Showing posts with label Smooth song of the day. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Smooth song of the day. Show all posts
Friday, May 4, 2018
The last Smooth Song of summer
This is very well written. It's Teflon smooth. That is to say, it doesn't stick. Heck, it barely even registers. And yet it is a supreme example of the songwriter's craft. (Yes, it did that on purpose.)
I have a funny memory that goes with this. Years after this was a hit, it was played as an oldie on the radio and my first girlfriend used it as a pretext to start talking about how she would deal with a break up. She spoke of the pain and how she wasn't certain how well she'd deal with it. And I felt for her. I had no intention of breaking up with her but we were teenagers and at that age you know, even if you don't discuss it, that it's highly unlikely you'll be together for the rest of your lives. My focus was entirely on her as I listened: I didn't want to hurt her but I knew at least enough not to make promises I couldn't keep. I felt for her.
Ah, to be that naive again. If I had a time machine I'd go back and whisper in my ear, "She's already planning her exit strategy you moron!" I spent a lot of my teens and twenties feeling sorry for women who had the moral consciences of professional killers.
The point of all this being that the lyrics of this are beyond disingenuous. She was always planning for this to end and now she wants to feel sorry for herself. Not one line, not one word of the song is devoted to any pain her ex might be feeling. She's supposed to help her deal with it and then disappear. There is a name for that sort of thinking but I use it too much so I won't actually write it here.
I've done smooth songs of summer for a number of years now and it's time to move on to something else. This seemed like a good song to end it with.
Tuesday, July 11, 2017
Smooth songs of summer 2017 edition
Bill Danoff was in on the creation of three beautifully crafted pop songs—absolutely perfect little gems that couldn't be improved on. On the one hand, that's a lot fewer than George Gershwin, Cole Porter, Irving Berlin, Paul Simon, Paul McCartney or the Gibb brothers. On the other hand, it's more than a lot of much more respected pop stars ever managed.
The three songs in question are "Take Me Home, Country Roads". "Boulder to Birmingham" and this huge hit from 1976.
Starland Vocal Band is an odd name. Okay, odd band names aren't exactly rare but I do wonder how they came up with this one. "Starland" gives off a Dorothy Stratten vibe. And "vocal"? Bands with vocals aren't rare. That said, the vocal harmonies on this recording are one heck of a lot harder to duplicate than they are to enjoy.
It wasn't just a huge hit. In 1976, the song penetrated the popular consciousness in a way that very few songs do. It did so because it caused sexual scandal. That's bound to puzzle anyone under the age of fifty. In preparing this, I scanned the Wikipedia page on the subject and was surprised to find that the lyrics are treated as "somewhat controversial" even today. That is followed by a somewhat perplexed quote from Danoff, "I didn't want to write an all-out sex song ... I just wanted to write something that was fun and hinted at sex." And that's pretty much all there is to the song. Why did it cause such excitement?
in his memoir The Best Times, John Dos Passos relays a story about how Don Alfonso of Spain woke up one morning to see a plane piloted by Ramon Franco flying over the palace. No bombs were dropped but Don Alfonso suddenly realized that it was all over for the Bourbons, burned a pile of state papers in his office and told his wife he was fleeing to France, which he promptly did, leaving her to follow with the children a few days later. And, as Dos Passos wraps up the story, "The people of Madrid woke up the next morning to find themselves, to their great surprise, a republic." Perhaps that story is a little too perfect but I think we can say that this song had exactly that effect on those who thought the sexual revolution could be reversed.
As I've said before, the people who first wrote about the sexual revolution described it as something that had already happened by 1960. It might be better to describe it as a fait accompli, that is to say as something that was too late to stop. No matter what you've been told to the contrary, your grandparents probably didn't wait for marriage. And by 1960 (if not by 1945), most sex was carried out in pursuit of pleasure without pregnancy. That was the fait accompli part. It was as if the whole world woke up one day to discover that a widespread rebellion against the sexual establishment had been launched and most of the country was in the hands of the rebels and there was widespread grassroots support for them. The establishment, however, still controlled the capital, the newspapers, the television stations and the airports. People were hesitant to speak in support of the rebels because the coup still looked reversible.
The thing that would have felt like a stake being driven into the hearts of those in the sexual Ancien Regime was the sense that, to use a current expression, afternoon sex had been normalized. People had had sex in the afternoon before. Married people had done it when they found themselves alone in the house and cheating spouses had done it to avoid being detected. No doubt, teenagers did it also to avoid getting caught. But these were all cases of settling for the afternoon because the nighttime wasn't available. Sex was, as Saint Paul described it, a deed of the nighttime. It was something that even people who had social sanction to do did not just secretly but shamefully. By, to use an anachronistic expression by 1976 standards, normalizing afternoon sex, Afternoon Delight made the last holdouts realize the battle was over.
People like my mother, a strict Catholic, still thought of sex as a chivalrous domain in 1976. She could see that certain scoundrels might have sex with someone's wife in a suburban home while her husband was at work and the children were at school. She could also see that a married man in the city might meet his lover at a downtown hotel for a nooner. For all I know, she may have taken part in such activities herself. But she saw such sex as something that should be and could be controlled, like weeds in the garden, it could never be eliminated but it could be minimized. She thought she could further count on the shame of afternoon sex limiting it to certain hard cases. That a mild-mannered pop song about afternoon sex could hit number one and hold it for two solid weeks, put paid to that notion. It was over.
To understand why, you need to know that everything my mother, and women like her, tried to control about her children's behaviour was based on the assumption that the danger lay chiefly at night. If a boy took her one of her daughters out, he was expected to bring her home early. My mother saw the overwhelming danger as something that happened after dinner, after the movie or after dancing. She thought a couple heading out in the afternoon represented no threat. That they might not go to lunch or an afternoon movie or for a walk in the park but straight over to his house when his parents were out or his friends house and have sofa on the sofa in the family room wasn't even imaginable. When it suddenly was, the game was over. I was 17 years old the year this was a hit. My mother still tried to control what I did or didn't do. She barely even tried for my three younger siblings.
The three songs in question are "Take Me Home, Country Roads". "Boulder to Birmingham" and this huge hit from 1976.
