I am working on a new blog about food, travel, music, theatre, literature and film. It will be devoted to how much I hate all the things I love. Some topics will include why I think Shakespeare would have been a better writer if he didn't talk funny, why Cole Porter hasn't written a good song since he died, how pizza would be so much better without sauce, cheese & crust and how much better silent films of the 20's would be if the actors spoke.
Until then, I have this.
Doesn't it fascinate anyone that legends like Dylan, McCartney, Bowie, Elvis Costello, and Bruce among many others, are more often treated with disgust than with respect?
Except, Neil Young.
If Neil Young literally vomited onto a recording console, 69% of his fanbase would say, "You know there are a few good moments on the vomit album."
But enough about "Greendale."
If I had a dollar for every time I heard a fan of any one of the aforementioned artists say, "No, I never heard "Momofuku," or "Heathen," or "Wrecking Ball," or "Chaos & Creation," or "Magic," or "The Next Day," or "Brutal Youth," or "Memory Almost Full," I'd have enough money to fire Ron Aniello and have Bruce rerecord his soul covers with the E Street Band.
But seriously...
This pall that hangs over the creators of the music that has made millions of lives better is unwarranted.
It's lazy. And offensive. If you've listened and were not moved, well that's a different story. But that is not my experience. It wasn't my experience working music retail on and off for 35 years and it's not my experience now. Your miles may vary, of course, but all I hear is, "I don't have time." Or, "I haven't listened to his last six records." Or, "I heard the single and it didn't kill me."
And the absolute lulu of them all, "His last good record was..."
How would you know what his last good record was when the last record you listened to came out in 1984? It just doesn't seem very likely that these legends all stopped being brilliant at exactly the same time 35 years ago.
One last thing:
For the last damned time, it is not about "I like this/you like that, can't we all get along?" I would hope that was no longer something that needed to be said. But it would be nice if the topics and comments on these pages were read through before offering an opinion, just like it would mean more to have heard the music you are criticizing before actually criticizing it. And while it would be easy to attribute the inspiration for this post to yesterday's post and comments, I can assure you, this feeling started long before Burning Wood ever existed. Yesterday was just the kick in the ass I needed to get it written.
This is NOT personal. I am addressing no one and everyone.
After 14 years, I would hope that both friends and blog family would be able to tell the difference between my strong sentiments about the music I love and a personal attack. If you paid closer attention, you'd find more personal attacks on me in the comments than in any of my posts.
Now, excuse me while I burn all my Todd Rundgren records and write an essay on why Allen Toussaint was a hack.
16 comments:
I hate to admit it but I think I purchased Neil's Greendale CD from NYCD.
Anyway, I do agree with your post Sal. Too often legacy artists' recent work is dismissed by many often without listening to any of it. Their loss; some really excellent music released over the past few years by artists who are over 60 that holds up to the records they released decades ago. Let's add Robert Plant, P Furs, & Tears for Years to your list. BTW, the Tears album is one of my favorites from 2022
The Stones are expected to release a new album next year. I'm already anticipating complaints that it's not as good as Voodoo Lounge. And perhaps it won't be. But at least I know I'll give it a good listen before I come to that conclusion.
Ah Sal, you are correct sir. I notice this in my friends at times. For them, any music released after 1978-80, for example, never gets a listen. Some of it is time, raising kids, working, etc. The biggest obstacle, however, seems to be that they are stuck in that time when they were approaching adulthood, but still had something akin to youthful freedom.
The music listened to in those years is their soundtrack, and there is a refusal to let anything else in. It's crazy I know. I love the emotional connection I have to music from the 70s, but I have been able to make that same connection with the music that followed.
I love listening to McCartney as he ages. There is always something appealing to my ears with every new release.
Bruce continues to make music that excites me and inspires me, despite what my ears have always found to be some pretty crappy production.
I have no idea why Neil Young gets a pass. I don't remember the last time I was counting the days until he released new music. I'm not saying he stopped making good music with Harvest, but I am reluctant to buy his new music without a great review from someone I trust or unless I've heard some of the songs first.
I had better stop here, before I get carried away! Thanks Sal for writing what I believe many of us are thinking.
It's crazy to think that the artists you cite (and plenty others) are putting out interesting and good records that just get tossed aside by people. Or worse, not even listened to. Springsteen isn't resting on his laurels with his covers album. What artists this far into their careers are putting out albums as diverse as Look Now, Hey Clockface, and The Boy Name IF? Soon enough, we'll only have new Taylor Swift records to talk about, and that will be a sad day.
Neil Young aside: his muse got back into the hearse and headed back to Canada long ago. I think Neil keeps working hard at making new music, but it's just not there. But, as you note, the fine people over at sites like Thrasher's Wheat will praise the upcoming World Record as surpassing Zuma in its brilliance.
Bill
One last word from me on the Bruce album. I read a really good review in Variety, which talked about the expectations for this project given Bruce's history of covers in concert. Mostly production issues hold this back, and the author rips Ron Aniello for petty much everything since Wrecking Ball. But it's the last paragraph that sums up what is missing for me: "Ultimately, Springsteen’s new soul covers album goes at least a little way toward being a handsome declaration of a life’s inspiration and intention. But it should have been so much more than merely “covering” — and beyond mere survival. It could have been more lived-in and mightier, something genuinely strong built from muscle memory."
I'm at least somewhat guilty of your accusation. But I bought disappointing Elvis Costello, Neil Young, Springsteen and Bob Dylan records before I gave up. I still listen to every new Costello record, and Dylan has made a few great ones in the last 25 years that I own and listen to. But I also like Sloan, Calexico, Del Amitri, Gomez, Drive By Truckers and a few other more recent groups, so I don't really have to have great new music from legacy artists. My biggest concern is your blood pressure. Have you checked it lately?
