I hear this. It’s a pretty common view, I think.

I might have a weird view of Zappa in a lot of ways, but I do think that one core aspect of him that’s the most alienating to most people is that I don’t think Frank really makes the distinction between “playing it straight, heartfelt” and “mocking, ironic” that most critics do. It’s a very strange kind of atmosphere, but I think most Zappa fans get what I mean—-“Yo Mama” is cruel, but it’s also supposed to be motivating, in a way. Ruben & The Jets isn’t just supposed to be mocking doowop or some Stravinskian exercise, though it is that—-it’s also an extremely sincere love letter to the form, and it can absolutely break your heart, if you get that. Sometimes he admittedly goes to more of one side than the other, but why not? (“Valerie” is another great “straight-ahead” love ballad, and I’m confused why some people don’t hear it as such—-I assume it’s because of the opening falsetto). But it’s a very specific mood & feeling—-I can get why people don’t get it’s there or don’t like it.

I won’t touch his “problematic” lyrics here, because I get carried away and I’m sure it gets irritating. But a lot of the times when people say something like Enema Bandit “glorifies” rape or Magdalena “glorifies” etc it just doesn’t fit with the lyrics or the rest of Zappa’s work. I can see those falling flat for people, or upsetting them, and I think you can critique Frank for not getting across some aspects of the “joke” as clearly and just reveling in the shock (which is, of course, a major part for him, no getting around it), but glorifying is just straight up incorrect. I would argue that many of his contemporaries that are considered unproblematic cultural icons have far more songs that without the tragicomic aspect I’m talking about sincerely thrill in all manner of “problematic” things.