Category Archives: Genre: Experimental

The Monks – Three Fan Albums

For those not in the know, fan albums are the attempts of me and many others to take songs and put them on an album, typically they’re made to improve upon something, such as an existing album or to take non-album tracks and put them on an album.

The Monks are generally known and defined by their one and only LP, as if nothing else was ever made. While that’s not far from the truth, there is a little more they did. That material is consistently less hard hitting than the famous album. The group are still surprisingly strong at infusing psychedelia and pop, with the drumming a particular highlight. That being said, these aren’t must-listen recordings by any means. While The Sonics managed to get almost a second full length worth of hard edged tracks, and all the way to a third of very quality work, these stray Monks would almost best be described as a different band. If you like the famous Black Monk Time and want more of it, you should go to other bands with a proto-punk style, as Black is all you’ll get from the Monk pot. If you want decent rock tunes and interesting alternate versions of songs, then here you go, what is essentially another group.

These two album names were apparently considered to be the names of potential follow-up albums. I don’t think they’re great titles, especially because of the change in sound for one and the same songs of the other, but I thought it was cute to do. If albums of new material had come out under those names, it probably wouldn’t have been like what’s below, with album-only tracks that were never recorded.

The three “fan albums” are Silver Monk Time, which details demos and live cuts of what’s on Black and also… Gold Monk Time, which features no overlapping songs with Black. The third are stray “modern” recordings by members of the band. Just for fun, also included is the live reunion album and more solo projects, as well as a list of what exists, but I couldn’t find.

THE MONKS – SILVER MONK TIME

TRACKLISTING

SIDE A

  1. “Boys Are Boys (1964)”
  2. “Monk Time”
  3. “Love Came Tumblin’ Down”
  4. “Space Age”
  5. “We Do Wie Du”
  6. “Boys Are Boys (1965)”
  7. “Pretty Suzanne”
  8. “Higgle-Dy Piggle-Dy”

SIDE B

  1. “Oh, How To Do Now (1965)”
  2. “I Hate You”
  3. “Boys Are Boys (1966)”
  4. “Oh, How To Do Now (1966)”
  5. “Complication”
  6. “I Can’t Get Over You”
  7. “Cuckoo”

THE MONKS – GOLD MONK TIME

TRACKLISTING

SIDE A

  1. “Monk Chant”
  2. “I Can’t Get Over You”
  3. “Cuckoo”
  4. “Love Can Tame the Wild”
  5. “He Went Down to the Sea”
  6. “Pretty Suzanne”

SIDE B

  1. “Hushie Pushie”
  2. “There She Walks”
  3. “Julia”
  4. “P.O. Box 3291”
  5. “I Need U Shatzi”
  6. “Yellow Grass”
  7. “I’m Watching You”

GARY BURGER & DAVE DAY – IT IS CHARLES TIME

TRACKLISTING

SIDE A

  1. The Spectors – “Oh, How To Do Now” (1993)
  2. Alec Empire & Gary Burger – “Monk Time” (2006)
  3. The Fall & Gary Burger – “Higgle-Dy Piggle-Dy” (2006)
  4. The Havletones & Dave Day – “That’s My Girl” (2006)

SIDE B

  1. Charles Paul Wilp & The Monks – “It Is Charles Time” (2006)
  2. Faust & Gary Burger – “Beware (The Transatlantic Feedback)” (2006)
  3. Gary Burger – “I Feel Fine” (2013)

LINKS

  1. The Monks – Black Monk Time (1966) – Spotify, YouTube
  2. The Monks – Silver Monk Time (1966) – YouTube, Spotify (Incomplete)
  3. The Monks – Gold Monk Time (1967) – Spotify, YouTube
  4. Minnesoda, Featuring Eddie Shaw – Minnesoda (1972) – YouTube
  5. Lightning, Featuring Eddie Shaw – “William Tell Overture (The Lone Ranger Theme)” (1975) – Spotify, YouTube
  6. The Monks – Let’s Start a Beat – Live from Cavestomp (2000) – Spotify, YouTube
  7. Gary Burger & Dave Day – It Is Charles Time (2013) – Spotify, YouTube
  8. Eddie Shaw & The Hydraulic Pigeons – Jass In Six Pieces (2013) – Spotify, YouTube
  9. Gary Burger – BurgerMONK 2010 (2016) – Spotify, YouTube

