Well, call me stupid, but I thought that Eric Clapton’s musical genius would extend into other areas, too. Thus I was gobsmacked when he became an ardent antivaxer, letting me down three times by opposing antivaccination restrictions, opposing the shot itself (though he got two AstraZeneca jabs), and releasing two anti-vax songs, “This Has Gotta Stop” and “Stand and Deliver,” the latter with Van Morrison.
Now, as Rolling Stone reports (click on screenshot below), Clapton is funding a band, Jam for Freedom. whose sole purpose appears to be to oppose vaccination:
Eric Clapton not only donated more than $1,300 to a GoFundMe posted by a vaccine skeptical music group, but he also lent the “pro-medical choice” band his family’s personal Transporter van to use for touring around the country, Rolling Stone reports. A musician for the group Jam for Freedom, known for songs with lyrics like, “You can stick your poison vaccine up your arse,” told the magazine that when he saw the donation he thought he was being tricked, until he received a text from the 76-year-old singer-songwriter himself. “It was something complimentary, along the lines of, ‘Hey, it’s Eric—great work you’re doing,’” McLaughlin said. Though he declined to say how much, McLaughlin also told the magazine that Clapton gave them more money to buy a new van and said he might play with the group in the future.
Clapton apparently is becoming (or always was, but kept it quiet) a conservative, and maybe even a racist. There were those comments at a concert in 1976, which I didn’t know about until they surfaced recently. The magazine reports those, too:
In the summer of 1976, Dave Wakeling thought he knew Clapton, too. Wakeling, who’d go on to found the English Beat, one of the U.K.’s pioneering ska bands, was 20 that year, and such a big Clapton fan that he’d once hitchhiked from his Birmingham home to London to see Clapton’s band Blind Faith in Hyde Park.
But when he saw Clapton at the Odeon theater in Birmingham in August 1976, Wakeling was gob-smacked. A clearly inebriated Clapton, who unlike most of his rock brethren hadn’t weighed in on topics like the Vietnam War, began grousing about immigration. The concert was neither filmed nor recorded, but based on published accounts at the time (and Wakeling’s recollection), Clapton began making vile, racist comments from the stage. In remarks he has never denied, he talked about how the influx of immigrants in the U.K. would result in the country “being a colony within 10 years.” He also went on an extended jag about how “foreigners” should leave Great Britain: “Get the wogs out . . . get the coons out.” (Wog, shorthand for golliwog, was a slur against dark-skinned nonwhites.)
“As it went on, it was like, ‘Is this a joke?’ ” Wakeling recalls. “And then it became obvious that it wasn’t. . . . It started to form a sort of murmur throughout the crowd. He kept talking, and the murmurings started to get louder: ‘What did he fucking say again?’ . . . We all got into the foyer after the concert, and it was as loud as the concert: ‘What is he fucking doing? What a cunt!’ ”
When Clapton voiced support onstage for the conservative British flamethrower and fascist Enoch Powell, a prominent anti-immigration politician who had given his polarizing “rivers of blood” speech on the topic in Birmingham in 1968, Wakeling was particularly offended. Thanks to white and black workers toiling together in its factories, Wakeling had sensed that Birmingham had become more integrated in recent years.
Make this breaking my heart for the fifth time.
Clapton later tried to explain away those comments, saying they weren’t really racist, but his excuse isn’t very convincing (read the piece).
Finally, Clapton vowed that he would never play in a venue that required vaccination, and is scheduling his tours according to that dictum:
Clapton recently embarked on a U.S. tour booked in red states despite surging transmission numbers and death rates — and at venues that largely don’t require proof of vaccination. In the process, this Sixties icon, who embraced the sex, drugs, and rock & roll lifestyle as much as anyone in his generation, has drawn praise from conservative pundits. In Austin, he posed for backstage photos with Texas’ anti-vax-mandate Gov. Greg Abbott, known for his attacks on abortion and voting rights. The sight of Clapton in backstage photos with the notorious governor amounted to a deal killer for some: “I just deleted all my Clapton songs,” went one comment on Abbott’s Twitter feed, along with, “A Kid Rock type with better guitar skills. Done with him.”
