We’ve been getting some eerily pleasant weather for Cleveland in late February, and I can’t decide if it’s a perfect countermeasure against the added pressure of encroaching midterms or an alluring distraction from, well, everything worldly. The people I'm closest with will escape this place into their own lives in three months, and those that remain won’t see me around CWRU in 2025. I’ve been trying since January to pry my focus away from school and extracurriculars to apply to even one summer internship, to no avail; the irony there lies in my sparse, manageable workload that I barely conquer each week while everyone I know either worries about getting a job, or already has one. Widening the scope just ushers in numerous overseas conflicts on a scale of wanton chaos that’d be beyond human comprehension five decades ago, not to mention that the not-so-distant month of November doesn’t bode well for domestic politics. Then again, neither does this month, if my roommates were chattering fervently outside my bedroom door about a man self-immolating in D.C. yesterday morning. The overarching takeaway isn’t really hopeless or depressing, it’s just that the best and worst elements of life have collided to become indistinguishable, a whirlwind of provocative stimulus-response relationships. Dust to dust. When one has to process this much in the mere act of living, it’s natural that the response to all this is as disillusioned and ambiguous as reality itself: What’s going on?
Marvin Gaye’s defining 1971 album has a title whose significance was lost on me when I first heard it, but it clicked today as I walked home from class, listening to the excited shouts and uplifting conversation in the first few seconds of What’s Going On. It’s a laid-back greeting and a way to express confusion and exasperation, a double entendre that perfectly defines this album. What’s Going On boasts an instantly recognizable, lush sound complete with a vast array of instruments, and Marvin Gaye’s vocals across the LP are simultaneously light and emotionally powerful; there isn’t a single sub-par performance from Gaye. Despite the record’s sunny, transcendent soundscape, this isn’t a campy cash grab or a mere dance record with ubiquitous filler for lyrical content. What’s Going On is concerned chiefly with the socioeconomic strife and racial divides that were rampant in the early ‘70s United States, not to mention the polarizing public response to the American invasion of Vietnam; Gaye’s own brother had returned from a three-year tour there in the U.S. Army the year this album was released. Details like this give What’s Going On a personal flair that evades the pitfalls of righteousness. Anyone can preach about saving the environment or future generations, but few vocalists can do it in a way that’s grounded in the complex emotions of American life; Gaye does so, but still maintains a charm and a penchant for otherworldly melodies that ensures What’s Going On is never tethered to any one period in music history.
The record’s iconic intro/title track, “What’s Going On,” establishes the warm and smooth sonic atmosphere that the rest of the album adheres to while still serving as the fantastic protest anthem it was fifty years ago. A soft saxophone riff takes us into the shining guitars and percussion that back Marvin Gaye’s soulful vocals as he sings of the American despair and social disarray he’s seen around him: police brutality, deaths of young American men overseas, workers on strike, and distraught mothers all appear in his verses. An ensemble of violins levitates the song’s production from the halfway mark onward, giving “What’s Going On” simultaneously uplifting and thematically poignant qualities: Gaye emotionally sings, “You know we’ve got to find a way / To bring some understanding here today / Picket lines and picket signs / Don’t punish me with brutality.” On both instrumental bridges, the background singers, Gaye’s lyric-less vocalizing, the saxophone, and the violins all work in tandem to create a lush wave of sound that ascends in key; the result sees the original disco-style instrumentation gradually transform into a soaring orchestral climb that fills the listener’s chest with anticipation.
The first two things that stuck out to me about What’s Going On were the phenomenal instrumental breaks and the incredible cohesiveness of the record from track to track; the subsequent track, “What’s Happening Brother,” exemplifies both perfectly. As the song starts, backup singers and bongos seamlessly take the 4/4 drum beat from the strings of “What’s Going On” in a perfect transition that slows the record’s tempo ever so slightly; however, no momentum or magic is lost in the process, with heavenly vocals mirroring the bridge melody from the title track. Gaye himself introduces new melodic developments on a crest of returning strings with a jovial, “Hey baby, what you know good?” Now, Gaye uses the spotlight to pose questions about the state of affairs in regular life, shifting his voice downward with “War is hell, when will it end? / When will people start gettin’ together again? / Are things really gettin’ better, like the newspaper said?” Gaye reflects the growing uncertainty in the minds of many Americans around the early ‘70s; matters like these were especially relevant during the Vietnam War and after the 1970 Kent State shootings, where 4 students were killed and 9 were injured by the Ohio National Guard while protesting the war. But on “What’s Happening Brother,” Gaye still balances the grim realities of the 1970s United States with his casual and personal ethos that he periodically taps into across What’s Going On: he still finds space to ask, “And tell me friend, how in the world have you been? / Tell me, what’s out, and I want to know what’s in (what’s happening, brother).” This track also has my personal favorite instrumental break on the record, where a glockenspiel takes center stage for just a few simple notes; more importantly, though, the break just highlights the whole track’s tireless production with stellar chemistry between drums, bongos, electric guitar and bass. One of the best on What’s Going On.