MISSING RECORDINGS

  1. Dave Day – “I Want The Right To Be Free” (1979)
  2. Dave Day – “G.I. Blues” (1979)
  3. Dave Day – “Application For Your Love” (1985)
  4. Dave Day – “Stars Shining In The Night” (1985)
  5. Gary Burger – What’s Your Limit (1992)
  6. Dave Day – Having A Party With Dave Havlicek (1994)
  7. Dave Day – “I Want The Right To Be Free” (1997)
  8. Dave Day – “Don’t Ha Ha” (1997)

THE MONKS ARE

  • Gary Burger – lead guitar, lead vocals, tambourine
  • Larry Clark – organ, backing vocals, piano, tambourine
  • Dave Day – banjo, rhythm guitar, banjo guitar, tambourine, backing vocals
  • Roger Johnston – drums, backing vocals
  • Eddie Shaw – bass guitar, backing vocals, trumpet, brass instruments

This is a passion of mine and if one person likes what I do, I’ll feel honored. I like suggestions on what artist to cover next, so if you know of one you’d like me to look at, feel free to suggest ‘em!

Syd Barrett 1971-1974 Stray Tracks Review

Syd Barrett with Stars in 1972

February 16th, 1971 Show for Sounds of the Seventies

The spacious guitar and vocals are beautiful. The “pleases” sound pleading. An announcer says Syd was writing lots of new songs. That appears to be false, so it’s curious where he got that information from. “Love Song” doesn’t get a chance to really take off as this version is shortened for some reason.

“Last Minute Put Together Boogie Band (‘Cambridge’ – January 27th, 1972)”

It’s hard not to love an audience clapping for Syd as he goes on stage. Musically, all you get is a little noodling, probably not even by Syd. Still, this doesn’t hurt to have.

Last Minute Put Together Boogie Band ‎- Six Hour Technicolour Dream Cambridge Show (Only the tracks with Syd) (January 27th. 1972)

Starting “Drinkin’ That Wine” with the singer saying it’s the sort of track you listen to while going to church and getting drunk is a pretty amusing way to start this, perfectly capturing its tone of a bluesy hippie band. “Number Nine” has a great instrumental section. The singer is very soulful, most notably on “Gotta Be A Reason”. Near the end of Reason, the guitar sounds similar to the playing on “Interstellar Overdrive”.

Steve Peregrin Took Tracks, “Molecular Lucky Charm” and “Syd’s Wine”

Syd’s presence is not confirmed. The sound quality is not great, especially for the vocals. The guitar playing and noises create a really solid atmosphere and seem like something Syd would come up with. The entrancing guitar is reminiscent of “Terrapin”. Syd used a lot of tap percussion, like bongos, which Wine has. I think it’s pretty likely Syd is on these. Regardless of the vaSydity, these are interesting psychedelic folk tracks that also feel like T. Rex for obvious reasons.

The 1974 guitar recordings

The 1974 recordings do feature Syd’s proficiency and unique style. While they are obviously incomplete, they do satisfy an itch for those willing to scratch the bottom of the Syd barrel. These prove that Syd still had guitar talent in 1974. These aren’t nearly as directionless as people say. You can detect some care in the playing. These would work as guitar lines of a full song. I wonder who the bassist is. “Boogie #2” has some cool psychedelic guitar playing in the beginning. “If You Go, Don’t Be Slow #1” has particularly warm sounds, though overall there’s sadly too little going on. Most of the tracks could benefit from more to make them last the time they do, but they’re still nice to listen to and not a bad way to spend twenty minutes.

