My fully expressed response to your statement would likely lead us to a place this that thread shouldn't go. Let's just say I adamantly disagree with your point of view, as does Mr. Townshend (see "Beads on One String"). Apart from one very clumsy line that sticks in my throat ("the 19th day of a spring day" makes no sense, and would almost work if the word "of" was replaced with a pause), I really like this song. It certainly has a nostalgic attachment for me, as I still remember using it for an oral presentation in my Freshman Comp class in the Fall of 1982 very shortly after the album came out. Required British conscription for a minimum of 18 months, which sent young men all over The Empire, was eliminated just in time for the pillars of the British Invasion. Those born after October 1, 1939 were freed from the obligation. Without this legislation, there is surely no Beatles, Who or Rolling Stones as we knew them. Certainly that reality plays into this song, and Pete talked about it at length around the time that he made "White City".
It isn't a point of view, merely a reality. People fight from the schoolyard to the graveyard. I never said I agreed with it in practice.
Great insight. It's having Pete's vocals recorded so dry that causes me to love "Eminence Front" so much. Rather than blending into the music, his vocals kind of sit separate and distant from the music throughout the song. It's reminiscent of a lot of Ric Ocasek's vocals on a number of Cars songs ("You're All I've Got Tonight" and "Let The Good Times Roll" come to mind). Maybe it's due to his having a huge nose but Pete has a pretty nasally voice. The mixing decision to split off his nasally vocals to the extreme right of the stereo soundfield add to that dry and disconnected feeling that seems appropriate considering the subject matter of the song. Whether or not they intended for the vocals to turn out sounding that way, the final result was brilliant
I really like this song, but I have two big caveats: that “spring day in may” lyric is just awful, and the long instrumental section is boring - feels like it needed a solo of some kind overdubbed on top of it, but this seems to have been a thing Pete was doing at the time (the same lengthy one-note instrumental break was used in It’s In You and Dance It Away). But I can look past both of those things. Why didn’t they do this live?? It would have been awesome!
I wish they had, too. If they wanted to try out some new songs for the '82 tour, "I've Known No War" seemed like a logical choice. It's structure is similar to the one Pete used for "Who Are You." Once Roger finishes the verses, an instrumental section begins where things start quiet, slightly becoming louder, then the instruments rev up, then Roger cathartically belts out "War!" (or "Who!"), then the music settles back down where Daltrey starts another verse. Since "Who Are You" worked so well in concerts, "I've Known No War" may have had a similar effect if played live. But then again, maybe they didn't play it live for that very reason -- because it was too similar to "Who Are You" which was already a mainstay in their setlist and a crowd favorite. It also left them more room for them to play "Eminence Front" and "Cry If You Want"
I confess to never liking this song all that much musically nor as a political message. It seemed silly and/or obsolete as by the time the album was released in September the UK had just completed a successful military operation against Argentina (at a substantial cost in lives). Then there's the whole Northern Ireland operation which was still ongoing in 1982. Never know war? The sentiment that drove Pete to write this song may have been heartfelt but as an antiwar song it falls flat. Roger gives it his all but it's not enough to save this track. As noted by Mark in his review, "war is an atrocity, but realistically,.... it is an inevitability". On a more positive note, peace to all and enjoy a Happy Thanksgiving.
Way behind in this thread -- finally gotten around buying used vinyl copy of Face Dances couple of months ago, the poster was still with it.