Starland Vocal Band is an odd name. Okay, odd band names aren't exactly rare but I do wonder how they came up with this one. "Starland" gives off a Dorothy Stratten vibe. And "vocal"? Bands with vocals aren't rare. That said, the vocal harmonies on this recording are one heck of a lot harder to duplicate than they are to enjoy.
It wasn't just a huge hit. In 1976, the song penetrated the popular consciousness in a way that very few songs do. It did so because it caused sexual scandal. That's bound to puzzle anyone under the age of fifty. In preparing this, I scanned the Wikipedia page on the subject and was surprised to find that the lyrics are treated as "somewhat controversial" even today. That is followed by a somewhat perplexed quote from Danoff, "I didn't want to write an all-out sex song ... I just wanted to write something that was fun and hinted at sex." And that's pretty much all there is to the song. Why did it cause such excitement?
in his memoir The Best Times, John Dos Passos relays a story about how Don Alfonso of Spain woke up one morning to see a plane piloted by Ramon Franco flying over the palace. No bombs were dropped but Don Alfonso suddenly realized that it was all over for the Bourbons, burned a pile of state papers in his office and told his wife he was fleeing to France, which he promptly did, leaving her to follow with the children a few days later. And, as Dos Passos wraps up the story, "The people of Madrid woke up the next morning to find themselves, to their great surprise, a republic." Perhaps that story is a little too perfect but I think we can say that this song had exactly that effect on those who thought the sexual revolution could be reversed.
As I've said before, the people who first wrote about the sexual revolution described it as something that had already happened by 1960. It might be better to describe it as a fait accompli, that is to say as something that was too late to stop. No matter what you've been told to the contrary, your grandparents probably didn't wait for marriage. And by 1960 (if not by 1945), most sex was carried out in pursuit of pleasure without pregnancy. That was the fait accompli part. It was as if the whole world woke up one day to discover that a widespread rebellion against the sexual establishment had been launched and most of the country was in the hands of the rebels and there was widespread grassroots support for them. The establishment, however, still controlled the capital, the newspapers, the television stations and the airports. People were hesitant to speak in support of the rebels because the coup still looked reversible.
The thing that would have felt like a stake being driven into the hearts of those in the sexual Ancien Regime was the sense that, to use a current expression, afternoon sex had been normalized. People had had sex in the afternoon before. Married people had done it when they found themselves alone in the house and cheating spouses had done it to avoid being detected. No doubt, teenagers did it also to avoid getting caught. But these were all cases of settling for the afternoon because the nighttime wasn't available. Sex was, as Saint Paul described it, a deed of the nighttime. It was something that even people who had social sanction to do did not just secretly but shamefully. By, to use an anachronistic expression by 1976 standards, normalizing afternoon sex, Afternoon Delight made the last holdouts realize the battle was over.
People like my mother, a strict Catholic, still thought of sex as a chivalrous domain in 1976. She could see that certain scoundrels might have sex with someone's wife in a suburban home while her husband was at work and the children were at school. She could also see that a married man in the city might meet his lover at a downtown hotel for a nooner. For all I know, she may have taken part in such activities herself. But she saw such sex as something that should be and could be controlled, like weeds in the garden, it could never be eliminated but it could be minimized. She thought she could further count on the shame of afternoon sex limiting it to certain hard cases. That a mild-mannered pop song about afternoon sex could hit number one and hold it for two solid weeks, put paid to that notion. It was over.
To understand why, you need to know that everything my mother, and women like her, tried to control about her children's behaviour was based on the assumption that the danger lay chiefly at night. If a boy took her one of her daughters out, he was expected to bring her home early. My mother saw the overwhelming danger as something that happened after dinner, after the movie or after dancing. She thought a couple heading out in the afternoon represented no threat. That they might not go to lunch or an afternoon movie or for a walk in the park but straight over to his house when his parents were out or his friends house and have sofa on the sofa in the family room wasn't even imaginable. When it suddenly was, the game was over. I was 17 years old the year this was a hit. My mother still tried to control what I did or didn't do. She barely even tried for my three younger siblings.
Friday, June 26, 2015
Songs of Summer: "innocence", now with added soft core porn
If you click on that YouTube will probably ask you to sign into prove you are of age. There is some 35 minutes worth of music there but the bit I am concerned with starts at 32:20. This link should take you right there. If you remember Je t'aime moi non plus from a few weeks ago that should strike you as very familiar. It's the Louie Louie riff in the Hang on Sloopy variation with an organ bit over it that is very similar to Je t'aime, moi non plus". Extra bonus points if you recognized that the organ line is clearly inspired by this teenybopper hit from 1969.
I won't belabour the point; the mix of innocence and not so innocent here is quite rich. What I think is worth noticing is how much of our reaction to a piece of music or an image is driven by previous associations we have with it. Once Serge Gainsbourg, Jane Birkin and Julie London had tied slow groove versions of kiddie pop to erotica we could never not think of sex when we heard these things again.
The same thing happened with the visuals by the way. If you look at Sylvia Kristel sitting topless in that rattan throne in the video and notice the clothes she isn't quite wearing, you'll notice how similar they are to what David Hamilton had the teen models he photographed wear. And notice this lingerie ad photo from the same era by Aubade:
And then there is this cover from Penthouse magazine.
These images are like religious icons in that while the faces may change the symbols establish the subject as the same in some way. And if you were to watch Emmanuelle and listen to Leonard Cohen's Suzanne and read a whole lot of 1970s Penthouse magazines while drinking Harvey Wallbangers it would all somehow make sense. Not because these things go together but because, like Fortnum & Mason, they have been linked together so often that anyone of the elements will bring the others with it.
Final note, contrary to what you might guess, softcore porn came after hardcore. You can find hardcore porn going all the way back to the 1920s. Softcore is a product of the pate 1960s and early 1970s with its soft focus and lack of really explicit detail.
Friday, June 19, 2015
Song of summer: "innocence" with bubblegum on her knees
Bubblegum music was probably called that because one of the leading purveyors of the music was a band called The 1910 Fruitgum Company. Most critics describe it as a dumbing down of rock music with innocents made innocent so as to not offend the parents of young adolescent girls. That's not really true. Rock and roll, which had been kiddie music, was getting decided adult in contend and this was music that tried to maintain an innocence that was in danger of being lost.