However, as Rolling Stone reports in a separate article, Clapton broke that vow, too, playing a venue on Sept. 18 that mandated testing or jabs:
He broke that absurd promise by playing Smoothie King, which, according to its website, is following New Orleans regulations that require all ticketholders 12 and above, as well as staff and participants, to either prove they have received at least one dose of a Covid-19 vaccine or provide a negative test taken within 72 hours. Moreover, they must wear a mask while not eating or drinking.
Well, fine, though it does show that he isn’t holding to his convictions.
What happened to Clapton? The Rolling Stone piece above is long and detailed, and advances some ideas that you’ll want to read if you’re a Clapton fan.
Yes, I believe Elton John & Kiki Dee would have something to say about this 🙂
I can’t think of too many rock stars who aren’t despicable or damaged in some respect. Let’s see: Bruce Springsteen, I guess? John Lennon?
Sadly, “Bruce Springsteen DWI: Singer charged with drink-driving”
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-56019580
John Denver? Of course, he wasn’t a rock star, in the literal sense. A few DUIs in his case too, not to mention flying an airplane with an expired pilot’s license. In regard to Eric Clapton:
interesting that a musician with a musical language heavily based on the blues was so concerned about non-whites in Britain. But then again, he says he was UI at the time.
There is a lot of bad stuff about John Denver. I don’t know how much is true.
With regard to Clapton, that’s a false dichotomy. It is equivalent to saying that either one must be a neonazi racist or in favour of completely open borders with no controls. That is independent of what is right and wrong. It is simply a logical error to think that since someone likes the blues, which has been historically associated with Black musicians and originated with them, then he must favour unrestricted immigration. Again, I’m not saying that Clapton’s drunken rant was expressing a truth, merely pointing out an error in the logic.
Drunkenness can affect one’s self-censoring. But it’s not known to introduce words like c**n and w*g into the speechway of a non-*ssh*le
I’ve known several non-arseholes who have transformed into arseholes when drunk.
Indeed: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Denver#Personal_life
But those charges were dropped. He paid a fine for having a drink with fans. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/24/nyregion/bruce-springsteen-dwi.html
Great fan of John Lennon’s, but he was certainly a very emotionally damaged human being who used to beat his women (which he admitted and found despicable himself).
John Lennon was also no saint, of course. After all, who of us is?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Lennon#Relationship_with_his_father
Although Julian later let his anger go, for his own sake, it’s obvious from his comments amongst other things – “Imagine no possessions” is a bit, er, rich coming from a multimillionaire, as has been pointed out many times before – that John Lennon was far from above criticism. Again, as are we all.
He wasn’t really a rock star, but a great many rock stars loved his songs so we can call for a judge’s decision on this one. I would say tht John Prine was a decent man who never let us down with the things he did in his personal life.
There has always been many obnoxious people in the music business, why not one more. If he truly has a liking for that disgusting governor of Texas, he is really in bad company. Oh, was that a joke?
Re: Abbott and Clapton, it’s the old saying at work: “Shit attracts flies”
Here in the UK, it led to the formation of Rock Against Racism: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rock_Against_Racism#History
D’oh, that was meant to be in reference to the statement in our host’s statement “There were those comments at a concert in 1976, which I didn’t know about until they surfaced recently”.
“What happened to Clapton?”
Nothing happened. It just proves, once again, that you can be good at what you do and still be a jerk.
L
Frank Zappa had some advice that Clapton should have heeded! https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shut_Up_%27n_Play_Yer_Guitar
+
I’m not a huge Clapton fan, but he did good work with Mayall and Cream. With regard to his racist remarks, they need to be seen in context. Clapton has done more than most to support the recognition of Black musicians, is personal friends with many, was even “adopted” by one, and so on. That would never happen to a typical racist. Yes, he was drunk, but that probable means only that he wasn’t as careful. I don’t see his rant so much as racist but as against (a certain form of) immigration. While almost all racists oppose almost all forms of immigration, the reverse is not true. Not everyone against open borders is a racist. I’m not saying that what he said is right, just saying that it needs to be taken within the context of the rest of his interactions with people of other races. (IIRC he also has a child by a Black woman.) In other words, citing only the rant as proof that he is a racist is on par with saying that he respects B. B. King and hence can’t be a racist.
Of course, there is the general question of separating the art from the artist. As Mark Twain quipped, Wagner’s music is better than it sounds.