I've Known No War is one of the better songs on the album. It's the most obvious example of a song "written to order" for the band after Pete asked them "what would you like me to write about?" but on the whole it turned out pretty good. The anti-nuclear message is somewhat "of its time" but is effectively executed. And musically it hearkens back to the classic Who sound, with its power chords and anthemic structure. No offense, but I think you're missing the point of the song's title. "I've Known No War" is meant to say "I've never been personally affected by war." The intent is to contrast the experiences of his generation with their parents and all previous generations. I recall John Lennon talking about how he would always hear speeches from his elders about how "You kids today have it easy. We had to live through the blitz." Lennon was too young to recall the blitz and of course Townshend was even younger and born after it ended. So the point is that Townshend never directly experienced war or had it affect his own life in any tangible way. The "police action" style war in the Falklands had no affect on British life, and with no conscription young people had no reason to fear that it would. This is underscored by the final verse, in which he talks about how he will never "know" war, because a hypothetical nuclear war would end his life immediately, before he had any time to experience or reflect upon its effects. This is a song where I miss Keith a lot. Or more accurately, I miss creative drumming, since it wouldn't have to be Keith, it's just that he would done a fine job. The power chording during the refrain screams for some dynamic drum fills. And the instrumental section beginning at 3:19 is sadly, the most boring and tedious minute on any Who album. In fact, it's probably the only moment on any Who album that I would describe as boring and tedious. First we get forty seconds of complete and utter repetition, where the same thing is played over and over. It literally sounds like the record is scratched and is repeating itself. And then the strings come in, but the keyboards and drums continue playing the same thing for forty more seconds. I know Keith wouldn't have tolerated playing the same thing for 80 seconds with no variation whatsoever. The long instrumental break in WGFA is interesting because there is variation and then a sense of building tension which is released by the scream. By contrast, this section is pure monotony. I've got to think that it's an instance where rushing through the recording left that bit undeveloped. Still, edit that out and you have a decent song. Huh? Don't you remember the dramatic moment at the concert for New York when they closed with this song? Not a dry eye in the place or a cigarette lighter unlit, since this song was the anthem of its generation, and everyone sang along. Sorry, couldn't resist a gratuitous shot at Parke Puterbaugh. In fairness to him though, he was just giving his boss (Jann Wenner) what he wanted. From what I've read, there was an unwritten rule that veteran classic rock acts who released an album and went on tour were to be given kid gloves record reviews, because that bought Rolling Stone backstage access and exclusive interviews. So Puterbaugh probably had his hands tied. Maybe he was even being sarcastic and deliberately writing a ridiculously over-the-top rave review. I'd like to think so.
I never thought of it as an anti-war song... I thought of it as an observation on the gap between the WW2 generation and the kids of the day, and a shout of rage at how quickly one button push could end it all.
First I’ve heard of this and I’m not surprised. These are pretty introspective for the guy who wrote Trick of the Light and You. I’ve really soured on JAEs songwriting in my old age and find it too big a contrast with Pete’s both lyrically and musically.
I've Known No War - this is an interesting track. It feels fairly confident. Roger as ever jumps at the opportunity to bark out some of Pete's more forthright lyrics. Kenny and John do what's required and nothing more, which could be a minor criticism. Not a huge amount melodically happening here, and perhaps a bit more invention on the bass could have spiced things up. Feels like a grower, then. I like the lyric but there's something missing - unless it's staring me in the face. I'm not sure what Pete's actually saying. Perhaps it's a sort of twisted relief, that he (and we) won't have to live through the terrible times his parents did - but that we pay for that privilege by living "in the shadow of the mushroom cloud" (Queen reference there). Which is all cool, but feels a little pat. It feels more like observation than statement. There's doubtless a lot to discuss, but this is a non political forum of course. I kinda wish Pete had had more to say, though. Still, not a bad song, one I'll happily revisit.
I'm not necessarily saying it works, and I don't know what Pete meant with it, but clearly the concept is for the keyboards, bass and drums to repeat the same thing hypnotically while the orchestra gradually swells over it. Why blame Kenney? For him (or Keith) to start improvising with the drum part wouldn't have supported the idea.
Here, Pete, let me rewrite that for you: "On the 19th day of the spring month of May...." Scans fine, says what you meant. I always thought Known no War was a smart piece of writing, perhaps not yoked to the most impressive composition, arrangement, or playing. Maybe a little too obvious an attempt at a "Who epic, like you like them, fans of classic rock!" Ironic, I don't recall EVER hearing it played on the radio BY the AOR station playing Baba and WAY and WGFA three times a day each.....
