 28
GABRIEL BERNING
Post 4: “The Cover of the Rolling Stone” Write a brief review of an album or song from your research topic. My Post:
Rush’s 1982 album Signals is considered as one of Rush’s better works or one of their worst
depending on who you talk to. If you ask me, I think it is masterful and underrated for being sub-par in the wake of their previous multi-platinum success, Moving Pictures from 1981.
When listening to the first song, “Subdivisions” the avid Rush listener could quickly tell
that this album is going to be different. Unlike the opening tracks of their previous albums, this slightly melancholy song about life in the suburbs is primarily accompanied by a sawtooth synthesizer than by a catchy guitar riff from Rush’s Alex Lifeson. Whether the listener likes it or not, this sets the stage for the remainder of the album. Though there are still a few very upbeat guitar songs with “The Analog Kid” and “New World Man,” this album still uses more synthesizers and takes more dark turns than their previous albums. The classic Rush fans do not like this, but some of the then new Rush fans who hopped on the bandwagon with Permanent Waves and Moving Pictures accepted this album with open arms. Aside from the three aforementioned songs, I think the the last two tracks of the album deserve mentioning. “Losing It” contains an electric violin accompanying the lyrics about talented people losing their talents and is quite possibly Rush’s saddest song. After this sad song, Rush ends this album with “Countdown” an upbeat track about a space shuttle launch the band got to attend, that features prominent synthesizers, voice samples, and various metaphors and similes in the lyrics. These two songs are not quite as great or nearly as successful as “Subdivisions” but are very enjoyable and underrated much like the rest of the album.
Overall, I believe Signals is an underrated masterpiece that was eclipsed by its successful
predecessor. I rate this album highly and would recommend it to anyone who likes classic rock, progressive rock, and early new wave. Allison Binegar:
Such a good band! I like how you decided to write about this album versus the more
classic like Moving Picture. As you said, its kind of an underrated album but still a masterpiece.
29
DISCUSSION BOARD POSTS
Post 5: “I Got the News” Post/link a news item about your research topic, and respond to content, rhetoric, perceived bias? My Post: http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/music/2013/04/19/rock-and-roll-hall-of-fame-inductionceremony/2095627/
This article, “Rush rules Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Induction” is about Rush’s Induction
into the rock and roll hall of fame in 2013. The title sums it up well enough, but here are some quotes from the article that reinforce the title’s message:”Rush drew the loudest applause but there were plenty of songs and sentiments to honor Heart, Public Enemy and the rest of the 2013 class” and “the night belonged to Rush, the Canadian prog-rock trio that’s been waiting for an invitation since 1998.” If there was any bias in this news piece, it was geared toward Rush, but most of it seemed fairly objective. Whether the writer liked Rush or not, the audience gave the greatest applause due in part to the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame letting people vote for eligible inductees for the first time. This notion was reinforced by the article’s structure. The first half seems to be merely about Rush, while the second half summarizes the other inductees and other seemingly modest details. Overall the article did not seem rhetorically persuasive, but the amount of content was definitely in favor of Rush. Xiangyu Kong:
It’s good to see there are many comments from different people, both fans and other
artists, over the event, which makes the article relatively unbiased. Eddy Gilfilen:
Its very interesting to see how much of a big deal it is to be inducted. I had no idea there
was such a celebration when being inducted in the hall of fame. Looks like it would be an amazing time. The article seems to do a great job showing the excitement around Rush fans.
30
GABRIEL BERNING
Post 6: “What’s Up (What’s Going on?)” How goes the research and writing? Anything surprising or unusual come up? My Post:
The research is going fairly well for me. It’s not that difficult since I know a lot about Rush,
since they are my favorite band of all time. As a result of this, writing enough material about them has been very easy. However, I think I need to know when to say when, since my paper was nearly 2000 pages long. That’s not a bad thing, but as a result, my paper was somewhat rushed at the end (pun not intended.) After I edit my MLA format mistakes that were covered in my conference with Prof. Kerley, think I may adjust my focus so that it covers the band’s longspanning career, but maybe has more of a focus on their “golden years.” One interesting fact that I discovered about Rush was that while they are from Toronto, they were first successful in Cleveland, Ohio when their hit song “Working Man” was played on local radio there. Naomi Guth:
I’m glad that the research is going well. MLA formatting can be a pain, I’m having troubles
of my own but it sounds like you have it all get worked out. Going with a shorter time frame of their career will definitely limit the amount of information you have to research so you can really dive into detail about those years. Sounds like it’s going to be a great project, happy writing! Daniel Wedig:
2000 pages! Woah! You are making us all look really bad. Honestly, I can’t believe you
were able to successfully conference a paper that long in 20 minutes. Rush is a really cool band though, so I can see how you could write that much about them. A cool fun fact about Rush: they actually are somewhat responsible for putting Primus on the map. They were the first big act that Primus opened for and it really expanded Primus’ reach. Good luck with your further work.
