What end ? I've never picked up anything more consistent from JC other than highlighting whats fucked up, which is fine, but its not an end is it. I've never detected anything approaching an ideology, an alternative or a strategy to adopt. A Wake up call then ? Seriously ? Thats not required either, if you look around the world there is an upsurge of activity against the current systems so no wake up is required. I'm not saying that JC needs to state an ideology, nor does he need to get involved in anything approaching an ideological debate, just lets not pretend that he has an 'end' in mind. You could say his end is just to spark debate, fine, but if he doesn't have an argument himself then he's just a troll right ? Thats okay too, and maybe all a musician like himself can hope to do/be. Maybe he sees that arguing his own politic properly would be counter-productive, alienating, but that attitude would be one of just self preservation right ? As in he'd alienate himself from his audience.

Riverman says its made him think about possible situations where he would take up a gun. Thats interesting I suppose, but I don't think that is the purpose of those images on the album. To me its all just part of the pose. Personally, I've always accepted that during any kind of revolutionary struggle that time would more than likely come, although as I've argued earlier in this thread that maybe there are other approaches that wouldn't lead to that (but its highly unlikely). Also, as marxist and other earlier anarchist methods have never actually delivered, that maybe its probably a good idea to try and think about completely different approaches and ideologies. Thing is though, and this is key, why the fuck is he constantly using the Anarchist Communist flag ? Is that what he is now ? If it isn't then put the flag down. I would be highly impressed if he said 'yep, I am an anarchist Communist'. It would reveal a hitherto unseen and unheard level of political commitment and thought from him.

Also as Ian B says these images merely appear to be glorifying the gun.. Well, they're not really, they're actually glorifying himself with the gun if you consider the context. Troublesome, confusing, and not sharp enough to be interpreted as a dadaist or situationist statement. To me its all just music and image, posturing, entertaining, definitely not thought provoking imo. Also, well, quite offensive and not in a good way, just more in a sad credibility underlining way.

Isn't the "end" to make Julian Cope's rock n roll fizz that little bit more in the market place than the next quinquagenarian in leather trousers? Otherwise why bother? There are other art forms and less tainted media conduits where the same social/political ends could be purused more effectively in the 21st century.

Rock n roll? Who really cares about rock n roll any more? Every piece of rock imagery worth it's weight in newsprint has been co-opted by the mainstream to sell other crappy consumerist ephemera. When it comes to the cultural packaging of discontent what I want, what I expect, is Albert Ayler meets John Heartfield via "Y" and Penderecki. Just try co-opting Albert Ayler or Threnody to the Victims of Hiroshima.

The only reason I care about this record and feel obliged to engage in the debate is because I like reading this forum and the existence of the various Cope releases presumably subsidises our ability to meet here. To come here and ignore a Cope release would be impolite (buying them is like paying an HH toll) but this record demands a bit of discussion because I think that it has much to say to us about how denuded of relevance rock n roll is in 2012. It's a museum music and the people who still care about it (myself included) and the people who play it (myself included) are rearranging the deckchairs on the ghost ship of a dead art form. I think the gun on the cover speaks to that in a major way but not to much else.