“Boogie #2 (Fragment – Bernard White ‘94 Mix)”

This is too fragmented to get much out of. It’s certainly far less listenable than the original version of this song. The mix doesn’t even sound very different.

“Was That Okay”

This is just Syd saying he thinks something was okay. No music! Of course this is the best track of the lot!

The 1974 recordings with bass and drums added by Richard Hall

A fan version by a Richard Hall adds bass, drums, and minor effects, which brings this to another level, medleying many songs and amplifying the impact they need. Here you get the softer side of Syd’s playing, the jam side, the meaner side. If this album was finished and released at the time, with Syd then retiring, it might be considered a solid and appropriate send off, with him touching on his various eras, while still being extremely solid all the way through.

OVERVIEW

One of the more elusive Syd projects is Stars, a band with bassist Jack Monck and drummer John “Twink” Alder that was only around briefly in 1972. While some of their shows were recorded, none have surfaced. While I wouldn’t turn down any Syd content, these don’t interest me compared to most of his canon because they were playing songs Syd already recorded in studio with Pink Floyd or for his solo work. That is unless there were really some new songs or new sections for old songs. However, we kind of get some Stars material in the above recordings. While the 1971 stuff’s bassist is usually credited to David Gilmour, Monck has also sometimes been. It’s not impossible it really was Monck. The Took recordings probably have Twink on drums (It’s not for certain as Duncan Sanderson is also credited on drums on the compilation album which features them). The closest we get to Stars is the Boogie Band, which has a concert recording where Monck and Twink are on every track, and Syd is on some.

While these later recordings aren’t as approachable as earlier ones, they still are solid, especially in their guitar playing and offer a fascinating final musical chapter for this otherworldly person. For those interested in more artistic expression from Barrett can go to his painting and sculpting. Every bit of Syd is well worth at least a single listen/experience.

Ron Geesin and Roger Waters – Music from The Body (1970) Review

Who knew Roger Waters ASMR folk music would be so captivating?

Music from The Body, almost certainly accidentally, demonstrates Roger yet again doing something Syd Barrett did first, folk music. This is essentially his first solo album. Apparently he was involved with every track, but I can’t say for sure. What is known is he has relatively few writing credits or vocals. What he does get he uses well. Despite how rough his voice often is, he can be so soft and gentle here that it’s near angelic. The guitar playing is also so pretty and pleasant. This folk styling suits him well. His lyrics about childhood and later environmental issues make for powerful contrast. The latter material is especially strong in light of modern problems. “Breathe” is perhaps my favorite track here.

The instrumentals by Ron Geesin, which dominate the album, are mixed-to-poor. The first track is disgusting, containing farts and burps and sounds of that sort. The first song on each side of the album are the weakest, sounding like a random assortment of noises. The b-side opener is annoying in such a way that suggests the two were trying to irritate. Many of the instrumentals feel directionless on their own, though they would probably make a lot more sense as soundtrack music, which they were made for. As is, they sometimes seem to never end.

While the tracks are often very hectic, being a cacophony of noise, some tracks are very melodic, like “Old Folks Ascension” and “Piddle in Perspex”. Tracks like those are sometimes boring and insignificant, while something like “More Than Seven Dwarfs in Penis-Land” is either filler or intentionally crude. A good balance between experimental and structured is sometimes captured, like on “The Womb Bit”, “Embryo Thought”, “Dance of the Red Corpuscles”, “Bed-Time-Dream-Clime”, and “Sea Shell and Soft Stone”. The first and last feature a Waters co-write. Those tracks feel fluid and mark what could’ve been a solid direction for Pink Floyd to go in (and did in a way). The first three would’ve worked as one big piece. “Bed-Time-Dream-Clime” is a favorite, due to some lovely guitar playing.