But it's all in the delivery. Take a bouncy bubblegum pop song with painfully innocent lyrics do it with a slow groove and let Julie London give it her patented oral stimulations on it and you you'll get a whole different set of ideas.
The people who hated it, and they were legion, thought that Julie had failed to pull off rock music here. What she really did, in conjunction with other oldsters like Serge Gainsbourg and Leonard Cohen, was to create something brand new. It's a masterpiece of its type.
But it's all in the delivery. Take a bouncy bubblegum pop song with painfully innocent lyrics do it with a slow groove and let Julie London give it her patented oral stimulations on it and you you'll get a whole different set of ideas.
The people who hated it, and they were legion, thought that Julie had failed to pull off rock music here. What she really did, in conjunction with other oldsters like Serge Gainsbourg and Leonard Cohen, was to create something brand new. It's a masterpiece of its type.
Friday, June 12, 2015
Songs of summer; "Innocence" NSFW
Suzanne shows a Jewish poet and an English photographer where to look ...
My theme this summer is a kind of erotic "innocence", the scare quotes are very appropriate here, that was evident everywhere in the 1970s just as I was coming of age. The first two posts focused on Serge Gainsbourg. Now I want to shift to Leonard Cohen. He and Gainsbourg have a lot in common. They both are Jewish. Both were older men than most of their pop music contemporaries. Both men, though no slouches at music, were much better with words than music. Most importantly, both men made huge contributions to the sort of erotic imagery I've been discussing.Cohen got some very-much-unwanted help in this from a photographer named David Hamilton and that unwitting collaboration is the subject of today's post.
The Jewish poet
We'll start with Cohen. The song is "Suzanne". Here is how he described it:I wrote this in 1966. Suzanne had a room on a waterfront street in the port of Montreal. Everything happened just as it was put down. She was the wife of a man I knew. Her hospitality was immaculate.That "immaculate" is a very ambiguous term. With no context, it sounds like she gave him sex. But the song blurs the lines between Suzanne the hostess and our Lady of the Harbour who is Notre Dame de Bon Secours (Our Lady of Good Hope in English) whose statue as Stella Maris (the star of the sea), is visible on the very street where Suzanne lives. She is the one whom the sun pours down like honey.
If you know your Catholic Mariology, you will know that Mary, aka "Our Lady", is also known as "the Immaculate Conception". Now that refers not to the conception of Jesus but to the conception of Mary as being immaculate, which is to say, without original sin. But Mary's conception is not without sex. Unlike Mary herself, her parents conceived through sex.
On the other hand, a man and a woman can not have sex and still be the opposite of innocent.
So ... well, you decide. We could go in circles here all day long, which I suspect was Cohen's intention.
At the same time, Cohen was mining a well-established genre here. It goes back at least as far as "It Happened in Monterey" from the 1920s and was carried on by dozens of other songs and books. The story was always the same, guy goes somewhere exotic, meets local girl, falls in love, loses local girl, she haunts him still. The exotic place could be a foreign land or it could be the bohemian part of town; in the end it was an imaginary exotica so it wasn't that important. In 1954, Jackie Gleason released a concept album called Tawny that hit almost all the same themes as Cohen only he set it to swing jazz with strings.
Cohen's innovation was to really play up the suggestion of innocence and sexuality together that comes from the troubadour tradition via Catholic teachings about Mary and a new kind of music. At the time, the music was called "folk" but it has no connection with any legitimate folk music you'll find anywhere on this planet. It's actual roots are French chanson and country, both of which were very much a part of the popular culture of Quebec where Cohen grew up.
The English photographer
Cohen foolishly signed away the publishing rights of the song and new owner of the rights agreed to allow the German magazine TWEN to use the lyrics along with a photo spread published in 1969. Now, that may mean nothing to you but, trust me, this was one very influential magazine.Is the Twen magazine the most influential magazine of all times? This question might sound pretentious but it is not far from the truth. Why was this magazine so influential? It was the groundbreaking design ideas, innovative usage of photography and full use of the advanced printing methods that made Twen a leader in magazine layout and design.Cohen gave exotica a new music and TWEN gave it a new look. They commissioned a fashion photographer named David Hamilton to provide a photo spread to go with the lyrics. And he delivered.
Hamilton gets a lot of criticism nowadays, when people pay attention to him at all, because he specialized in erotic photography of girls, as in under legal age girls. And maybe he deserves it. I'm inclined to let him off the hook but thousands of others aren't. But, whether you think the end result is pornographic or art, the achievement is impressive. [Update: A year after this was posted, Hamilton was accused of having raped an underaged girl back in 1987. He first denied it and threatened to sue his accusers and then committed suicide, all within about one month.]
He didn't have much to go on.
she is wearing rags and feathers
from Salvation Army counters
That's all the song says about her appearance. Hamilton took that and a vaguely Pre-Raphaelite bohemianism combined with Belle Epoque aesthetic and shot it all in soft focus to give it a sort of impressionist feeling and ran with it. There were only four photos in the original spread abut it was so popular that Hamilton spun dozens of books and, most famously, an ad campaign for Nina Ricci perfume out of it. Here is a sampler, warning nudity.
In a David Hamilton photograph, the subject is almost always innocent. You on the other hand, may not be. She is either alone in her bedroom or with a trusted girlfriend or, if in public, unaware of what she is showing.
And a whole lot people built a career on that look, from designers, to models, to actresses, to clothing stores. (Added March 21, 2016: Also Penthouse Magazine.)
Friday, June 5, 2015
Songs of Summer: "Innocence"
Serge Gainsbourg, also the subject of last week's song of summer, was frighteningly clever. Was he anything more than that? No. Just very, very clever.
On the one hand, that's nothing to sneer at. 9999 out of 10,000 pop artists are just clever. On the other hand, there is no real depth here.
The joke, for those of you who don't speak French, is that after several scandals caused by his sneaking sexual content into seemingly innocent songs, here Gainsbourg has produced a song that seems overtly sexual but has lyrics that say that sex is not love. It's a love song of a sort.