Similarly, just because Trump and his crowd oppose CRT doesn’t mean that anyone who opposes Trump must think that CRT is correct. I see such behaviour as a big danger. Out of the (rather unrealistic) fear of being mistaken for a Trump supporter, some anti-Trump people don’t call out other anti-Trump people when the latter spout garbage.
Cant say I’m impressed with the Rolling Stone piece. OK, Clapton has apparently gone off the deep end on vaccines, but I fail to see what this has to do with some allegedly racist remarks he made 45 years ago—as if his anti-vax position can’t be discredited on its own lack of merit. You can be pretty sure those remarks would not have surfaced at all unless someone was out to dig up dirt on Clapton–and irrelevant dirt at that. Hence, what should have been a reasoned response to a misguided mission ends up looking like a smear campaign.
I think they’re there (this is not the first time they’ve come up) to show that Clapton isn’t the liberal icon people think he is, so in that way they go with the anti-vax stance.
Clapton may well be not the liberal icon people think he is… but did he ever intend to be one? Or has he merely disappointed peoples’ expectations? *If* he was primarily into drugs and music then social niceties may have not been a significant concern for him.
There are plenty of other artists and musicians who have led less than spotless lives – but are respected for their artistic works. The ones that impress me are those who not only still produce excellent work but have also overcome their demons.
A good example of someone who definitely didn’t want to be what people made him out to be is Dylan. The account of that in his autobiography is well worth reading.
Yes. On the other hand, being pro or anti vax is not a left/right issue. There are opponents on the right because they think that it is some sort of socialist plot or whatever, but also on the left, among the anthroposophy/woo crowd, who are otherwise usually support ideas associated with the left. Looking at the governments around the world, both conservative and liberal tend to support vaccination; those who don’t are the more populist governments.
It is in the USA (at least wrt COVID19 vaccines). That’s one of the reasons they have got such disastrous pandemic figures at the moment.
Two points. First, Clapton is English and, AFAIK, lives mostly in England. Second, even in the States there are anti-vax people who are generally considered to be on the left, though they aren’t as visible in the media, partly because it’s not a new phenomenon. Yes, in the States, most anti-vax people are probably on the right, but that’s not a hard and fast rule.
None of these rules are hard and fast. Clapton may be English but you have to remember that lots of people posting here are from the USA and COVID denying generally is very much associated with the right over there.
Also, I have no idea what Clapton’s political views are but knowing his opinion on the COVID vaccines and also having only recently heard about his anti-immigration rant nearly half a century ago, I would guess he’s not left of centre.
Before you reply, I am aware that my guess panders to stereotypes. Your average man working in the mines or on the production line in the UK fifty years ago was probably a Labour supporter but also racist and misogynist largely because equality for women and blacks threatened his status. This is half of the paradox of British politics.
I used to think Eric Clapton was aging into a bitter old contrarian crank. But now I see his record of racists statements and support for crackpot ideas extends way back in his career. He strikes me now as a bitter old man who is angry because he’s not as world famous as he used to be. Fact of the matter is he was badly outclassed when he play on the same stage as Jimmy Hendrix and it happened again when Prince played circles around him (see it on youtube – Why My Guitar Gently Weeps). He ripped off black bluesmen while he complained England wasn’t white enough. He’s past it and he knows. Sad.
” Fact of the matter is he was badly outclassed when he play on the same stage as Jimmy Hendrix and it happened again when Prince played circles around him”
I will just never, ever understand why people think Clapton was/is (some say he fell off hard after the 70’s) a great guitarist. He never was. He wasn’t very creative aside from his work with Cream; he wasn’t versatile; he wasn’t fast or passionate or emotional or any of the other “intangibles” that can mitigate lesser sheer talent (I’m thinking Joe Satriani here, who’s an amazing guitarist technically, but has absolutely no emotion or feeling behind his playing, which makes it boring and lifeless). He doesn’t even make a top 200 list of greatest famous guitarists. I literally knew multiple people in college who could have played circles around Clapton. And that was just one small college in all the USA.
He did some good work with Cream and then made one good album with Derek and the Dominoes, and the latter’s Live at Fillmore is pretty awesome too. But his meager contributions were all with a number of other highly creative and talented artists. He’s never been a great musician, but he somehow got anointed as one. I don’t know how it happened. I guess that, back in the late 60’s and 70’s, magazines like Rolling Stone and the wider music bigwigs decided who got famous and worshiped, and they made Clapton one of their guys. I’ll never, ever understand it.