Side-b seems to have some of the lesser instrumentals. The second last of which is a particular lowlight. “Mrs. Throat Goes Walking”’s vocal sounds also seem designed to irritate. “Sea Shell and Soft Stone” features good orchestration. An alternate version of the music that puts it right after “Sea Shell and Stone”, from around the start of side-a uses it better. They tie together very strongly, Soft escalating the former song. Soft ends like it’d be the last track, then it isn’t. The beginning of the actual last is a nice surprise. “Give Birth to a Smile” feels like a traditional rock song. It features Pink Floyd backing, so that makes sense. It doesn’t match the avant-garde or folk material before, as it’s the only rock track. It is about as good as the folk material, though the lack of Roger’s intense vocal puts it slightly below.

The film versions of the Roger songs are generally better, but Smile‘s studio version is more cohesive and benefits from crisper quality. The female backing singers are really good. The film versions have more sound effects, which adds to the world Roger is creating. They’re wisely kept simple, with things like birds chirping. The soundtrack versions are still very solid, but less special and less impactful due to the lack of that added element. “Roger’s Proposition”, which was only in the film, is more hippie junk. It’s like you got him stoned and asked him to talk about whatever that could be passably related to the rest of the album.

OVERVIEW

As has been a theme, Pink Floyd material that wasn’t on their albums was better than their albums. That being said, the Roger tracks would almost definitely not work with a band. If they were put on a Floyd album as they are, that might seem too strange as it wouldn’t really be Floyd. It would’ve benefited the group to get in whatever mindset they needed to make songs of this quality. The Geesin cuts are definitely a niche. If this was to be constructed for the sake of a Floyd fan, it would’ve been nice to get a Roger-led EP with these tracks on it. This marks an oddity for him, due to his reasonably different voice that makes him hard to identify at points. Those are just about the ones that are strong enough for repeat listening.

Pink Floyd – Ummagumma (1969) Review

Gigi

Ummagumma is either a dream or an acid trip, depending on how you look at it. Certainly not something coming from the unimpeded mind, at least as a whole. It’s certainly an oddity, starting with a full disc of old favorites done live, then a studio disc of essentially solo material. No one appears on anyone else’s track. This really hurts the album as Richard Wright and David Gilmour are just not as good of drummers as Nick Mason. Roger Waters is not as good of a guitar player as David. The live and studio sides also don’t blend together. Why weren’t they separate albums? They could’ve also gone the whole hog and interspersed them, so you don’t get too much of one. The manufactured-psychedelic cover emphasizes the music’s nature.

The live side plays it too safe. Their points of diverging from the studio equivalents are where they’re best. Take the point of “Astronomy Domine” where it dies down for a bit. It’s a welcome addition. “Careful with That Axe, Eugene” is the only one that really works as the other three feel far too plain and expected. The original studio version feels incomplete, so this one creates a lot of space, and emphasizes things like Roger’s scream. It’s the most different from its studio version, unlike the others that feel like rehearsals. The live vocals on every track are flat. The ending of “Saucerful” is especially weak due to the vocals not soaring. It needs to feel grand and it doesn’t. Roger’s scream doesn’t suffer from this issue probably because it’s loud.

“Sysyphus Part 1” is far too sudden an opening for the studio tracks. It’s supposed to be this big opener to the studio side, but the drumming is so poor it can’t get off the ground. As a composition, it’s not too bad. Fortunately it’s only a minute. “Part 2” benefits from Rick’s stylish keyboard playing. Not the greatest number ever, but Rick injects personality into the notes which make it hard to hate. “Part 3” could about pass as a Nick Mason track due to the percussion-centered nature. While Part 2 is a little mindless due to what can feel like random playing, Part 3 eliminates any soul or ability to be subtle. The missing ingredient is probably the keyboard. “Part 4” has similar limitations.

