adolph@ssc-vax.UUCP (Mark Adolph) (12/18/84)
*** YOUR MESSAGE *** How many times have you heard/read one of the following? "I like their old stuff much better." "They've really sold out." "They were better before they became so famous." While this is true in some cases (Manhattan Transfer?), I submit that in many cases this is an expression partially of elitism and partially of a Reaganesque feeling that `nothing can be as good as the old days', rather than a fair appraisal of the music. Think about it. Is there not a certain pride in being able to introduce someone else to some hitherto unknown group, and have that person recognize along with you that this music, although not widely acclaimed, is very good stuff. It's the same sort of thinking that keeps big city residents searching for "their little hangout". One can also sit safely back and assure oneself that while the masses are placating themselves with Duran Duran and Michael Jackson, you are reaching a higher plane by listening to Electro & The Quantum Leaps, a group out of North Platt, Nebraska who are destined to be the biggest thing since the automatic transmission (at which time, they can safely be accused of selling out), as soon as everyone else wakes up and realizes what YOU have known all along. Then again, how many songs bring back memories? I, for one, have very strong and specific memories whenever I hear Earth, Wind & Fire do "September", but haven't bought one of their albums in years. Has their music really changed, or am I unwilling to accept that anything could compete with those memories? Was Prince's "Controversy" really better than "When Doves Cry", or have we simply known the latter longer? I feel that opinions like this can have a stifling effect on performers and prevent them from growing and changing. Sure, we liked "Yes I Can Can", but isn't it good to hear The Pointer Sisters strike out in a new direction so successfully with "Jump (For My Love)" and "I'm So Excited"? And some esoteric souls have liked "Weird Al" Yankovic since he was singing "My Bologna", accompanied by only an accordian, but I'm sure that they must be happy to hear real instrumentation on "Eat It". This could never have happened if people didn't accept his new sound, locking him into a James Brown-like repetitousness. I've probably invited 4-6 weeks worth of flames, but I'm frankly tired of hearing statements like those at the beginning of this message, especially when they seem to be a result of sweeping anti-popularism (I love inventing words!), rather than seriously listening to the music in question. -- Mark A. ...uw-beaver!ssc-vax!adolph "Computers are like preppies: they just boil around in their own way and you have to do things their way or they blow you off." "Everything that was different was a different thing..."
gtaylor@lasspvax.UUCP (Greg Taylor) (12/18/84)
Yeah, Mark-point well taken. However, I don't think that ego and ownership are always the whole story. Consider, for example, the notion of "sustained naivety;" Scritti Politti have been around for quite a long time, being one of the first Rough Trade bands (for a little earlier work-though you'll hardly recognize it-try the RT compilation "Wanna Buy a Bridge?"). Back then, they could hardly play a note, and the stuff they did was this heavily reggae flavored slab of white noise with fuzz-tone vocals. Then, they had a big hit in England with"The Sweetest Girl"...anyhow, as they kept working, the sense of shine got a bit more obvious, and the sort of idiosyncratic things that originally attracted me to them just flew away. Not that they needed to hang on to the little things they did to circumvent being unable to play lightning fast solos etc, but that I guess it just became harder to retain the sense of pleasure, determination and fun that filled their early stuff. Don't get me wrong: I happen to think that the new Jerry Wexler produced stuff is really stylish (though a bit too Jacksoned-up). It's just that they are really two groups when you try to think of their work. I'd just as easily talk about the Clash, PiL, in the same way. And also note that I am not assuming that getting slick is all bad: In the case of a band like Japan (who, by the way, have a great retrospective album called "Excorcising Ghosts" out-check it), their slicker work is head and shoulders above their earlier derivative junk: THey went from being third-stringBowie clones to a really fine group. It seems a bit ironic that I think we're arguing for the same thing: the right of an artist to choose, or choose not to change. I am inclined to be more mindful of the pressures generated by the "recording industry" together with the urge for wealth in terms of the way that it creates a process that inevitably restricts the people who might do something interesting, though. You really interested in this? Go out and hunt up a copy of Simon Frith's (yes, he *is* Fred Frith's brother) "Sound Affects: Youth, Leisure, and the Politics of Rock and Roll." It is an excellent discussion of many of the issues you raise. Greg
sherouse@unc.UUCP (George W. Sherouse) (12/19/84)
Yes, but on the other hand, isn't it just possible that a great many artists (I mean the ones who write their own material primarily) just start out with a limited amount to say? In many of the groups I listened to in the early 70s (Yes, King Crimson, Genesis, etc.) it is easy to trace their development from new ideas with little direction, to realization of just the right expression of their ideas, through rapid decline. The same holds true of the groups I cared about in the late 70s except they had the additional burden of the has-beens as vampiric producers (Eno (T. Heads), Fripp (Roches), Bowie (Iggy), ad nauseum). My point, if I have one, is that in many cases an artist's earlier work *is* better, not so much because they sell out (They *do* sell out.) but because they were more in touch with whatever it was that made them unique. "Why do I want to make music? Hmmm... I forget. Must be for the bucks." Good tunes to you, George W. Sherouse <decvax!mcnc!unc!godot!sherouse> "I couldn't act naturally if I wanted to."
sethian@cmcl2.UUCP (12/19/84)
The previous note is one of the most intelligent and ego-less discussion on an old topic that I have ever seen. It makes up for a lot of crap on the net. .
