Murder Ballad MondayFrankie and Albert
mbm-header

Comments

Frankie and Albert — 5 Comments

  1. Cecil Brown makes the case in his essay that the “kimono,” whether or not it was a sign of her occupation, may be a clue left behind by the songwriter that the deadly confrontation didn’t actually take place where the song says it did. See the next post.

  2. Thanks for the comment, Tyler. I think you’re right that the mention of a “kimono” is probably an allusion to Frankie’s occupation. It’s like various versions contain clues about the real story, but none of them, as we’ll see next, actually tell it. You’re also right about the importance of the tie to “Stagger Lee,” which we will see in a post later today, I hope.

  3. To me one of the interesting components of Frankie and Albert has been the frequent mention of her kimono dress. I suppose it makes sense as an allusion to her being a prostitute or in a whorehouse (wait…something about that all sounds bad…). In the song lyrics you posted it is in five of the separate songs, certainly not a central theme but obviously part of the story. It is always, naturally, paired with her forty-four which I think is interesting because of the somewhat similar motif that exists in the almost equally ubiquitous balled of Stagger Lee, although in Stag-O’s case it is a forty-four and his Stetson hat.

    Thanks for the post, I’m loving the Taj Mahal version which I was unaware of.

    • Thanks for the comment, and nice ear for detail! I’ve often thought about Stag’s Stetson, but have to admit I’d overlooked the kimono here. It’s interesting to think about what details become a song’s anchor, keeping it grounded it people’s minds as “the song” instead of something completely new.

      I think of Little Red Riding Hood, for example, and the wonderful work that various confabulators have done with that tale. Still, they need to retain some key details, even if metaphorically — the wolf, the red cape or hood, and some version of the phrase, “Oh my, what big [fill in the blank] you have!,” seem to be required or the tale falls apart as such. In “Two Sisters,” the ballad we looked at last week, it seems to me you need the miller in addition to the two sisters and the river. In “Young Hunting/Henry Lee,” you seem to need the little bird.

      But I’m also now thinking about how in the cinematic version of “Omie Wise” that we looked at a few weeks back, you didn’t even really need the murder itself…

      Again, great comment as we explore what “facts” are and are not needed, how they are used or not used, and why.