Ha! Yeah, it would never have been a classic. It’s undercooked in a couple of different ways. But I sure would’ve enjoyed the show more if it replaced It’s Hard in the repertoire! Interesting point about it being made to order... it really is a “formula” song. But when it works (fantastic guitar! Super-committed vocal!) it really works. I’ve been praising Kenney for NOT being Keith on some of these songs - that is, he’s playing stuff that works but that Keith never would’ve played (Eminence Front, for instance). But in this case it sounds like a first rehearsal - it’s not a streamlined groove, it’s just boring. It doesn’t kill it for me but it’s another place where the track falls short. But if the album was 12 tracks of this quality I’d be satisfied.
Fair enough. I'm sure Kenney was playing what Pete wanted, misguided as that was. So it's not fair for me to blame him. On the other hand, in that instance I don't think Keith would have been willing to play what Pete wanted. That was the great dynamic of The Who at their peak... they took Pete's songs and imposed their own wills upon them, and sometimes took them in directions Pete hadn't thought of and maybe didn't even agree with. A lot of that was lost when Keith died. To me, the moment is not hypnotic, it's incredibly tedious. It might have helped if they'd started the strings sooner, rather than having a full 40 seconds of repetition before the strings even come in.
I've Known No War: 6,5/10 The song is not bad, but I don't like it too much either. While on paper, there's a enough stuff to like (the anthemic structure, the well-worded statement, Rog's state of the art battle-shouts), it somehow doesn't click for me... I think my problem is it sounds a bit constructed and superficial: It starts rather bold (somehow like a new-era Baba O'Reilly), but then segues into a lighthearted verse riff not too far removed from "Slip Kid" which I find distracting from the serious (is it serious?) topic. Pete's harmonizing in "...and I'm sure" is unconventional but welcomed, and in the next moment that's already gone again to showcase some U2-flavoured guitar work accompanying the chorus. That sequencing gets repeated, and that's it more or less. The middle part sounds... vacant, I'd say, and from my POV, the song could as well simply end right there - apart from how the band comes in again and the "outro" (I struggle to use that word here) is plain boring and does nothing but stretch the song. I also think the minimalistic approach in the rhythm section (read: "Kenney's and John's playing") didn't work out. There's stuff that works splendid that way, kind of hypnotically sucking you in, but it just doesn't work here. Not Kenney's fault, I think he was told to do exactly that, as well as John's doing far less then the song could take... As for the lyrics, I think that's the next problem: it is not a decidedly anti-war song, it's only a bit of an anti-war song, combined with just noticing there's a generation not knowing war. AFAIK, it's true that most (if not all) generations in the history of the human kind were directly affected by the consequences (and horrors) of war, and that indeed the baby-boomers were the first generation in western culture that didn't have to deal with that directly and were spared from its accompanying circumstances - but as I said before, "I've Known No War" treats this mere superficial here. I can see how the band was amazed with the song: The statement itself not only sounds really good, but also serves well to spark that old unifying spirit inititated with "My Generation" and continued with "Won't Get Fooled Again" - but I really think it falls totally flat, especially when compared to those iconic songs - a prevented classic, so to say, burried under the expectations it was designed to meet. The potential might be there, but it isn't fulfilled - maybe the rushed, unprepared situation and the work ethic ("just tell me what you want me to write about and I'll do!") are to blame here.
I tend to associate the lyric with the FDR quote " We have nothing to fear but fear itself".. How fear can debilitate a person in any environment. The analogy "beachhead is the street" could be seen as one with Normandy, which might bring about criticism.. No city streets are really that bad.... I still like it as an analogy, and I thing it's a great rock singing line. I've known no War For me an absolute masterpiece. Love everything about it. Performance/lyrics/recording itself/song itself....Verses absolutely kill
Yes, I've edited it so the strings come in faster and it does help.... though for me, it's the strings that don't cut it as something interesting to bring on over the pulse of the band. It's not particularly striking or dramatic stuff they're playing. As producer I think I would have asked Pete, got anything else?
I’ve Known No War: 2/5 I like the way it functions on the album, but when I hear it all alone? It feels pretty forced. I used to go to the mat to defend the album, but this reappraisal might be changing my mind!