Except that Jane Birkin is simulating orgasm in the background and that tends to contradict the lyrics in the foreground.
Birkin had been married to John Barry, of James Bond fame, before hooking up with Gainsbourg. As such, you might say that this song represents the pivot point between the sixties and the seventies. There is an undeniable change of attitude that comes with it.
It wasn't a pivot for the kiddie set but for adults. The adults had made it through the sixties still making updated versions of the easy swinging style that Nat King Cole and Frank Sinatra had established in the 1950s but the clock had run out on that. Some sort of compromise with rock music had to be made and this showed the way.
Gainsbourg's pop career is pretty much an extended commentary on pop music by a man who simultaneously a) made a lot of money out of it while b) hating it. The opening riff, for example, is obviously derived from The lineage of Louie Louie but Gainsbourg can't help improving it as he steals it. He's married that to an organ line clearly inspired by Whiter Shade of Pale.
(For any purists reading this, it's not quite the Louie Louie Chord progression. That one goes I-IV-v-IV and this, like Hang on Sloopy, is a more straightforward I-IV-V-IV. Most listeners couldn't tell the difference and there is no good reason to care.)
On top of all that there is Gainsbourg's almost spoken vocal and Jane Birkin's inimitable contribution. His vocal is almost a cliché of French chanson but, for obvious reasons, no one was going to notice. Birkin did a full frontal nude in the movie Blow Up that I'm told was the first in British film history. She was, and is, extremely beautiful, talented and rich, so she didn't have to worry about shame much.
Donna Summer later did a version of this which is rather a shame as it seems a little too much, sort of like Caitlyn Jenner doing a sex tape.
In any case, this really set the style for what was to come as we'll see.
Friday, July 26, 2013
Smooth baritones of summer: problems with Sinatra
As far as our era is concerned, Sinatra is the baritone if not the singer. Anyone who sets out to be a serious male singer of standards tends to take Sinatra as a role model. Actually, that understates the problem. As Mark Steyn said somewhere, we have a whole generation of crooners who more or less do karaoke versions of standards as sung by Sinatra.
That's a problem and not just because it's a sterile approach. It's a problem because there are aspects of Sinatra's style that are being absorbed uncritically.
Sinatra had three careers. He had a career in the 1940s when he sang mostly for women alone at home while their husbands and boyfriends fought the war. We think of performances like "I'll Never Smile Again" when we think of that period. He had a career in the 1950s when he sang mostly for men adjusting to the social changes that came after the war. We think of the great concept albums he did with Capitol records when we think of this career. Finally, he had a career as a swaggering, swinging very male man in his final decades. We think of an awful lot of tripe such as "My Way", "This Town" and "New York, New York" when we think of this career. *
One problem here is that that last phase of his career tended to establish his persona for the baby boomer generation. Sinatra reported hated the Doors song "Light my Fire" and that is all well and good but Jim Morrison learned to sing by imitating Sinatra and he learned well. With albums such as 1966's That's Life Sinatra started to get blustery and assertive where he had been subtle and unafraid to show vulnerability.
And then he did something worse. In 1967, the year that the Doors music became so painfully popular, Sinatra recorded this awful song. It's not just the awfulness of the song, it's the way he sings it. Jim Morrison developed his style by copying Sinatra and here we see Sinatra debasing his by copying Morrison.
* There was lots of good stuff as well in this period but most of it, think of the album September of My Years, succeeds because it is a throwback to what he was doing in the 1950s. The sole exception is the Jobim stuff he recorded. Sinatra's versions of the big bossa nova hits are the only ones that do anything more than simply copy the Brazilian originals. He was on the edge of developing a new style that could have been the beginning of something great. Sadly, Sinatra wasn't willing to work as hard at that point of his career as he did in the 1940s and 1950s. Then again, who can blame him. Why should he have?
That's a problem and not just because it's a sterile approach. It's a problem because there are aspects of Sinatra's style that are being absorbed uncritically.
Sinatra had three careers. He had a career in the 1940s when he sang mostly for women alone at home while their husbands and boyfriends fought the war. We think of performances like "I'll Never Smile Again" when we think of that period. He had a career in the 1950s when he sang mostly for men adjusting to the social changes that came after the war. We think of the great concept albums he did with Capitol records when we think of this career. Finally, he had a career as a swaggering, swinging very male man in his final decades. We think of an awful lot of tripe such as "My Way", "This Town" and "New York, New York" when we think of this career. *
One problem here is that that last phase of his career tended to establish his persona for the baby boomer generation. Sinatra reported hated the Doors song "Light my Fire" and that is all well and good but Jim Morrison learned to sing by imitating Sinatra and he learned well. With albums such as 1966's That's Life Sinatra started to get blustery and assertive where he had been subtle and unafraid to show vulnerability.
And then he did something worse. In 1967, the year that the Doors music became so painfully popular, Sinatra recorded this awful song. It's not just the awfulness of the song, it's the way he sings it. Jim Morrison developed his style by copying Sinatra and here we see Sinatra debasing his by copying Morrison.
* There was lots of good stuff as well in this period but most of it, think of the album September of My Years, succeeds because it is a throwback to what he was doing in the 1950s. The sole exception is the Jobim stuff he recorded. Sinatra's versions of the big bossa nova hits are the only ones that do anything more than simply copy the Brazilian originals. He was on the edge of developing a new style that could have been the beginning of something great. Sadly, Sinatra wasn't willing to work as hard at that point of his career as he did in the 1940s and 1950s. Then again, who can blame him. Why should he have?
Saturday, July 6, 2013
Smooth baritones of summer #2 Armstrong and Crosby
I meant to get this up Friday. Oh well.
This is not a great song. The melody is stolen and the lyrics are, well, disposable is probably the nicest thing anyone will ever say about them. That said, the lyrics work well for the point I want to make. There is no terribly profound meaning to be excavated here. You have a song about being musical being sung by two guys who were better at being musical than just about anyone else alive in the twentieth century.
This is one of those rare occasions where the medium actually is the message.
Because the lyrics are stupid, you can ignore them and notice how each man makes his voice work first against and then with the other mans voice. They can sound very distinct for a few bars and then turn around and blend like Scotch (Armstrong) and Soda (Bing). It's very easy to listen to but just try doing it yourself.