Another enthralling highlight is “Save The Children,” which is by no means a cop-out, despite the nondescript title; it’s actually quite risky, considering Gaye’s spoken-word approach that’s echoed by the sung version of the same lyrics for every line. Using this method for the track’s entire four-minute runtime could have turned the record into a drag; instead, “Save The Children” comes off as a whirling ballad that grows in sound and energy as Gaye croons some of his most nihilistic but down-to-earth lyrics yet. Hence the track title, he’s looking towards the future and what it means for the well-being of the younger generations, but Gaye’s cumulative vision of the coming decades is tainted by the apathy of the present. The track’s venture into minor keys at crucial moments of crescendo curates a perfect atmosphere for Gaye’s heartfelt lamentations, while a double-time guitar gives the song momentum amidst soaring strings that continue over from the previous track, “Flyin’ High (In The Friendly Sky).” Gaye’s troubled by the children of today having to experience lives of suffering and poverty in the near future, and despite his own calls to save them at the song’s climax, he inevitably acknowledges, “Who really cares? / Who’s willing to try? / To save the world, that’s destined to die?” Gaye leads the track’s instrumentation impeccably, and small additions like an occasional saxophone riff and backup vocals are thrown into the mix at a perfect time; at the height of the track, 3/4 time be-bop drums come in to push it all through, only for Gaye to reiterate, “But…who really cares?” He’s acknowledging the obvious: Everyone has the intention to “save the children,” but no one’s willing to do it. We all have our own lives to worry about. Part of the immense value of “Save The Children” lies in the intense bittersweetness the track evokes, written during a tumultuous time in American society; however, the harsh reality this song channels is that most people just went about their daily routine while protestors were beaten, U.S. soldiers were killed overseas, and children starved.
A similar thematic approach is taken on “Mercy Mercy Me (The Ecology),” but from an environmental standpoint; Marvin Gaye essentially finds the most beautiful way to paint a devastating picture of blue skies occluded by pollution, poison in the atmosphere blowing in all cardinal directions, and sick or dying animals near big cities. This track is another personal favorite for its grandiose, piano- and guitar-led production that reaches a unique point of sentimentality appropriate for its somber topic. Gaye repurposes the adage “Things ain’t what they used to be” but turns his focus outward to the surrounding land with a tone of voice that’s somehow light and mournful at the same time, pointing out “Oil wasted on the oceans and upon our seas, fish full of mercury… / Radiation underground and in the sky… / What about this overcrowded land / How much more abuse from man can she stand?” The existential frustration in Gaye’s lyrics is rather subtle when compared to the pleasant alto timbre of his voice and the maximalist soul instrumentation of What’s Going On, but the observations and questions he poses all originate from the same source of worldly discontent. This dynamic also holds true for outro “Inner City Blues (Make Me Wanna Holler),” a track that’s more bass-heavy and spacious than the rest of the record; Gaye skillfully maintains a pitch-perfect falsetto that gives an almost supernatural energy to the song, but sounds more urgent and distressed than endearing and saccharine. Again, no doubt that Gaye’s lyrics play an important role in the tone and direction of the song; even amidst an infectious bass, saxophone, and percussion groove, Gaye’s dread is incredibly apparent as he sings, “Inflation, no chance / To increase finance / Bills pile up, sky high / Send that boy off to die.”
What’s Going On sounds like a single 35-minute suite that periodically attempts to leave Earth’s surface, only to be fettered by the pressures of everyday American life. I’ve often wished my favorite part of any given “good” song would stretch for the track’s entire duration, and this record has gotten the closest to evoking the feeling of having that single good part run for the duration of an entire album. Is it a flawless record? Well, maybe there are one or two parts of What’s Going On that feel slower and less grounded than the rest of the record, but then again, even the modal and gospel-y “Wholy Holy” sounds gorgeous. The crucial detail that kept me coming back to this record was the fact that such a positive and passionate-sounding album was created from an amalgamation of stress, paranoia, and anger at the injustices endured by people of color in the 1970s United States. It’s akin to stepping into a past world of pressure and pain, only to witness a miraculous musical endeavor that uplifts and empowers the listener in the face of insurmountable disarray. However, What’s Going On doesn’t sound like it’s over fifty years old; most of this album’s subject matter has never felt more relevant than right now, which is perhaps what resonates with me the most. Gaye thoroughly takes in this backwards world we all exist in, and creates a venerated art piece out of the churning nonsense of reality. It’s impossible to do What’s Going On justice in writing about it; in the five decades since it’s been released, Gaye has been cemented as an R&B icon whose career apex coincided with a crucial moment in U.S. history, and What’s Going On is considered to be his magnum opus.