I love your blog.
@Troy,
I read that Variety review and I don't disagree with the paragraph you cited. Yet again I will say, I did not LOVE the album the way some comments say I do. I never once said it was great. "Hit and miss. Highs and lows." The difference between my feelings and what seems to be the feelings of most everyone else is something anonymous said--
"I can understand not being over the moon but the trashing is perplexing. By any stretch of objective criticism it’s a well crafted piece. It may not be a Lamborghini but at the very least it’s a Luxury Volvo."
The anger and disdain over this record is a joke.
@Cleveland Jeff,
My BP is fine!
It's when I keep my mouth shut that is goes up.
:)
Point taken, and well made. I would say, though, that while tastes differ, fandom is what it is.
My love for all things Van, Paul (Macca and Weller), Todd, Elvis C, Joni, Ray (Davies and Lamontagne), Robbie, Garland, Waterboys, Charlatans, Hiatt...and yes Neil, is on me.
That I don't really 'like', and rarely listen to, Bob, Bruce, Velvets, The Stones is also on me. Doesn't diminish or reveal anything about them or the folks who love them.
But, I cherish (yup) your insights, opinions and passions. They have certainly entertained me, inform me and helped me reassess artists, discover ones I was never aware of.
It can be tough to get feedback that challenge ones passions and favorites. But you have created a space for fans of you and your opinions to share theirs (even if they may come across as less considered).
Man, that must have felt good! ;-)
I'm so guilty of what you rail against here. For example, The last Robyn Hitchcock album I bought was 1985's "Groovy Decoy", until a couple weeks ago when I ordered and received his new "Shufflemania!" which I like very much, and about which have said many times sounds like it's 40 years old in all the right ways.
I'd rather have 20 albums by 20 different artists, than 20 by any one of them, I guess.
I know this is appropo of nothing, but the Grammy noms came out.
I absolutely can't wait to see if this nomination gets to be performed live:
Song of the Year
"Abcdefu," Sara Davis, Gayle and Dave Pittenger, songwriters (Gayle)
I'm usually often bemused by the nominations, but to throw a bone to the TikTok crowd is a crazy way to draw viewers.
I was actually listening to the Springsteen album when I clicked on Burning Wood to see what Sal was up to, after having been away for a couple weeks. I'm an outlier -- I was once a passionate Bruce fan, but a lot of his early work has paled for me over the decades and I'm now more likely to listen to "Magic" or "Western Stars" than "Born to Run." Anyway, as a respectful but much more casual fan these days, I'm not invested in what Bruce chooses to put out, and all that said... I really enjoyed "Only the Strong Survive." On its own terms it's a fun, pleasurable record. To my ears the production is more nostalgic than slick, and I get why that could rankle either way, but I dug the vibe. And at 73, the guy can still sing! Damn!
Bruce H.
PS: Sal, I got a lot out of your post on the Revolver set -- thanks!
I hope "ABCDEFU" wins Song Of The Year just so they can say that title on the air. Mediate, keep that blood pressure down people!
If it makes you feel better, Metacritic gathers together reviews and comes up with the average take on an album. Typically to be one of the best reviewed albums of the year you'd have to hit 90 out of 100. It launched in 1999 so Silver And Gold is the first Neil Young covered on it. Not a SINGLE new album hits a 90, usually not even close. Only some reissues and compilations do it. So maybe he's not getting the free pass it feels like. Cheer up! :)
P.S. I'm looking forward to World Record because I'm an eternal optimist and that man was the SHIT in the 1970s. Damn music was pouring out of him and Stevie Wonder and Joni Mitchell. And I JUST got the pun of the title World Record. Seriously!
I love everybody.
https://www.metacritic.com/person/neil-young
The relationship between a listener and a musician is, in some ways, like a romantic relationship. You can spend years loving a particular artist, collecting all the B-sides, seeing all the shows, hearing something new every time you listen to their classic albums, and then one day you wake up and... for whatever reason, the passion is gone. The new record comes out, and the one after that, and the one after that, and you find you just don't care as much. And even the old records, while you'll still always have a soft spot in your heart for them, it's more for what they MEANT to you then, rather than what they MEAN to you now. And there's no explanation for it. It just is. It happened to me with Springsteen after The Rising, and with Elvis Costello a few years after that. I still have tons of records and CDs by both of them, I still occasionally get jazzed when I hear a new song by them that I like, but it's not the same and it never will be. And it's not them, it's me. The artists change, we change as listeners, and it's not always going to be in lockstep. It's sad, but any kind of love can be sad.
As ever,
Pete
Nice take on this, Pete.
I understand your point.
However, as you know, art is subjective. One can look at a painting once, and believe it to be a masterpiece, see it again some time later and wonder what they saw in it before.
Same with music artists. I'm a fan of all those mentioned, but not nearly as much of a fan of them as I once was.
Because I have changed as a person, so has my mind when it comes to appreciating those artists.
I'm much more interested seeking out new music, or at least music I haven't heard before. I'm just not going to live in the past when it comes to my music listening.
When a "legacy artist" puts out something new, I usually take a listen, and if it's the same old thing, I don't waste my time further.
One more thing, the more legendary an artist is, the better a target they are. If you attain the status of a McCartney, what you describe is as predictable as it gets. I doubt he gives one shit what the fans and critics opine by this point.
People are fickle. As someone once said, "it's all in the mind,ya know".
Post a Comment