“Grantchester Meadows” is a nice idea that would be improved conceptually on the Roger-on-guitar 1970 track, “If”. Grantchester could benefit from being a little shorter and having David on guitar, though Roger turns in a quality vocal and good enough guitar playing for this to be one of the highlights. “Several Species of Small Furry Animals Gathered Together in a Cave and Grooving with a Pict” is rightfully often considered the worst of the bunch. It feels like a prank to pass off a bunch of random sounds and yelling as music. There’s little sense of rhythm or thought having gone into it. Roger’s vocal is reminiscent of the “How can you have any pudding?” bit from The Wall.

We’re introduced to “The Narrow Way” with David’s excellent guitar playing, which contrasts Roger’s. It outstays its welcome far more than Grantchester, though. It goes on too long without an idea, feeling like a tolerable practice session. The repetitiveness of “Part 2” doesn’t help in making the record not feel like a demo. “Part 3” is the most like a standard Pink Floyd song, though it has the fault of lacking an idea to ground it. It would be better with the actual band on it. “The Grand Vizier’s Garden Party”’s highlights are the opening and closing segments, which collectively are a minute and a half. They have the good graces to not try to be more than they’re not, doing their job as a beginning and end. They make use of a pretty flute solo. The actual track is like Several Species, feeling like a joke. It has better rhythm, so it’s not quite as bad. The drumming is also noticeably sharp, but it can’t save the whole piece.

OVERVIEW

At its best, the album feels like an expression of the little quirks of this great band. There is value when looking at this as a distillation of their stranger qualities. As something to sit down and enjoy as music, it mostly fails. The album feels like a stop-gap. “We need a new album STAT, let’s record anything now.” The argument can be made that queues are being taken from the Syd Barrett-led improvisations, but now they’re so directionless that Syd’s influence is less apparent. A committed fan can get something out of the various elements that work and to be nice, the many negatives aren’t so bad for a one-time listen. It also might make more sense as something to listen to as you doze off. For fun, I’ll sequence an album of the quality tracks. I’m leaving off the just alright “Astronomy Domine”, “Sysyphus Part 1”, and “The Narrow Way Parts 1 and 3”. First is “The Grand Vizier’s Garden Party – Entrance”, then “Sysyphus Part 2”, “Grantchester Meadows”, “Careful with That Axe, Eugene”, and finally, “The Grand Vizier’s Garden Party – Exit” for a twenty-one minute album. A fourth of the album being good is not too bad, considering its faults being more memorable.

The Chaser (1928) Review // Applying Queer Theory In A Picture Book Review!

Harry Langdon is yet another black and white comedian that missed my radar when I was discovering a lot of the greats. The one and only Langdon film I’ve seen is Three’s a Crowd in 2019. After learning of ‘queer’ themes in his next film, The Chaser, it became too intriguing to turn down. There’s an interesting article giving its own take on the film called The Trans* Fantasy in Harry Langdon’s The Chaser, written by Sabrina Sonner, which further intrigued me to this story. Langdon’s character is both disarmingly innocent and simple, while having layers underneath. He also plays well enough as a silent clown that does silly things, a uniformity of essentially all these types of comedies. Not a quality of them all is the little ways Langdon can give deeper emotions to his role. After the proper story has started and Harry is clad in a dress, he runs up the stairs while hiking up the outfit. He runs with a youthful drive to manage with what’s going on and solve the stairs in his own way. Most would just go up the stairs normally. When he’s upset later, he jumps up and down with a face of not knowing how to understand the situation, while his distress shines to the surface. We even learn of this character just by how still he sits, like he is a nervous child.

Langdon is great at directing. The lighting captures the tone of a given scene. Many here are damp and moody, so as to suggest the issue at hand. The camera can stare at a character like it’s digging into their soul. Some of those long takes and dry angles can make us feel like we’re trapped in a distressed person’s head. After a scene in court, we learn that something strange was ruled by the judge, with excellent buildup to what the ruling was… that Harry and his wife need to swap their gender roles for a while. The film has generally good editing, but occasional moments that look poor; as if the movie had to be rushed. At one point, all the food in Harry’s skirt disappears after a cut.