And here is the thing, Sinatra couldn't sing like that to save his life. And he knew it.
He used to say that his kind of singing was harder than Crosby's kind but that isn't really true. Sinatra was a genius with phrasing and he could go up to F#, which is a major third higher than Crosby could go*, which is to say, there were things Sinatra could do that Crosby couldn't. Sinatra also mastered the long-playing format that Crosby had only a few successes with. But it's nonsense on stilts to pretend that what Crosby could do wasn't hard. It was very hard and the fact that he made it look easy only makes it more daunting.
I love Sinatra, with some reservations, but Crosby was the more significant artist.
* It's telling that some Sinatra fans use range when trying to make the case for their man as neither Sinatra nor Crosby had much range (by serious singer standards that is, my own range is right between the two men's).
This is not a great song. The melody is stolen and the lyrics are, well, disposable is probably the nicest thing anyone will ever say about them. That said, the lyrics work well for the point I want to make. There is no terribly profound meaning to be excavated here. You have a song about being musical being sung by two guys who were better at being musical than just about anyone else alive in the twentieth century.
This is one of those rare occasions where the medium actually is the message.
Because the lyrics are stupid, you can ignore them and notice how each man makes his voice work first against and then with the other mans voice. They can sound very distinct for a few bars and then turn around and blend like Scotch (Armstrong) and Soda (Bing). It's very easy to listen to but just try doing it yourself.
And here is the thing, Sinatra couldn't sing like that to save his life. And he knew it.
He used to say that his kind of singing was harder than Crosby's kind but that isn't really true. Sinatra was a genius with phrasing and he could go up to F#, which is a major third higher than Crosby could go*, which is to say, there were things Sinatra could do that Crosby couldn't. Sinatra also mastered the long-playing format that Crosby had only a few successes with. But it's nonsense on stilts to pretend that what Crosby could do wasn't hard. It was very hard and the fact that he made it look easy only makes it more daunting.
I love Sinatra, with some reservations, but Crosby was the more significant artist.
* It's telling that some Sinatra fans use range when trying to make the case for their man as neither Sinatra nor Crosby had much range (by serious singer standards that is, my own range is right between the two men's).
Friday, June 28, 2013
Smooth baritones of summer #1: Crosby and Sinatra
My thing never was duets, I liked doing them, but, you know, I just never got into it as much as Bing did. Bing did so much singing with the Andrews Sisters and backup singers, also he liked singing with another voice, just having another presence around. His stuff with Armstrong, for instance, was fabulous stuff. When I sang with Bing early on, I was so nervous to be with this big gun I probably didn't sound so hot. But, you know, when we did the movie together, we sang together and did OK, but it never went over as well as I wanted. Bing's voice was great, he bent over backwards to mesh it with whoever he was singing with and he had, you know, so much practice from singing duets for so long. The little girl he sang with in the movie, he even pitched up to her level. He was real talented in that department, you could say.There is a lot in that quote.
I'll start with "the little girl he sang with in the movie". The movie in question is High Society and, because there is a child actress in the movie. you might assume that Sinatra is referring to some duet he sang with this child. But he doesn't sing any duet with her. The duet he sings is with Grace Kelly!
So why does Sinatra brush Grace Kelly off as "the little girl he sand with in the movie"? Because she and Crosby had a torrid affair during the filming of that movie and that ease with women that men like Crosby and Bogart had was something Sinatra coveted just as much, if not more than, Crosby's superior skill singing duets. (Being a lover was very much a part of Sinatra's public persona, of course, but the evidence suggests that he wasn't very good at it despite Ava Gardner's famous bragging point about 19 pounds.)
The point here is not to enter into an interminable debate about which man was better. Both were very, very good (although Crosby doesn't get as much credit as he deserves these days while Sinatra tends to get overpraised). But if we compare their ability to do certain specific things, then there are clear differences between the two men.
I'll get to Sinatra later this summer, but here are some of the things that Crosby was very good at that Sinatra couldn't do.
- Sing the blues
- Syncopate
- Harmonize with other singers
- Be at ease with women (not unrelated to the previous point)
- Sing in a way that was healing and soothing
But there is another reason: Sinatra is a bit of a narcissist in a way that Crosby and his generation never were. The video above is the only Crosby-Sinatra duet that really clicked. If you watch it carefully, you can see why. When Crosby responds to a line that Sinatra has sung, he does so musically, pitching his voice to complement what Sinatra has just sung. When the shoe is on the other foot, Sinatra relies on his ability to act rather than on musicality. Sinatra isn't actually drunk be he uses the fact that he is playing someone who is supposed be drunk as a crutch. It's a very telling difference between the two men and between the eras they represent.
Wednesday, July 18, 2012
Smooth song of the day, #7 for 2012
What the World Needs Now
Who was responsible for this stupid idea? Sorry but the song is great and the lyric is clever but the idea behind the lyric is just stupid. I'm guessing the idea popped up in liberal theology first and then made its way to the mainstream.
I'm not going to dwell on the philosophical issues for too long. Suffice to say, where do you get the content fleshing out what love is? If someone wrote a song saying that what the world needs now is more "goodness" everyone would catch the problem pretty quickly. To say that the world needs more love or that "All You Need is Love" is to say nothing at all.
But here is the cool thing about the song, it's in waltz time. That's why everyone in the video above is a little uncertain about how to move. It's also what gives the song its lovely swinging lilt. You get all these long-pulse, short-pulse moments but you never think of the time.
Try singing it. It's perfect in it's way. There are very few songs that feel quite so right in your mouth.
Who was responsible for this stupid idea? Sorry but the song is great and the lyric is clever but the idea behind the lyric is just stupid. I'm guessing the idea popped up in liberal theology first and then made its way to the mainstream.
I'm not going to dwell on the philosophical issues for too long. Suffice to say, where do you get the content fleshing out what love is? If someone wrote a song saying that what the world needs now is more "goodness" everyone would catch the problem pretty quickly. To say that the world needs more love or that "All You Need is Love" is to say nothing at all.
But here is the cool thing about the song, it's in waltz time. That's why everyone in the video above is a little uncertain about how to move. It's also what gives the song its lovely swinging lilt. You get all these long-pulse, short-pulse moments but you never think of the time.