Gabriel Berning (my response):
31
Hahaha, 2000 words. I meant 2000 words. My bad!
DISCUSSION BOARD POSTS
Joseph Keilholz:
I feel the same about my research with Eminem. It is just difficult to get what I know onto
paper in a cohesive and well-organized way.
Concert Ad. 1979. 2112.net. jpeg. April 11, 2017 32
GABRIEL BERNING
PRAXIS: THE CULT OF RUSH
“Cult.” The word stands out with others such as “feminism,” or “conservative,” as a
somewhat vague, polar-received word in the English language. While arguably a few think of it simply as a following, with positivity in their experience or indifference, others recall Jim Jones and the Peoples Temple with its horrors.
When I first heard that Rush was described as “the greatest cult band,” I thought that
sounded awry. As a fairly religious person, I knew that some non-religious people to accuse religion, and even some religious people to insult other religions, easily threw around the word “cult.” I was not taken too aback by its careless usage, and I certainly saw no malice when Rush was described this way in a fairly positive light, but it still seemed odd.
Religion aside, cult is defined as “a misplaced or excessive admiration for a particular
person or thing” and “a person or things that is popular or fashionable, especially among a particular section of society.” With these definitions in mind, Geddy Lee of Rush referring to them as “the greatest cult band” (which simply must be true because no member of Rush displays much pride) makes a lot more sense. In the article “Rush: Steady As They Go,” the authors go into detail about how Rush is still successful and maintains a loyal fan base despite ignoring market trends and initially receiving much negative criticism from many rock music critics. This explains why movies such as The Rocky Horror Picture Show are considered cult films.
Rush: Time Stand Still Cover. 2016. rushisaband.com. jpeg. April 27, 2017 33
PRAXIS: THE CULT OF RUSH
Though this logically explains the use of the word “cult” when describing any band,
arguably any definition of cult would suffice for many of Rush’s fans. In the documentary film Rush: Time Stand Still, Ray Wawrzyniak, the man with the biggest collection of Rush memorabilia says himself something along the lines of “I’m a husband and I am a father first… but second on that list, I am a Rush fan” as he opens filing cabinets organized by year of pictures, posters, cassettes, CDs, vinyl LPs, and even imports of albums. While he is the most extreme, many Rush fans are like this: Rush, to a great degree, is a part of their life, nearly blurring the line between defining cult as purely unique or religiously remote. This is evidenced in their amity toward each other, annoyance with those who attack Rush, their push for Rush to be recognized on a more popular level, similar traits, and the desire to see as many live shows and collect as many Rush products --albums to memorabilia-- as possible. I will briefly go into greater detail from an outsider point of view on these criteria, then end with my own “personal testimony.”
First of all, there is an amazing hypothetical connection when two Rush fans meet. One
example from Time Stand Still is a lady who said that whenever she sees someone with a Rush shirt, she MUST talk to him or her. Right away, she needs to hear the other’s concert experience, favorite album, and other details as soon as she meets this person. Just like any other topic of interest, there is a bond when two people find their cherished commonality, but with Rush fans it seems much greater.
On the other hand Rush fans can be known to have a poor outlook on people who do
not at least like Rush a little, and vice versa. Despite Rush’s (slightly-fading) obscurity, the fans treat Rush as if they are as essential as Star Wars or Harry Potter. Just out of curiosity, I Googlesearched “Rush fans,” and before I could type anything else, some of the search options read: “rush fans nerds” and “rush fans are annoying.” Opening any of these webpages leads to forums talking about Rush fans as being clearly obsessive and critical of lax views of the band, as well as news articles stating that Rush is not cool, but the fans do not care.