“It rained on the day that Marvin Gaye died.” -Roc Marciano
[9.8 / 10]
by Mariana Parilli-Castillo ('26)
There is no such thing as feminine, or womanly, literature. This is not in support of the opinion that Virginia Woolf describes in “A Room of Her Own,” that of an inherently androgynous literature that desires to get rid of the presence of a writer as a woman in favor of just being a great writer. Some of the most decorated male writers, such as Aeschylus, Wordsworth, and Márquez, are as closely linked to their genders — to the realities, privileges, and upbringings with which they had to live and publish their works — as their comrades in writing, Sappho, Shelley, and Allende. I am also not arguing that there is no such thing as feminist literature. Attempting to argue such a simplistic and vacuous proposition is as reasonable as arguing that there is no such thing as a ground beneath our feet or a sky above our temples.
Simply, the reality of the matter is that femininity is not a rarified, unique, and singular quality in the personal and social world of a woman — a wash that overcomes any other quality a woman may have in the name of femininity. On the contrary, the nature of being “feminine” is as neutral an aspect in the matter of gender as it is being cunning, kind, or masculine. Femininity may be a characteristic expected of and reinforced in women by the mere nature of their birth, but this does not mean that it is inherent to their birth. A masculine woman — or one that expresses their gender utilizing masculine qualities and characteristics — is as much of a woman as a feminine woman, just as a feminine man is as much of a man as a masculine one. Adding on to that, expecting a nonbinary person to forever be tethered to the most androgynous of conventions, with no deviation lest they be misgendered, is absurd, because similar principles apply. Gender is often associated in some form with its expression, but this does not mean its gender and its expression are not mutually independent.
But, if so, why am I arguing that there is no feminine literature? Even if the gender of an author does not signify if the written work they create is feminine, masculine, or androgynous — could it not be so that said work could be feminine for the mere characteristics of femininity? To such questionings, I give a question back: What is “feminine” writing? Is it, by chance, a completely internal work of literature which focuses primarily on the inner workings of the human psyche rather than external matters? Any man — no matter his gender expression — can be in such concordance with his conscience and thoughts that the literature they write write is inherently introspective, just as a woman — whether masculine, feminine, or androgynous — can be so isolated from their emotions that such introspection is absent in their works. Could it be a particular emphasis on romance, on the world of love and passion? A man is as capable of loving as a woman, outside of any expression of gender. Love may be associated with sensibility and emotionality — and thus associated with femininity — but even the most calculating and clear-headed of people have loved as fervently as those who are sentimental. Perhaps it is just a matter that florid prose is more characteristic of feminine writing? One can consider George Gordon, Lord Byron to be a myriad of things — florid far above them — but feminine is not quite one of them. The fact is that, when it comes to literary criticism, what is characterized as feminine is agglomerated under the title of feminine only when it is the creation of a female author, no matter her gender expression or even if the manner by which they use those traits is particularly feminine in itself. Hence, what is introspective in a man, is feminine in a woman; What is passionate in a man, is feminine in a woman; What is elaborate, well-constructed, and intricate in a man, is feminine in a woman. Even when a woman rejects all that is seen as characteristic in so-called feminine writing — writing plot-focused works which reject the portrayal of stereotypically feminine subjects using minimalist and straightforward language — there is a good chance that her work will still be labeled as “feminine.” Women, and those whose the cultural hegemony considers women-adjacent, are reduced entirely to the expectations of their perceived gender — and under patriarchal society, that expectation is always “femenine.”
Of course, there is and always will be writing that is inherently tied to the gender of its female author. The realities that Laura Esquivel describes in her 1989 novel Like Water for Chocolate, the passions that Jane Austen brings to life in Persuasion (1817), the fears that Margaret Atwood prophesied in 1985 with her Handmaid’s Tale — all these are based primarily in their existences as women under patriarchal society. “Cine Prado,” a short story by French-Mexican author Elena Poinatowska, is written from the point of view of a crude and misogynistic man whose feverish obsession for an actress bring him to his doom — just because it assumes the eyes of patriarchy, the eyes of assumed and inflated masculinity, this does not mean that her writings are not those based upon Poniatowska’s experiences as a woman. Perhaps, if only for the sake of brevity — particularly is languages such as Spanish, where there is no distinction between “feminine” and “female” — one can use the notion of “feminine literature” to characterize the works written by a woman. Such works can be written expressing her fears, passions, and experiences influenced and characterized by existence under patriarchy — or even not at all, as gender does not preclude a necessity of telling the “female story.” But, when using such a term, one must keep in mind that just because the text is of “feminine” — or female — providence, this does not mean that that the text itself is feminine, that there are more nuances within a text outside the gender, or gender expression, of its authors.