Tearing Down The Wall: The Contemporary Guide to Decoding Pink Floyd - The Wall One Brick at a Time

Reading this book took me back to the many nights where I would put the album on the stereo, the headphones on my head, shut off the lights and fall into a story. The album is so rich it always sent me on an adventure trying to find what was there. This book is the same. The language is rich. The musical knowledge adds to the wonderful deconstruction of the album and the undertaking is taken with care. It took me directly back to those nights. This is the true "backwards masking" the 80s was so concerned about, but in a good, real way. A most entertaining and thought provoking read. And hey, you already have the perfect soundtrack to go along with it.

What the author does to The Wall in this book is exactly what Morpheus does to Neo in the Matrix by giving him the red pill so he could see the truth. Wow. Wow. Wow... There is stuff so deep in this book's analysis of what is happening in The Wall that it really made my jaw drop to the ground. This book is not about the movie "The Wall", but instead the album, which goes so much deeper than the film. "Tearing Down The Wall" is an amazing read, so entertaining and so full of expert observations. If you are a fan of "The Wall", you must read this book.

I have to admit right up front that I'm not much of a Pink Floyd fan so going in there was no way I could give this book five stars. But, since the author is a friend of mine I wanted to buy a copy and see what he had to say. I am a HUGE lover of music and because of that I thought I'd enjoy this book and I did. Anyone who has listened to The Wall at least one (and honestly, who hasn't?) will have a new appreciation for it after reading this book. Nemcoff analyzes this single album to a degree I didn't know was possible and while I didn't fully appreciate all the nitty gritty bits, I have a feeling that the true fans of Floyd are going to flip over and argue over them. Plenty of conversation starters for them and I can't wait to see their reactions. If you have a music fan on your Christmas list, I can't think of a better new present to get them this year.

Bought this book for a buddy at Christmas. It sat on a coffee table so I picked it up and randomly opened to a chapter somewhere around the middle of the book. The insight and writing are excellent. Before I knew it, I had read four chapters. The amount of detail and obvious research Mark put into the analysis of each song is amazing. A must read for Floyd fans.

I'm never been a Roger Waters fan. In fact, The Wall is not even in my top 5 favorite Floyd albums. Hoping to gain a greater appreciation for one of Floyd's seminal works, and for only $2.99 I gave this book a shot. I put on some decent headphones with my copy of The Wall album and started reading. From chapter 1, I was BLOWN AWAY. First, if you're not paying attention, there is so many little pieces to the puzzle that you would never even hear. Nemcoff deftly navigates the reader through the importance of each little sound effect, rhythmic syncopation, and chord change, all the while showing you the larger mosaic that each song on this album contributes too. I now have a greater appreciation for Water's talent, depth of feeling an emotion. What Nemcoff reveals for the reader is an album that probes deep into the depths of madness, isolation, human emotion and tangled relationships. In short, This is a must for any Floyd fan, and will totally change the way you hear this album, and possibly the way you hear every other Roger Waters written Floyd album as well.

"Tearing Down the Wall" is a masterful exploration of the album, and of the people who created it. Mark Yoshimoto Nemcoff shares unique and powerful insights he discovered while writing the book, such as the deep importance of specific lyrics, literary and cultural references hiding in plain sight ... and much more. A revelation on every page!