Alex Lifeson — a guitarist who most Clapton fans have never even heard of — has more talent in his right pinky than Clapton ever had. Steve Howe showed more creativity, emotion, technical prowess, etc. in one song than Clapton has shown in a lifetime. Frank Zappa broke more boundaries in a couple of bars than Clapton has in an entire career.
His popularity will always remain a mystery to me.
Agree about Lifeson, of whom I’m a huge fan. I’m less of a fan of Howe and Zappa, but see your point. But all three of those are not just good guitarists, but they write good music. That was never Clapton’s strong point. Rather, what made him famous, justly so, was, first, that tone. Listen to what electric guitarists sounded like before Clapton and after his album with John Mayall. That set the template for essentially all electric guitarists. Also, although of course following in the footsteps of Mayall and so on, he re-introduced the blues into rock. You have to keep in mind that there are different forms of greatness: technical, influential, popular, innovative, and so on.
It always breaks my heart to see how overlooked Lifeson is, even by Rush fans. Like Pete Townshend, he was willing to step back and just be “part of the band,” rather than try to stand out all the time (although Townshend wrote basically all of The Who’s music, so there’s a big difference in that respect. But Lifeson is by far the better guitarists, so, y’know, whatever). The way he tailored his solos to a given song’s theme and tone was always amazing, as in Passage to Bangkok, Closer to the Heart, YYZ, Natural Science, and so on. And the way he messed with tone, phrasing, his extraordinarily complex feel…What a monster. But he never stuck out. He’s one of the rare great guitarists who never felt the need to show off at the expense of a song’s overall quality, which is a part of his brilliance. I guess you need to be that great if you want to be part of the greatest power trio in history 🙂
About half of my top-10 guitar solos are by Lifeson.
I can be glimpsed in the Rush 30 DVD filmed in Frankfurt, one day before I went into hospital with lymphoma. I had taken a lot of painkillers and got there early enough so that I could stand at the front (right in front of Alex) and hang on to the railing.
I’m sure that Rush fans appreciate Alex. However, like Townshend, the bassist in the band is arguably the top rock bassist of his generation, and similarly for the drummer, so it is natural that Alex gets more eclipsed than if he were playing with an average rhythm section. Of course, he is technically much better than Townshend, though Townshend is a more prolific writer, especially of lyrics.
Note that the lack of egos in Rush is one reason they stayed together for so long. Apart from ZZ Top, which band was active that long in the same formation?
Oh, and with regard to introducing the blues into rock and roll: people Jimi Hendrix were coming up at about the same time. I don’t think Clapton can really be credited with laying the groundwork for rock and roll guitar for the next few years after his work with Mayall. Hell, I’d say that Jimi had a greater influence than Clapton did in that brief period. between around 1966-68, breaking out as he did in 1967.
Just read what guitarists say their influences were.
I agree though when I listen to Cream’s version of Robert Johnson’s “Crossroads”, there is some genius there. Still, I wonder how much Jack Bruce contributed to it.
Jimi Hendrix played everyone off stage. It wasn’t just his playing either, he was also a genius at composing.
Clapton was not as good at either, but the person who wrote and played Layla is a great musician. The person who played guitar on While My Guitar Gently Weeps can do emotion.
I agree about Joe Satriani though.
“Clapton was not as good at either, but the person who wrote and played Layla is a great musician.”
Layla’s a very good song! Does writing that one song make a musician great? Not in my opinion. It’s a very good, but ultimately rather standard rock song.
I feel like I’ve heard dozens of different guitarists play a better solo for While My Guitar Gently Weeps than Clapton did, but I guess that’s just a matter of opinion as well.
But this kind of response does kind of go to the central point I was making: Clapton just doesn’t have that much to contribute to the landscape of rock over his many decades. Someone who is truly one of the greatest of all time would have done a lot more, or been greater than most of his contemporaries at something, be it composition, technical prowess, feeling, etc.
I’m glad we agree on Satriani. I can’t stand his music. So dull. There’s no reason to listen. Every song sounds like a kid shouting, “look at me! Look at how fast I am!!!”