Try singing it. It's perfect in it's way. There are very few songs that feel quite so right in your mouth.
Tuesday, July 17, 2012
Smooth song of the day # 6: Wives and Lovers
Champagne cocktails! Damn but I love those things. I don't drink them often because they are expensive at a bar. At home the problem is that you have to drink most of a bottle of champagne. That wasn't a problem this evening. I mention that because it may explain how I come to post what I have seen described as "the most sexist song ever" for today.
(That's not the original by the way.) It's telling that such a song is so threatening that it would attract such harsh condemnation. It's not like women don't willingly strive to be better lovers. There are websites out there that draw huge numbers of women simply by recycling the same lame tricks "to really blow his mind" over and over again. No, the thing that gets the feminists wrought up is the suggestion that a woman should make special efforts for her husband.
I don't think any further comment is needed on that.
That said, the song makes this pitch entirely in terms of fear. Do all these things so you don't lose him. It's a sad thing both then and now that doing the right thing simply because it is the right thing to do is beyond the reach of popular culture.
The song is an early hit for Bacharach and David and it has all their strengths. (Something I plan to revisit by doing Bacharach and David songs all week.) It is a remarkably sophisticated tune that doesn't seem to be. Anyone catching it on the radio back in the day might have thought they were listening to just another pop song. It is the sort of art that conceals its art and that is always impressive.
By the way, the notion that a wife should be a lover too was revisited in a movie that came out in the late 1970s. Know as Mogliamante in Italian and Wifemistress in English, the movie was praised by the cool people when it came out. The difference was that the movie made it look like it was the husband who was keeping the woman from being both rather tan suggesting, as the uncool quote of the month does, that "One is born female, but being a woman is a personal accomplishment."
(That's not the original by the way.) It's telling that such a song is so threatening that it would attract such harsh condemnation. It's not like women don't willingly strive to be better lovers. There are websites out there that draw huge numbers of women simply by recycling the same lame tricks "to really blow his mind" over and over again. No, the thing that gets the feminists wrought up is the suggestion that a woman should make special efforts for her husband.
I don't think any further comment is needed on that.
That said, the song makes this pitch entirely in terms of fear. Do all these things so you don't lose him. It's a sad thing both then and now that doing the right thing simply because it is the right thing to do is beyond the reach of popular culture.
The song is an early hit for Bacharach and David and it has all their strengths. (Something I plan to revisit by doing Bacharach and David songs all week.) It is a remarkably sophisticated tune that doesn't seem to be. Anyone catching it on the radio back in the day might have thought they were listening to just another pop song. It is the sort of art that conceals its art and that is always impressive.
By the way, the notion that a wife should be a lover too was revisited in a movie that came out in the late 1970s. Know as Mogliamante in Italian and Wifemistress in English, the movie was praised by the cool people when it came out. The difference was that the movie made it look like it was the husband who was keeping the woman from being both rather tan suggesting, as the uncool quote of the month does, that "One is born female, but being a woman is a personal accomplishment."
Friday, July 13, 2012
Smooth song of the day #5 for 2012
The Summer of 42 by Michel Legrand
Thank God for the movies. They kept real music alive through the horrible years.
If you remember seeing this movie you're old. I remember. Lame, lame movie but everyone saw it and this song served as a theme for not just the movie but just about everyone's yearning crushes for a few years. There were lots of different versions recorded. That's the thing about a really well-crafted song, it doesn't depend on your hearing a particular recording to work. In fact it lends itself to different interpretations.
Think of just about any Beatles song by way of contrast. Yesterday, for example, is (according to some sources) the most recorded song in history. I'm not sure I believe that but there must be a lot of versions. But the thing is, close your eyes and see how many you can think of. It just doesn't have the musical or lyrical depth to justify doing it that many times.
In case you're wondering: The woman in the clip just learned that her husband died in combat and yes, cringe, cringe. cringe, she is going to have sex with that boy. If we believe the screenwriter, and I don't, it's based on a true story. But even if I did believe him, I would've thought that even a sex-crazed teenage boy would have grasped that there are sometimes when, in the name of everything good and sacred about love and sex, you don't even if she wants to and this is one of those times.
The actress is Jennifer O'Neil. She has a look that was really big in the late 1970s and early, 1980s. More or less straight hair, willowy, not large-breasted, heavy silk shirt and knee-length skirt. It's funny, given all the things that came back from that era that that look never has.
You can call me gay if you want, but, beautiful as she is, I'd rather have that cottage than her.
Must have those shoes too:
Words were written for the tune, BTW, and they are not bad. I like this version by Patricia Kaas a lot. (It's from an album called Piano Bar that I love. If you were in that cottage with someone you love and lying still because it's too hot and you are waiting for it to cool down so you can have sex, Piano Bar would be perfect to have on in the background.)
Thank God for the movies. They kept real music alive through the horrible years.
If you remember seeing this movie you're old. I remember. Lame, lame movie but everyone saw it and this song served as a theme for not just the movie but just about everyone's yearning crushes for a few years. There were lots of different versions recorded. That's the thing about a really well-crafted song, it doesn't depend on your hearing a particular recording to work. In fact it lends itself to different interpretations.
Think of just about any Beatles song by way of contrast. Yesterday, for example, is (according to some sources) the most recorded song in history. I'm not sure I believe that but there must be a lot of versions. But the thing is, close your eyes and see how many you can think of. It just doesn't have the musical or lyrical depth to justify doing it that many times.
In case you're wondering: The woman in the clip just learned that her husband died in combat and yes, cringe, cringe. cringe, she is going to have sex with that boy. If we believe the screenwriter, and I don't, it's based on a true story. But even if I did believe him, I would've thought that even a sex-crazed teenage boy would have grasped that there are sometimes when, in the name of everything good and sacred about love and sex, you don't even if she wants to and this is one of those times.
The actress is Jennifer O'Neil. She has a look that was really big in the late 1970s and early, 1980s. More or less straight hair, willowy, not large-breasted, heavy silk shirt and knee-length skirt. It's funny, given all the things that came back from that era that that look never has.