Gladys McConnell, Harry’s wife, is also a great actor, despite her limited screen time. Take the scene of her crying or her “acting like a man”, telling Harry to make her eggs. It’d be worthwhile to see more of how her character thinks and feels. She never minds or complains about acting masculine. Assuming she likes it, let’s see her enjoying herself more clearly. If she doesn’t, let’s get some of that. Confusingly, the wife never wears pants. Perhaps the reason she doesn’t is that it might seem too much like a challenge of power. Didn’t want it to seem like that’s something they should be allowed to wear. A man in a dress on the other hand is considered more silly. Harry’s wife is very stylish in the film, while he isn’t.

The first forty minutes follow Harry’s confrontation with his gender-problem, which is very compelling with a lot of sharp scenes. It’s such a shame that the last twenty minutes see a change from this. There’s an unrelated comedy sequence that feels like it was lifted from a one-reel short and thrown in. To top it off, a friend of Harry’s is introduced suddenly when he easily could’ve been included earlier. There’s also a little plot point related to the judge that has no payoff. Why include it? Afterwards there’s a section that is reminiscent of experimental films. This ending third being so out of place and strange suggests it really does have a place, it’s just under the surface. Still, the sacrifice of the story in the first two-thirds is so frustrating that the film can be a disappointment. There was so much that could’ve happened.

SPOILERS

In the beginning, Harry gets home late, so his wife and mother-in-law incorrectly believe he was having an affair with other women. His typical quiet and nervous nature makes him look guilty. The mother-in-law is so furious that she tries to shoot him. She has the line, “I’ll show you how to run around after wine, women and blondes!-” After the duo swap roles, Harry doesn’t initially seem to mind much, just trying to do what he has to. He doesn’t appear to like it, but can easily cope. His wife is far more confident, seeming to really enjoy being assertive. The duo don’t wear their familiar clothes even when no one is around to see them. Even though arguably there was no chance to, a scene of them more expressly hating this would make sense in a story that doesn’t want to challenge 1920s ideals and such a scene easily could’ve been included. They do ultimately change back, but because of outside factors.

One man, who Harry seemingly doesn’t know well, calls Harry madame and his wife his husband. He is explicitly shown to be attracted to Harry. Two other men also have romantic attraction to Harry. Harry is horrified by this and the unwanted kiss of one. In the finest scene of the whole picture, Harry looks at himself in the mirror. While the character is usually timid, here he looks angry and calls himself a sissy, not targeting the man who sexually harassed him, but himself. The lighting is dark and a little angular, as if depicting something scary, yet it’s just normal Harry; which shows how he feels. He possibly thinks he’s gay just for receiving a kiss from a man and can’t handle such a thing, not being able to handle the perception that would afflict him. From here, he seems to more mind his new feminine role. That does introduce a plot hole of why he wouldn’t just take the jail sentence instead of the gender punishment.

From this point on, the film becomes more absurdist and strange. Harry decides to kill himself. He commits to it, but circumstance saves him. It’s a little silly he would rather die than take the jail sentence, which suggests this is supposed to be a ridiculous way to solve the problem. You could say he wanted to die because of being gay, but it still comes off as too sudden. There should be more of him hating the situation first. Harry writes a letter to his wife, whom he mistakenly calls his husband, but he crosses it out and writes “wife”. To contrast, his wife never calls him her wife. After McConnell stretches her acting chops by crying and Harry is shown to be missing, one of the wife’s friend says after seeing her friend find her husband’s suicide note, “Well, goodnight, dearie – we’ve had a lovely evening!”