kissell@spar.UUCP (12/20/84)
> > How many times have you heard/read one of the following? > > "I like their old stuff much better." > "They've really sold out." > "They were better before they became so famous." > > While this is true in some cases (Manhattan Transfer?), I submit that in > many cases this is an expression partially of elitism and partially of a > Reaganesque feeling that `nothing can be as good as the old days', rather > than a fair appraisal of the music. > There are very good reasons why the quality of a commercial artist's work often declines in the course of a successful career. These apply to popular visual and literary forms as well as to music, but I'll try and describe them from a rocker's perspective. Most bands have at least two full sets of material worked out for their live act before they get any sort of record contract and exposure. This material is often the product of many years of writing, arranging, and refining. So the first album or two usually contain the very best of 5-10 man-years of work. After that, a recording group is expected to produce an LP every 12 to 24 months, which is pretty taxing for all but the most prolific composers. It's a lot easier to be daring when you have nothing to lose. Success is so fleeting a thing that once a performer has achieved it, he/she/they will think two or three times before deviating from whatever it was that they did that worked. Mortgage payments make conservatives of us all.
pjt@BRL-VOC.ARPA (12/20/84)
I disagree reasonably strongly. Look at any of the ex-Beatles. The
quality of their work correlates pretty well with its age. You gonna
tell me 'Ebony & Ivory' or 'Cook of the House' (already turning musty)
compare to bona fide Fab Four stuff? But McCartney would be assured of
making a bundle whatever he produced. He wasn't compelled to go pop in
order to feed his family. On the contrary, it seems to me he took the
route of least resistance and became a pablum peddlar. Of course, he
always did lean toward the cutesy quaint vaudeville stuff (e.g. 'Martha
My Dear', 'Honey Pie').
Furthermore, I personally don't just like performers' earlier work because
I got in on the ground floor. 'Lamb Lies Down on Broadway' was the first
hot-off-the-presses purchase I made of a Genesis album, but I've always found
their post-Gabriel stuff inferior (at best). By the time I got around to
Eno he was well into ambient but 'Another Green World' is still my favorite
of his albums.
+++paulstrock@fortune.UUCP (Gregory Strockbine) (12/20/84)
In article <13@spar.UUCP> kissell@spar.UUCP (Kevin Kissell) writes: >> >> How many times have you heard/read one of the following? >> >> "I like their old stuff much better." >> "They've really sold out." >> "They were better before they became so famous." >> "I like band x." "I like band y." "I like this song." Don't you just hate it when people express their personal preference. Just by the very fact of mentioning a band's name or a song's name is elitist! "Go out and listen to some music." - What kind? By who? "JUST music, damn it, JUST music!"
Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@BRL-VLD.ARPA> (12/21/84)
George Harrison spoke of the Beatles' having to play the hits from their records, not their old stuff. (This is from comments appearing on the cover of at least 1 edition of "Beatles in the beginning, c. 1960, with Tony Sheridan".) It's also my understanding that Brian Wilson of the Beach Boys was going deaf in one ear, and became quite withdrawn, and stopped touring with the group (replaced on the tours by singers such as Glen Campbell and Bruce Johnston). Other members of the group were concerned about the new sounds found on Pet Sounds LP, even though such LP became a classic. (It compares to Sgt. Pepper or Rubber Soul, and is the 1st Beach Boys LP not to have surfing and/or car songs on it.)
steiny@scc.UUCP (Don Steiny) (12/22/84)
** The idea that musicians peak and then decline is a hard one to justify in the light of the large number of musicians that get better and better their whole lives and and leave the world a much better place. This may not be true of New Wave groups or rock in general. But Merle Travis, Doc Watson, Chet Atkins, Dave Grissman, Tony Rice, Stephan Grappalli, Miles Davis, Beethoven, and many other musicians living and dead have evolved their whole lives. They often move from one form of music to another. Their love of music seems to go far beyond that of us ordinary mortals. -- scc!steiny Don Steiny - Personetics @ (408) 425-0382 109 Torrey Pine Terr. Santa Cruz, Calif. 95060 ihnp4!pesnta -\ fortune!idsvax -> scc!steiny ucbvax!twg -/
gregbo@houxm.UUCP (Greg Skinner) (12/24/84)
> From: adolph@ssc-vax.UUCP (Mark Adolph) > How many times have you heard/read one of the following? > "I like their old stuff much better." > "They've really sold out." > "They were better before they became so famous." Practically all the time on this list, especially when discussions of pre- Phil Collins lead-singer Genesis come up. > Then again, how many songs bring back memories? I, for one, have very strong > and specific memories whenever I hear Earth, Wind & Fire do "September", but > haven't bought one of their albums in years. Has their music really changed, > or am I unwilling to accept that anything could compete with those memories? > Was Prince's "Controversy" really better than "When Doves Cry", or have we > simply known the latter longer? As far as Earth, Wind and Fire go, I can't say, because they haven't put out anything creative in their last few album efforts (not since 1979 anyway, which is when "I Am" came out, I think). Prince's music isn't necessarily better now than back in his "Controversy" days, but his music appeals to a wider cross-section of people now than it did three years ago and this is the reason for his huge popularity now. He also has not lost his original aud- ience. A lot of this logic can be applied to Genesis, both during and post-Gabriel, but with the exception that most former Genesis fans don't seem to like them anymore with Phil Collins at the lead, whereas I haven't heard of any com- plaints from Prince's pre-Revolution fans. -- Baby tie your hair back in a long white bow ... Meet me in the field, behind the dynamo ... Greg Skinner (gregbo) {allegra,cbosgd,ihnp4}!houxm!gregbo