34
GABRIEL BERNING
As pointed out previously, Rush fans ABSOLUTELY LOVE Rush, and as a result, they
want everyone else in the world to ABSOLUTELY LOVE Rush. In a similar vein to people sharing their organization, religion, or cult with others as a must, Rush fans have a passion to share their passion with the masses and obtain recognition for their beloved band. The greatest example of this ranged from 1999 to 2012 when Rush was eligible for the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, but was not yet inducted. While the matter was trivial to the band, Rush fans gave politics a run for its money by protesting outside the Hall, petitioning online, and slandering the Hall of Fame as stuck up and probably unworthy of Rush anyway. However, in 2013, The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame finally inducted Rush much to the pleasure of the fans and even to the slight satisfaction of the band who had already received numerous awards in their homeland of Canada.
While the previous criteria can be attributed to the zealous parts of many followings,
the traits of Rush fans can make Rush seem almost strictly on the extreme side of cultish. The average Rush fan, like any band member of Rush, is usually a nerdy male. While there are plenty of exceptions, this is often the case. In the film documentary Rush: Beyond the Lighted Stage, the drummer of “The Foo Fighters” says he can never seem to get his wife excited when he places Caress of Steel on the turntable and I have even read a blog from a girl complaining about her Rush-loving boyfriend. Ironically, her complaint was met with replies from other Rush fans saying why Rush is important and that she should be dating her boyfriend.
As far as actually listening to and following Rush, fans walk the walk as they talk the
talk. Rush certainly delivers with their nineteen studio albums, several live albums, and endless memorabilia, so the fans must collect. Case and point: Ray Wawrzyniak, the “husband, father, and Rush fan” mentioned earlier from Time Stand Still.
Before I give my “personal testimony,” it might surprise you when I disclaim that Rush
is my religion. Before I am a Rush fan, I am a son, brother, cousin, nephew, uncle, student, boyfriend, classmate, friend, and a practicing Roman Catholic. However, I will not deny that Rush did change my life and they still hold the highest honor on the podium of my favorite bands and artists. I would actually give them their own podium to be honest.
35
PRAXIS: THE CULT OF RUSH
The first time I ever heard of Rush was in the 8th grade from a fairly lax Rush fan. He
simply told me to check them out and I did not think too much of them. I thought the singer was a little weird and the music was okay, but I did not pursue them much further.
A year later, I bought my first iPod, an 8 GB Nano 5th generation, which I strove to fill
with music. Immediately I consulted my siblings for songs. While I found a lot of great tracks from them, one stood out in particular: “Tom Sawyer” by Rush. I still was not quite into it, but after many listens, I was hooked. After listening to it, I discovered the song “Limelight” and it immediately became my favorite song. That is when I began researching the band, borrowing albums, from the library and taking in as much information as I could about the band from articles and films. I rarely bought CDs, but you bet I bought seventeen of their nineteen studio albums (some on CD, some on cassette, and some on both media,) and I talked about Rush endlessly. If you asked me to name every Rush song in order of track listing on every album they own from 1974 to 1993, I would be able to do it.
Aside from Rush’s intrinsic influence, the band also acted as a gateway for me to other
obscure types of music such as progressive rock, electronic, and new wave. I must admit, Rush changed my view on music forever and it showed as I turned into a crazed Rush fan.
I developed the amity of Rush fans. I was always excited to talk about Rush especially
with other fans of Rush and people who simply like Rush. I also found myself taken aback when people claimed they hated Rush or when plenty say they have never heard of them (even though it took me a while before I discovered them.) While I was not as fervently pushing for the Hall of Fame Induction, I still stood by Rush when I could, even half-joking with my band director about making them the theme of our marching band show. I fit the traits mentioned earlier, since I am a male who enjoys older music and nerdy things like Star Wars and The Legend of Zelda. Last, but definitely not least, after collecting plenty of albums, I finally saw them live on their last tour. It was one of the most amazing experiences I have ever had. Rush had a long and very diverse set list, and performed incredibly well. That was probably my last and only chance to see Rush because they said it would be their last big tour and I paid a lot for the ticket, but it was well worth it, and I have a t-shirt to remember it by.