As introduction, if my credentials as a Floydian obsessive are required in order for my viewpoint to be granted credence: -I co-moderate the online community of one of the largest PF fansites sanctioned by the official organization (A Fleeting Glimpse). -I have both interviewed and composed articles about Floydian associates for the site. -I have been a fan of the band for nearly half my life as well as a fan of The Wall since its release in 1979 (I was 13). The history and significance of the album/tour/film are - for me - a particular and special point of interest and I have spent years in absorption of all available details and commentary. My title does not intend to imply this was wholly a bad idea. After all, popular music as a subjective medium for cultural criticism means that interpretations vary and therefore this kind of analysis is the stuff of thesis submissions in Contemporary Culture programs and blog entries alike, let alone music journalism or self-published works capitalizing on the work's resurgence in popularity in the past three years. But it does have one rather glaring fault: it's obvious to any true Floydian obsessive that not much research into the making of the album itself was attempted, and that's where I declare I would not allow this book to join the canon of Floydian scholarship. Because the subject is a veritable cottage industry of books, websites, articles, and there are authors who have made chronicling the Floyd their business, such as Mark Blake, Glenn Povey, and Vernon Fitch. As said obsessive I own books penned by all these people, and more. Another point not in favor of this work is there are *already* other books existant about The Wall: what it means (straight from the auteur's mouth and mind) and how it was made. Those are the books you should be reading. I'll name three primary works: Bricks in The Wall by Karl Dallas, Comfortably Numb: A History of The Wall by Vernon Fitch & Richard Mahon, and The Making of Pink Floyd The Wall by Gerald Scarfe. Those books cite the primary thematic and narrative analysis as well as, in Scarfe's and Fitch & Mahon's work, the methodology of creation. Having read *those* books, it then makes it easy to find the errors in this one. The technical errors, I mean. The story of The Wall is one which is fairly obvious. Listeners knew what it meant almost as soon as it came out, given that Roger Waters gave a series of definitive interviews leading fans through the narrative, with Jim Ladd and Tommy Vance. Therefore I can't wholly support the interpretations made by the author because many of them are in direct contrast with Roger Waters' own comments. It is one thing to say what a work means, and that is something wholly different from what it means to YOU. To provide a disclaimer that the work is subjective and *then* to state this text can be viewed as extended commentary is disingenuous, because this is not any kind of companion to the work and not merely because it is unofficial. The work itself isn't a dense landscape of metaphorical signifiers and obscure references. It is a compelling story which is by turns bombastic, claustrophobic, emotionally wrenching, and full of black humor and deep pathos. It begins on a note of dramatic irony and resolves on a note of hope, after an incredibly cathartic journey into the tortured psyche of one man, a character whom many could relate to, and the album made its mark upon the cultural landscape and was inspiration and influence upon all the generations it touched. It is - along with Dark Side of the Moon and Wish You Were Here - one of Pink Floyd's "Big Three," the most successful albums of their storied career. It doesn't really *need* to be "decoded." Appreciation, respect, and acknowledgement of its status as a landmark work is always welcome, and as regards that agenda this book does contribute to those considerations Casual fans do appreciate this book, I'm sure, but no one has any business calling this the work of a Floydian scholar. There are just too many concrete details which are incorrect. As example: -"Another Brick in the Wall Part II" was not cut together by Bob Ezrin, the use of children's voices was not his suggestion, the structure of the song was created by Roger Waters and the editing was done by James Guthrie. Nor did Ezrin ever direct the recording of any sound effects himself save for Pink's encounter with the groupie as preface to "One Of My Turns." Effects and ambiance were created and recorded by Guthrie and assistant engineers Nick Griffiths, Rick Hart and Brian Christian with additional help from Gilmour's technician Phil Taylor. -The sound effect at the end of "Goodbye Blue Sky" is not from an airport terminal, but a train station. -The dialog heard on the television during the introduction to "One Of My Turns" is NOT from the film The White Cliffs of Dover although that was a popular long-standing theory. In 2010 it was determined that it is likely from an episode of the soap opera Another World which happened to be recorded at random by Guthrie while at Producers Workshop (same as all the other bits of television which were used on the record). So it's rather foolhardy not only to base part of your interpretation of the song on the use of a film which was not only an incorrect citation, but also merely recorded at random with no direct intention for its inclusion. -The sound of insects in "Hey You" was not a synth effect but rather was created by recording an electric drill grinding into a piece of wood. -It's not only "Pink Floyd!" (in the left channel) you hear chanted at the beginning of "Run Like Hell" but also "Hammer!" (in the right channel). -The use of percussion and hand claps in "Run Like Hell" is meant to support the song's disco time signature, not as some kind of metaphor. As I stated there are moments of interpretation I disagree with because they run counter to Roger's stated intentions. "In The Flesh?" is the version of the song which takes place in Pink's mind, hence the use of the question mark. The second iteration is meant to be a literal one, Pink is now doing his job in a way no one expected him to, and so therefore the assertion that it is all in his mind is incorrect. And the "absurdity" of having spots...that word is also British slang for acne. Again, some research would have been helpful. There is a concert sequence in the record which consists of "In The Flesh" and "Run Like Hell" and then "Waiting For The Worms" is Pink's full-on hallucination. But perhaps the most appalling gaffe is the interpretation of "Comfortably Numb." Roger Waters has already stated numerous times that it is based on something which happened to him while on tour in 1977 when, at a gig in Philadelphia, he was too sick to go on and given a powerful tranquilizer so he could perform the show. The doctor in the song IS actually a doctor. The name of the song was originally "The Doctor" and was only changed to "Comfortably Numb" mere days before the completion of the album. Waters wore a white lab coat on stage during the original performances of the song in 1980-81. The song IS about the intrusion of craven reality into Pink's retreat behind the wall (think about the segue into C-Numb: the chorus of voices which includes every "external" voice heard thus far, the ringing phone, the knocking on the door, and how the question changes from "Is there anybody OUT there?" to, in the song, "Is there anybody IN there?"), demanding he fulfill his now empty responsibilities, his madness now changed by this chemical alchemy, causing him to fugue full-blown into fascist demagoguery which then leads the narrative through the next four songs. But it is not about heroin use (though yes, there is drug use referenced throughout the record, no one would dispute that). These are the established facts of the song's meaning and Floydian obsessives know them. Or at least most of them do, but apparently not the author. As it is mentioned more than once in this book, to state the movie does not portray the meaning of the album, or what any of the songs mean is also wrong because Waters wrote the screenplay for the movie and THAT is why the scenario of C-Numb is a literal one, for example, because that IS what the song is about. I wonder if the author has ever watched the film with the commentary track from Roger Waters and Gerald Scarfe, because he might finally understand that it was not wholly up to Alan Parker to bring the story to the screen. It was a collaboration between Waters, Scarfe and Parker at all times. Scarfe's book also makes this abundantly clear. Even just the slightest bit of actual research into the album, like listening to either the "Under Construction" production demo from March 1979 or the collection of work-in-progress tracks included as bonus material on The Wall Immersion box set, would have provided a better grounding for whatever summations could be made about the material's evolution and context. People who are obsessed with this album and its history don't need this book, but I decided to give it a chance anyway. It's a noble cause, certainly, which is why it is all the more painful that the author let me down - as a fan, much less a Floydian obsessive - in his execution of the goal.

For many, Pink Floyd's music has always been a journey of inner exploration, but unlike many of their modern counterparts in the rock music spectrum, some have found a rare profundity to their lyrics, as many have attempted to unravel the lyrics and the meaning behind the music. Combine that with the turbulent story of the band's existence and you have an area ripe for discovery. Most writers focus either on the "classic" period of Pink Floyd's music, such as Dark Side of the Moon, Wish You Were Here, and The Wall. The Wall encourages for insights into the alienation of humanity, as well as the madness and supposed meaningless existence we are here to experience. The author of "Tearing Down the Wall" does a brilliant job of telling the story in Roger Water's life, as well as the relationships and events that took place in his life. This book profoundly opened my eyes beyond what I thought was the meaning of "The Wall's message... It literally took on a whole new meaning for me. I highly recommend this to all Pink Floyd fans.