There is nothing strange or narcotic in this "ambiguous" song. Considering that she constantly hints at the public harassment of the singer, her meaning is more than understandable.
Daddy is horrified: his child listens to such an amoral singer as Mercury - after all he hears only bad news about him. Under the influence of "bad communication", or rather - "spoiled phone" (so it's best to translate "bad communication"), Mercury made such a monster, such a "bad guy" that parents do not understand how you can listen to such a scoundrel. And Mercury himself feels "the president of the United States." Why? Because the president of the United States is a man who is obliged to demonstrate impeccable behavior in an immoral country. Immersed in fornication and violence, Americans closely follow each step of their president. His life is completely controlled, nothing is forgiven. Carelessness, mistakes, or simply slander are enough to cause a scandal and the collapse of a career. For example, there is no need to go far - remember at least "monikagate". That's why the harried Mercury used this image. He is the president of the United States, the scapegoat. Other rock stars say goodbye to everything, any nastiness and crimes, they do not forgive him anything. Everyone is just waiting to catch him and make a scandal ...
"Big Daddy" has one more, slang meaning - "head of the mafia", "godfather". And here comes another, terrible meaning of the verse - Freddie hints at the "Big Uncle", "Big Daddy" show business, which for many years has prevented him from living, exposing him and his work to disgusting persecution.
Even more curious in the context of the topic of persecution is the early version of the song "Mr. Bad Guy »:
You break the border, it's bad!Incorrect invitation ...It's better not to stand in my way!I'm Mr. Poor Guy!Yes, for all I'm Mr. Bad Guy!Beware, I bring disaster.Only this way you live from day to day.Your Big Dad - he's a big businessmanWithout recommendations ...I feel like the President of the United States.Everyone is afraid of me,Everyone is afraid of me ...
As you can see, there are no drugs here. Biographers only demonstrate prejudiced attitudes towards Mercury.
And if someone is wondering what the real narcotic poetry looks like, listen to the songs of Doors or Nirvana ... Why does nobody study the lyrics of other rockers on the subject of drugs? Why did they stick to Freddie Mercury ?!
As for the album "Mr. Bad Guy ", he is really very personal, but only tender and serious songs from this album have nothing to do with the fashionable rock music image of the" bad guy ". Rather, on the contrary - all the texts of the album do not say, but they scream that the real Freddie Mercury, a gentle, sensitive and religious person, has nothing to do with the nasty image created by the press (remember at least the already mentioned song "Your Kind Of Lover", in Which Freddie cruelly ridicules gay culture). On the cover of this album is Freddie's photo with black glasses. She seems to be hinting at the mystery of Mercury, that no one knows his real face - and will never know, if you believe any nonsense, and not your own mind and feelings.
* * *
Another aspect of their hatred is Freddie's constant belittling. All biographers are looking for the manifestation of talents of their heroes in their childhood and adolescence, and are very happy if they find it. If we are talking about the artist, the biographer will gladly tell you that already in his childhood, he beautifully drew, and will demonstrate a couple of early drawings. If this is a poet, then we learn that as a schoolboy he impressed the teachers with remarkable, not childlike serious verses. If a musician - we will be told how wonderful he was playing music at home concerts. If the politician - that necessarily will tell, that he was the born leader. Sometimes biographers move all reasonable measures, giving out ordinary youthful experiences for the first glimpses of the talent of a future genius.
But the biographers of Mercury are constantly trying to convince the readers that their hero is mediocrity itself, which did not stand out until the very creation of "Queen". He was an ordinary child, a mediocre student, an ordinary student, an uninteresting musician. Freddie, in the interpretation of his biographers, is a donut hole, which became famous by sheer chance.
The fact that he adored classical music from an early age and listened to opera records for hours, that the director of St. Peter's College drew attention to the musical talent of Freddie and, in a letter to Balsar's spouses, insisted on the need for additional music lessons, that he was a ping-pong champion, Had a discharge in boxing and had many prizes among juniors, successfully performed at the stage of the school theater and in a rock band, constantly won at school olympiads - this is either not mentioned at all (Rick Sky), or ominaetsya briefly (David Bret, Leslie Enn Dzhons). If Freddie's place was another person, biographers would write about "the youth of genius" with rapture, but in this case their attitude to the successes of young Mercury is very cool. But they often write, referring to his teachers and classmates that he did not stand out, Poorly studied, received little fives ... And how this teacher overlooked the future of genius! Here's another strange thing - people who personally knew the future celebrity in childhood or adolescence, usually talk about her uncommonness, whatever they really thought. And often the same teacher who once told the student about his complete stupidity and insignificance, after years of proudly say: "I always knew that this boy will go far!".
Here everything is different. You can learn that he, they say, did not succeed in school subjects, other than drawing. This is not true. It is interesting, since when is the good mark in school a determinant of genius? Moreover, most of the future geniuses in the school were three-grade students, only succeeding in those sciences in which they became famous in the future. For example, Pushkin's biographers mention that he studied three, but no one called Pushkin an ordinary boy, on the contrary, they all note that even then he wrote wonderful poems that attracted the attention of the best poets of Russia!
And, of course, the fact that the performances of the 12-year-old Farukh Balsar in the school rock band The Hectics attracted crowds of girls from the neighboring women's boarding house, and adults also went to look at these guys, very unloved biographers. But what about the numerous prizes he won at sports competitions and school Olympiads? What about the cups and credentials that are still kept in the house of his parents?
About his student years - the same. "In college, Freddie did not stand out, showing himself in the years of study as a very ordinary student." Interestingly, and John Lennon studied well? And Elvis Presley? And Kurt Cobain? Maybe they forgot their own words - what kind of intelligence and education did Freddie and his Queen colleagues call "professors of rock" ?! And the fact that, deprived of financial support from his parents, Freddie was forced to combine his studies with work, not counting music lessons - he does not interest them? Or they are interested in one thing: how to circumvent all factual material at once to make Freddie a nothing?
Many of Mercury's biographies mention an episode that took place at Ealington College. Once, when the whole group was exhausted by the boring task, Freddie, bristling with grief, began to rush around the audience, portraying Jimmy Hendrix and using a squeegee instead of a guitar. How should an ordinary biographer react to this? Probably, to blur the stupidity of the type "And at this historic moment, the future star was born!"
But this is an ordinary soldier. And the biographers of Mercury, to put it mildly, have an unconventional attitude towards their hero. And the reaction is quite different - bad, boring, uninteresting. As always, Rick Sky excelled in particular:
15