36
GABRIEL BERNING
That is a summary of my life in the “Cult of Rush.” To paraphrase The Blues Brothers, I
saw the light when I got into them seriously, and they opened many musical doors to other great bands and music genres for me. My last act of dedication toward Rush was on November 3rd, 2016, when I went to a movie theater to see the aforementioned film Rush: Time Stand Still. I went all by myself and sat in front of the rest of the audience while wearing my Rush R40 Tour T-Shirt. As I watched the film, I felt the nostalgia of the concert I attended and was fascinated by the new facts I learned. The music was great as always and while I feel like I am a huge Rush fan, I felt somewhat humbled to see even bigger Rush fans on the screen. Rush has had a greater impact on me than any other band I have listened to and that is why they hold a special place in my heart. Despite any negative, cultish connotations that exist, I am proud to call myself a Rush fan.
Berning, Gabriel. “Rush R40 Pre-Show Photo” 2015. jpeg.
37
PRAXIS: THE CULT OF RUSH Works Cited Rush: Beyond the Lighted Stage. Directed by Sam Dunn and Scot McFadyen, Banger Films, 2010. Rush: Time Stand Still. Directed by Dale Heslip, Fadoo Productions, 2016. Titus, Christa, and Ray Waddell. “Steady As They Go.” Billboard 122.44 (2010): 42-47.
Academic Search Complete. Web. 26 Jan. 2017.
38
GABRIEL BERNING
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Gabriel Berning is a third year Architecture student at the University of Cincinnati. He
was born and raised in Sidney, Ohio, where he found his love for creativity in writing, drawing, and music at a young age. Aside from writing and studying his major, he enjoys playing piano, singing, dancing, running, ice skating, and animating. Despite the demands of architecture, Gabriel hopes to be an architect someday while still making time for his family, friends, hobbies, and other interests and obligations. In the years before composing this portfolio, he has written poems, short stories, essays, and a couple of speeches both for classes and for recreation. While his previous writing compositions have not been published yet, his Architecture Portfolio and Resume can be found on this website, issuu.com.
Berning, Gabriel. “Dad, Me, and Geddy Lee� 2015. jpeg.
39
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Photo Bibliography for Cover Photos and Underlays Cover Photo Table of Contents Photo
Berning, Gabriel. “Rush R40� 2015. jpeg. Hille, Antonia. rush-1976. 2016. Getty Images. npr.org. jpeg. April 10, 2017.
p. 3-4
Rush Cover. 1974. jasondionne.bandcamp.com. jpeg. April 25, 2017.
p. 5-6
Fly By Night Cover. 1975. cygnus-x1.net. jpeg. March 30, 2017.
p. 7-8
Caress of Steel Cover. 1975. cygnus-x1.net. jpeg. March 30, 2017.
p. 9-10
2112 Cover. 1976. phoenixnewtimes.com. jpeg. April 11, 2017.
p. 11-12
A Farewell to Kings Cover. 1977. cygnus-x1.net. jpeg. March 30, 2017.
p. 13-14
Hemispheres Cover. 1978. cygnus-x1.net. jpeg. April 25, 2017.
p. 15-16
Permanent Waves Cover. 1980. cygnus-x1.net. jpeg. March 30, 2017.
p. 17-18
Moving Pictures Cover. 1981. cygnus-x1.net. jpeg. March 30, 2017.
p. 19-20
Signals Cover. 1982. cygnus-x1.net. jpeg. March 30, 2017.
p. 21-22
Grace Under Pressure Cover. 1984. cygnus-x1.net. jpeg. March 30, 2017.
p. 23-24
Power Windows Cover. 1985. noisey.vice.com. jpeg. March 30, 2017.
p. 25-26
Hold Your Fire Cover. 1987. globalnews.ca. jpeg. March 30, 2017.
p. 27-28
Presto Cover. 1989. cygnus-x1.net. jpeg. March 30, 2017.
p. 29-30
Roll Your Bones Cover. 1991. cygnus-x1.net. jpeg. March 30, 2017.
p. 31-32
Counterparts Cover. 1993. cygnus-x1.net. jpeg. March 30, 2017.
p. 33-34
Test For Echo Cover. 1996. cygnus-x1.net. jpeg. March 30, 2017.
p. 35-36
Vapor Trails Cover. 2002. cygnus-x1.net. jpeg. March 30, 2017.
p. 37-38
Snakes and Arrows Cover. 2007. cygnus-x1.net. jpeg. March 30, 2017.
p. 39-40
Clockwork Angels Cover. 2012. feelnumb.com. jpeg. March 30, 2017.
Back Cover
Exit Stage Left Cover. 1981. theanalogkidblog.com. png. April 18, 2017.
40
THANK YOU