Maybe others can play that solo better. But Clapton was brought into the studio and played it more or less spontaneously without even having heard the song before.
Clapton was first lead guitarist for The Yardbirds after they had a recording contract in the early 1960s. That’s him on lead guitar on “For Your Love.” That makes up for a lot of later sins, but his band mates at the time all hated him. He was replaced by Jeff Beck, then Jimmy Page. Three great lead guitarists from one semi-obscure band.
Although Jimmy has had his own questionable relationships, of course:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Page#Personal_life
It seems that The Stranglers had it right way back in 1977: “No more heroes, anymore…”.
Clapton left the Yardbirds because that song was too pop.
My friend has a parent, a scientist, that believes all sorts of anti-vaxx, conspiracy theory stuff now. This is something new and my friend thinks it may have to do with declining executive function which can happen to some as we age. Perhaps Clapton is reflecting a cognitive decline.
I think maybe your friend is getting too technical with this particular case. Clapton was apparently an idiot even when much younger. What happens to lots of people as they age is they become easy prey for every scam or crazy idea. That is why you want to get grandma’s checkbook away from her and monitor the phone calls. This is also why so may are sucked into the con man such as Trump. If you check out most of these people they have the TV tuned to Fox and it is the only channel they watch. They are positive Fox. is giving them the real news while lying to them all day long.
I think my friend knows her mother….and your description of older people becoming prey to scams is exactly the definition of loss of executive function.
Fine, whatever you want to call it. But the anti-vaccine business that has struck the music man has also hit millions of other people in this country. They all got there pretty much the same way — by listening to Trump and Fox new and all the other conspiracy ideas they throw out. They then pass it on all over the internet platforms and the cult is born.
Yes but I wasn’t talking about those people. I was simply suggesting that there may be an explanation for this particular case.
I’m guessing Clapton had a bad side-effects from vaccination.
Musical ability–and I would NOT classify Clapton as a genius, but an excellent musician who wrote a few very good songs and one bordering on genius that happened to be about his lust for another man’s* wife–doesn’t necessarily have any bearing on any other aspect of a person’s character. As Barney said regarding Hannibal Lecter (the account is fictional but the point is true), “One quality in a person doesn’t rule out any other quality. They can exist side by side, good and terrible.”
*A man much closer to musical genius in more than one sense.
Nice footnote, Robert!
LOL. I would add another disqualification to Clapton’s ledger as a musical genius. The original song Layla had serious intensity but his revamped 1992 version was trash. It sounded like a too-tired-to-bring-the-heat, middle-aged, reggae campfire version that neutered the original, leaving him not on his knees driven mad with lust for Layla but rather slowly on his way to an assisted care facility after passing and stocking up at a local cannabis dispensary.
Re Clapton’s new songs.
Aside from the bad message, they are par for the course. Most “message” songs really suck. I don’t know what it is – maybe something about the stridency of shoving a message down the listener’s throat, or something about it “injures the composers muse” or whatever. But they just tend to be awful and unmemorable.
(Of course, like with everything, there are exceptions! Off the top of my head I love tons of Curtis Mayfield who was often making socially conscious stuff. But I find his work more the exception than the rule)
I think this is strong evidence that being called a god all your adult life can warp your perspective. Having a lot of confidence may well be an asset for a guitarist but he evidently doesn’t know his limitations.
Andrew Young suggests in a Politico article https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2021/10/03/andrew-yang-book-excerpt-campaigning-514967
that there is evidence that powerful peoples’ brains are affected over time, that power “makes one more impulsive, more reckless and less able to see things from others’ points of view. It also leads one to be rude, more likely to cheat on one’s spouse, less attentive to other people, and less interested in the experiences of others.”
I imagine that constant adulation would also have an effect too.
This might be an opportunity to reflect who and how is one breaking hearts. What are the views that defy reason that you are ardently clinging to ?
It’s always sad when the idols fall!
I think some people think “natural immunity” is more “manly” than vaccine-induced immunitiy.
Sorta like “muscular Christianity” but for immunity.
Or death is more “manly” than life.
Also the notion that what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger… but if it’s a vaccine – a vaccine that will allow your body to kill a pathogen – your body will overall be weaker than if you fought the pathogen “on your own”.
I think Clapton has a more weird idea than that though.