Probably the most complicated scene of the whole film is when Harry is kissed by a milkman and doesn’t seem to mind. He doesn’t in any way show a dislike of the kiss, though he didn’t ask for it. Based on how Harry was positioned, he was arguably expecting it and fine with it happening. This isn’t directly acknowledged in the story. The milkman also never appears before or after. Right after, Harry’s friend, Bud, shows up and says, “Take off those skirts! Be a man before your voice changes.” After this, we move to Harry wearing pants and the main plot being kind of dropped. Arguably Harry here is consciously rejecting the kiss that just happened by dressing male. It’s worth noting that he dressed male because he was told to. The movie unfortunately has this weird golf sequence near the end and only returns to the main plot briefly. Will Harry act like how the judge hoped he would after the film? Is there a poignant lack of resolution? Does Harry have to challenge himself or his life? No. The movie just doesn’t tie that up! At least not unless you take certain interpretations from what happens in the last third.

Bud breaking golf sticks could be intended to portray a very aggressively manly man. He’s firing off a lot of self-destructive anger. He later is with a bunch of women and fits in, as if he is a man that knows how to “treat a woman”. When the two find the group of women, the movie becomes much slower for this segment. We get surrealist static shots of Harry and characters moving slowly. Two women he kisses and/or embraces fall ill afterwards. The sickliness and slow pace is like the movie is dying. The scene is so moody and lacking in humor that it suggests some experimental edge to Langdon, like he wanted to intricately portray something, but what doesn’t come across. The lack of stronger things to infer could suggest he didn’t know how to make such a film properly.

Because of Harry being blamed for the women getting sick, the two men have to leave. After an accident, Harry in the car flies down a hill. Him going down it takes a while, but it wasn’t shown to be so long earlier. The car crashes and Harry flies into his house, a bucket of white powder that sadly wasn’t established earlier falls on him. Harry not dying from that could suggest this movie isn’t trying to tackle realism. That’s such a goofy moment that feels out of place from the initial serious comedy and later surreal sequence, though fits reasonably well with the golf portion. There could’ve been more value to the golf sequence or him falling down a steep hill. He could try and perhaps fail to act masculine or feminine, proving some kind of point. That’s not to say he had to act differently, but it could’ve made those sequences matter more in an on-the-surface way.

While probably not, there could be a sexual meaning to certain moments. Harry accepts a kiss from the milkman, but rejects it from someone that sold him items for a baby; Harry hands golf clubs to Bud, who then angrily breaks the phallic-shaped objects; women Harry kisses fall unconscious, with him not kissing his wife at the end of the film; and Harry falling into white powder at the end. All these could suggest that Harry likes receiving male affection and doesn’t fit in with women. The clubs could suggest his friend rejecting homosexuality and finding comfort with women. Harry wants to do the same but it just doesn’t work out for him. Harry handing the clubs to Bud could represent Harry making or wanting to make an advance on him, which is turned down.

Harry does some unlikable things, like kiss a woman without consent. The movie doesn’t “reward” him or clearly state he’s in the wrong. There’s an unreal feeling to how he’s depicted, sometimes childlike and sometimes broken. Based on scenes like Harry calling himself a sissy and being unable to handle his emotions, the film could be about his character confronting his homosexuality, transsexuality, or gender non conforming behavior. The film is like a dream a child might have, specifically a misogynistic one. Harry is an average married man who is accused of doing something ‘adult’ that the child may not understand. Based on how Harry didn’t do such a thing and was just watching a party, you could imagine a child thinking sex might be done by going to a party and cheating by doing that when you’re not supposed to be there.

The child then thinks he’s queer because another man kissed him and is afraid of that. When he is “treated like a woman”, he can’t handle it and tries to kill himself, with him escaping death by absurdist circumstances. The suicide could represent the extreme places a dream can go. Him referring to his wife as his husband could mean he liked the idea of having a husband, but was able to not really address that. If he liked being kissed by men, that’d be harder to push aside. Given that he does really like kissing men, his guard can be later down and can enjoy the milkman’s kiss. The golf sequence matches how dreams can diverge into something only loosely related to what came before, with some hints like Harry’s friend being very masculine and breaking the golf clubs. It also served as a distraction from Harry with the milkman. The male-attraction does creep back in. If Harry likes being alone with a man, but doesn’t want to like it, he could queue in what else but a group of women?