You can call me gay if you want, but, beautiful as she is, I'd rather have that cottage than her.
Must have those shoes too:
Words were written for the tune, BTW, and they are not bad. I like this version by Patricia Kaas a lot. (It's from an album called Piano Bar that I love. If you were in that cottage with someone you love and lying still because it's too hot and you are waiting for it to cool down so you can have sex, Piano Bar would be perfect to have on in the background.)
Thursday, July 12, 2012
Smooth song of the day #3 and #4 for 2012
Two songs from the Fleetwoods
Come softly to me
There is a lesson here about being too cute. The song was originally just called "Come Softly Darling". Maybe they thought the grown ups wouldn't notice.
The thing is, it's better with the new, cleaner, title the adults insisted on. This way, when your seventeen or whatever and you figure it out, you think you're the only one.
(By the way, the #1 hits of 1959 had "Venus" immediately followed by "Come Softly to Me" which, in turn, was followed by "The Happy Organ" which is worth a snicker.)
Mr. Blue
There is a lesson that goes with this one too. It's right here:
And aren't you glad I pointed it out to you so you can hear it every time you listen to this song now? You're welcome.
Come softly to me
There is a lesson here about being too cute. The song was originally just called "Come Softly Darling". Maybe they thought the grown ups wouldn't notice.
The thing is, it's better with the new, cleaner, title the adults insisted on. This way, when your seventeen or whatever and you figure it out, you think you're the only one.
(By the way, the #1 hits of 1959 had "Venus" immediately followed by "Come Softly to Me" which, in turn, was followed by "The Happy Organ" which is worth a snicker.)
Mr. Blue
There is a lesson that goes with this one too. It's right here:
I'm Mr. BlueThat couplet with prove-proving is just so awful. And it would have been so easy to fix! But they didn't.
When you say you love me
Then prove it by going out on the sly,
Proving your love isn't true.
And aren't you glad I pointed it out to you so you can hear it every time you listen to this song now? You're welcome.
Wednesday, July 11, 2012
Smooth song of the day #2 for 2012
Who is he and what is he to you?
You know the tambourine? Well, you'll never feel the same about them after this. I'm not going to tell you when it comes it. Just wait for it. When it hits, it will go right through you like a stiletto.
This song is a lot like film noir—it's pure menace all the way through and yet you want more of it so badly. It's sorta like a lover you know will hurt but you your knees go weak every time she or he walks in the door.
You know the tambourine? Well, you'll never feel the same about them after this. I'm not going to tell you when it comes it. Just wait for it. When it hits, it will go right through you like a stiletto.
This song is a lot like film noir—it's pure menace all the way through and yet you want more of it so badly. It's sorta like a lover you know will hurt but you your knees go weak every time she or he walks in the door.
Tuesday, July 10, 2012
Smooth song of summer #1 for 2012
Here is the first entry for the summer of 2012.
This became a hit the year I was thirteen and it was inescapable on the radio. Some people get nostalgic for Top Forty radio now that it is gone but it killed a lot of music. I remember driving through Montreal with my father trying to avoid this tune. I pushed five preset buttons in a row and got this song every time. It didn't matter how good a tune was, you'd hate it by the time Top Forty radio was finished with it.
It wasn't until the year I was nineteen and I heard it played that I realized how wonderful it is. As i've aid before, songs like this get dismissed because they are so easy to enjoy. Not easy to do. One heck of a lot of talent goes into a performance like this. You don't have to listen carefully but you'll notice, if you do, that the lyrics are beautifully crafted, that the arrangement, the harmonies are perfect.
To steal a line from Charles Ryder, it's like drowning in honey, stingless.
Harmony, is there anything it can't do?
This became a hit the year I was thirteen and it was inescapable on the radio. Some people get nostalgic for Top Forty radio now that it is gone but it killed a lot of music. I remember driving through Montreal with my father trying to avoid this tune. I pushed five preset buttons in a row and got this song every time. It didn't matter how good a tune was, you'd hate it by the time Top Forty radio was finished with it.
It wasn't until the year I was nineteen and I heard it played that I realized how wonderful it is. As i've aid before, songs like this get dismissed because they are so easy to enjoy. Not easy to do. One heck of a lot of talent goes into a performance like this. You don't have to listen carefully but you'll notice, if you do, that the lyrics are beautifully crafted, that the arrangement, the harmonies are perfect.
To steal a line from Charles Ryder, it's like drowning in honey, stingless.
Harmony, is there anything it can't do?
Tuesday, July 5, 2011
Because it's summer: the last two smooth songs of the day
Edge of Seventeen by Stevie Nicks and Here Comes the Rain Again by Eurythmics
Note: I'll probably keep doing song posts as time goes on but less frequently and less restricted as to period after this.
These songs have a few things in common and some rather more significant differences and I thought they would make a good wrap up.
Both feature lyrics that are about as purely lyrical as they can be. That is to say that both lyrics evoke emotions rather than trying to be about anything. The only way you'd ever figure out that "Edge of Seventeen" is about dealing with the death of people close to us is if someone told you. You'd have a better chance in figuring out that "Here Comes the Rain Again" has something to do with unrequited love but what exactly it has to say about unrequited love is anyone's guess.
Both singers share a similar sort of romantic persona. The difference is that this is the only persona that Nicks ever had while Annie Lennox assumed a bunch of different stances depending on the song, the point in her career and what was most likely to sell at the time. This is an old theme of mine: the authentic versus the cultivated self.
And what I'd like you to notice as you listen to the two is the difference in skill. Take enunciation. The Stevie Nicks song is often given as an example of a misheard lyric but it's actually a mis-sung lyric. Consider the opening phrase. The words are supposed to be, "Just like the white-winged dove". What Nicks actually sings is more like "Juss like duh wide wing of". Listen to the Eurythmics song and you can pick out every word. Lennox's enunciation, intonation and timing are always good. Nicks is always a sloppy performer.
Anything Stevie Nicks can do, Annie Lennox can do better. I'm not going to argue the point here but I'd like to suggest that Nicks' shortcomings as a singer are a likely consequence of pursuing a authentic rather than a cultivated self.
Stevie Nicks was, as I noted before, the essential role model for the smooth, clean girls of my generation. Annie Lennox's carefully cultivated talent made that role model tired and obsolete.