This is an example of why I rarely read biographies or interviews with artists/ musicians or other creative people whose work I love, unless they stick 100% to the topic of making art. A Clapton concert or music purchase is not likely to be on my shortlist based on his behavior. I really dislike having to get political about this type of thing; feeling I must decide to boycott or not. His music has brought me so many hours of pleasure. I never look to artists to be role models; on the other hand I don’t want to financially support egregious behavior. *sigh*
I picked up a used copy of Clapton’s autobiography several years ago at a festival and read it just a couple of years ago. It’s an interesting tale and he is extremely honest about his shortcomings. Of course the drunken rant is mentioned.
Regarding Patti Harrison, wife of George and later of Eric, that was more or less consensual among all involved. I think it was Ravi Shankar who said that while George was spiritual, he by no means neglected the flesh. At one point, he was happy for Clapton to court Patti because that allowed him to seduce Patti’s sister.
I certainly know people who are otherwise extremely intelligent, nice, considerate, enlightened, critical, you name it—but who just black out when it comes to vaccines.
Beware the intentional fallacy. You can appreciate Clapton’s art while despising his politics.
Exactly. I can appreciate a younger brother and sister even if I cannot stand to be in the same room with them.
This notion sounds very well and enlightened.
However, the audience/listener-musician relationship is not the same. And it is undeniable something has been poisoned, and deep.
The music – and here, the lyrics – express feelings that resonate, that make us say “yes! That is right!” Music has a way of suspending judgement, exposing our vulnerabilities, and we might let ourselves become absorbed wholly by it.
Stuff like this is bitter medicine to remind us it is, sadly, something like a dream.
Fine tuning : I wrote :
“This notion sounds very well and enlightened.”
I wanted to write :
This notion sounds very well and enlightened – because it is.”
As in, I agree!
Perhaps if Clapton goes back to injecting heroin then we can all like him again.
The man was vaccinated, and now he opposes this particular vaccine. Why? Well, as the Rolling Stone article points out, he gave an interview explaining exactly that (below). Agree with him or not, it is quite obvious that he had a frightening experience that he attributes (correctly or incorrectly) to his vaccination. You know, a bit like a man who may have had a bad experience with the police that he attributes to racism (correctly or incorrectly) and now advocates defunding the police. Do we need to agree? Of course not. But it doesn’t take a surfeit of empathy to understand how he might have arrived at his position. That said, let’s set aside that token of empathy and get about doing the real work: determining whether Clapton was ever, truly, “one of us”.
Trigger warning: In the linked video, Clapton also alludes to what sound suspiciously like pro-Brexit convictions. Those who are so inclined can burn his albums at the next commercial break.
I suggest that next time Clapton performs, he first stand on the stage and yell, “Unclean, unclean” and then gets on with the show. Maybe a Rolling Stone journalist may actually enjoy it.
My executive functions have decayed so severely in old age that I have fallen prey to WEIT.
The paradoxes of musical genius and personal quality have been a puzzle for a long time. Beethoven was reputed to be absolutely impossible personally, and he apparently got worse and worse with age. On the other hand, Liszt (a third-rate composer in my view) was renowned for his generosity. One of the rare cases where there seems to be no paradox—a great composer and also a mensch—was England’s best, RVW.
Glyn Johns writes in his autobiography Sound Man:
(page 212 in my paperback edition).
However, they later worked together and he produced Slowhand. They became friends around the same time – it helped that Johns’ younger brother Andy [also a sound engineer, who worked on Led Zeppelin’s albums II through V] was married to one of Eric’s then-wife (and George Harrison’s ex) Patti Boyd’s sisters. Eric and the late-lamented Charlie Watts both played at Johns’ second wedding; “Now that was quite a band”, as he puts it.
Sound Man is highly recommended; it’s hard to name a major band or musician from the ’60s and ‘7Os that the dude didn’t work with and doesn’t have anecdotes about (Stones, Beatles, Who, Led Zepp, Eagles, CS&N, Hendrix, … ). And that’s not to mention the ones he met as a result, like Bob Dylan.
I love much of Clapton’s music, but I would defy anyone to demonstrate that he ever showed any particular wisdom at any point in his career.
Here is a hypothesis which I hate. As popular music gets worse, the musicians become better people.
Eric Clapton is a musical genius. He is also a total twat.