Harry kissing the women represents him finally actually doing the cheating, possibly because he thinks it’ll make him “a real man to just take any woman he wants”, though it doesn’t work. Him kissing women doesn’t fit him, when he tries they go sick. Harry arguably accepts his femininity when after he golfed and “acted like a man”, he crashed into his house into some powder. That incident realistically should’ve killed someone. The powder making him look like a ghost could mean that he did die, except only this need to be masculine did. What’s left is a happy ending of him in that dress and the person in his life he loves not appearing to mind. Their bond is now stronger due to self acceptance. Due to the film demonstrating that gender roles are only as valid as we humans want them to be, the return of the opening title card, “In the beginning, God created man in his own image and likeness. A little later on, he created woman.” at the end could be considered ironic due to the film challenging gender roles. Also, the car crashing through billboards can signify that these sorts of “gender crises” are unnecessary and started by culture and social expectations hitting people in the head.

On the other hand, the women Harry kisses becoming ill could also represent his internal rejection of his feminine leanings, not his heterosexual. The brain wants to “kill the femininity.” Harry getting away with kissing a woman without consent and getting in a dangerous stunt that he makes it out of okay suggests that this aggressive behavior is fine to him. He acts like, “I’m such a man that I can do unsafe things and be fine afterwards!” Despite this, Harry doesn’t act too differently for a lot of the runtime, with him not embracing or rejecting any part of himself or acting differently. He rejects what others label onto him, like “woman”. That could mean he’s unwilling to consider femininity or he is still a valid man even if society doesn’t consider him to be one. At least from a simplistic view, the worst thing that could befall someone like this would be for society to just decide he’s a woman. It doesn’t have to make sense or be true, he just is. He takes it better than you might expect from someone with “toxic” traits.

Harry being in the incident that should’ve killed him and then the powder in the dress means that what is supposed to die is him accepting his femininity. Him in embrace with his wife could mean running to those gender roles and not allowing himself to consider being gay, with the end title card referring to Christianity, which especially in 1928 wouldn’t accept gender divergence. Harry and his wife’s relationship not being healthy is suggested by the reason they reconnect after their rough patch being that she thought he killed himself. That’s not anything inherent to him as a person. She was just afraid of losing him. That can ignite good times, but their actual issues aren’t solved. That would suggest that what Harry really needs is to reject being hyper masculine, but he won’t.

Harry is not good at being a typical male or even a typical female. No matter what he wants to be, his friends want him to be, or society wants him to be, he has qualities of both. The different interpretations could suggest that he is hard to be “boxed into” an identity or that it will take a lot of work to accept himself as something, whether it be a masculine straight man or not. Instead he is more complex. Maybe he’s not gay, but bisexual; or he’s transgender but still loves and wants to be with his wife? Maybe he’s a straight man that likes wearing dresses? The film portraying Harry and especially his wife as comfortable with having elements of both shows this complexity and could hopefully mean that the intended message is that you should be allowed to explore yourself and dress how you like.

OVERVIEW

The Chaser is a film probably everyone interested in silent films, experimental films, queer films, and maybe, maybe films in general should watch. It not focusing much on its original and great, great premise to go with a loosely related segment that could be its own film is a tragedy. The “heightened realism” earlier scenes have is phenomenal. With both this film and Langdon’s previous directed feature, Three’s a Crowd, they have segments that feel out of place and like filler. Certain scenes don’t make much sense or aren’t comedic. Thus, they are ripe for analysis and are great films for thinking about. In a different time, Langdon could’ve been popular with fans of experimental films or if his stories were more fleshed out he could be more popular with silent film fans of the now. Due to the “messy” movie we have to watch, it can’t be recommended on the basis of wanting a good story, but there is more to it if you’re willing to give it a chance.