Authenticity is a romantic idea and it will never go away in a narcissistic culture like ours. To really grow up, however, is to leave authenticity behind and it was at this point in time that the smooth, clean girls pack up there stuff and leave campus and start really living their lives.
The series starts here.
Note: I'll probably keep doing song posts as time goes on but less frequently and less restricted as to period after this.
These songs have a few things in common and some rather more significant differences and I thought they would make a good wrap up.
Both feature lyrics that are about as purely lyrical as they can be. That is to say that both lyrics evoke emotions rather than trying to be about anything. The only way you'd ever figure out that "Edge of Seventeen" is about dealing with the death of people close to us is if someone told you. You'd have a better chance in figuring out that "Here Comes the Rain Again" has something to do with unrequited love but what exactly it has to say about unrequited love is anyone's guess.
Both singers share a similar sort of romantic persona. The difference is that this is the only persona that Nicks ever had while Annie Lennox assumed a bunch of different stances depending on the song, the point in her career and what was most likely to sell at the time. This is an old theme of mine: the authentic versus the cultivated self.
And what I'd like you to notice as you listen to the two is the difference in skill. Take enunciation. The Stevie Nicks song is often given as an example of a misheard lyric but it's actually a mis-sung lyric. Consider the opening phrase. The words are supposed to be, "Just like the white-winged dove". What Nicks actually sings is more like "Juss like duh wide wing of". Listen to the Eurythmics song and you can pick out every word. Lennox's enunciation, intonation and timing are always good. Nicks is always a sloppy performer.
Anything Stevie Nicks can do, Annie Lennox can do better. I'm not going to argue the point here but I'd like to suggest that Nicks' shortcomings as a singer are a likely consequence of pursuing a authentic rather than a cultivated self.
Stevie Nicks was, as I noted before, the essential role model for the smooth, clean girls of my generation. Annie Lennox's carefully cultivated talent made that role model tired and obsolete.
Authenticity is a romantic idea and it will never go away in a narcissistic culture like ours. To really grow up, however, is to leave authenticity behind and it was at this point in time that the smooth, clean girls pack up there stuff and leave campus and start really living their lives.
The series starts here.
Saturday, July 2, 2011
Because it's summer: smooth song of the day #24
Flashdance: What a Feeling by Irene Cara
I remember when this movie came out the critics rained all over it for being unrealistic. Hmm, a girl who works full time as a welder during the day and then dances 'til late at night at a strip club where the strippers don't have to take off their clothes applies for and gets admission to a dance conservatory even though she has had no formal training and is already 18? Happens every day I'm sure. But attacking a musical for being unrealistic is like criticizing a dance tune for having a steady beat. It's the whole point.
The smooth, clean girls were in university and dressing preppy and the thing about the music was, as I've said before, that it wasn't about her life. The music was about some fantastic creature who could live the sort of high-risk, roller coaster life she never would live.
She knew such lives existed. She knew this intimately because she had an older sisters or cousins who had thrown caution and taste aside in the 1970s and she was well acquainted with the wreckage such lives left behind them. That's why she was making damn sure it wasn't going to happen to her and it is why she knew stories like this belonged in the movies. The song says, "I can really have it all" but any girl with a reasonable sense of prudence knows better and the smooth, clean girls who'd popped up at the end of the 1970s knew better in the 1980s.
By the way: I'd say we're long overdue for a return of girls with that 1980s preppy attitude.
The series starts here.
Everything comes to an end and the era and this series wraps up here.
I remember when this movie came out the critics rained all over it for being unrealistic. Hmm, a girl who works full time as a welder during the day and then dances 'til late at night at a strip club where the strippers don't have to take off their clothes applies for and gets admission to a dance conservatory even though she has had no formal training and is already 18? Happens every day I'm sure. But attacking a musical for being unrealistic is like criticizing a dance tune for having a steady beat. It's the whole point.
The smooth, clean girls were in university and dressing preppy and the thing about the music was, as I've said before, that it wasn't about her life. The music was about some fantastic creature who could live the sort of high-risk, roller coaster life she never would live.
She knew such lives existed. She knew this intimately because she had an older sisters or cousins who had thrown caution and taste aside in the 1970s and she was well acquainted with the wreckage such lives left behind them. That's why she was making damn sure it wasn't going to happen to her and it is why she knew stories like this belonged in the movies. The song says, "I can really have it all" but any girl with a reasonable sense of prudence knows better and the smooth, clean girls who'd popped up at the end of the 1970s knew better in the 1980s.
By the way: I'd say we're long overdue for a return of girls with that 1980s preppy attitude.
The series starts here.
Everything comes to an end and the era and this series wraps up here.
Friday, July 1, 2011
Because it's summer: smooth song of the day #23
On and On by Stephen Bishop
Yes, I know, I said I was moving into the new decade and this is a throwback to the 1970s. But this song just hung around for years and years. And besides it's a holiday and besides it is a personal favourite. It was never that big a hit but the smooth, clean girls kept playing it for years after it first came out. Often they'd apologize as if they were ashamed of liking it or try and hide their love of it behind irony. Eventually, they admitted it was just great.
The problem, I think, was the mention of Sinatra. Nowadays, everyone knows that Sinatra was the greatest singer of the American songbook ever but it was the height of uncool to like him back in the early 1980s (believe me, I know, I cleared rooms over and over again when I tried to get people to listen to Sinatra. I had a Sinatra pin I used to wear and everyone assumed I meant it as a joke. They wouldn't believe me when I tried to tell them that I really thought Sinatra was the greatest.
Anyway, that Stephen Bishop clearly saw something special about Sinatra made the song less credible back then. Nowadays, it has the opposite effect.
There was something prophetic about it too. Smooth would mean something different from now on.
I think I'll "Toss up my heart and see where it lands".
Yes, I know, I said I was moving into the new decade and this is a throwback to the 1970s. But this song just hung around for years and years. And besides it's a holiday and besides it is a personal favourite. It was never that big a hit but the smooth, clean girls kept playing it for years after it first came out. Often they'd apologize as if they were ashamed of liking it or try and hide their love of it behind irony. Eventually, they admitted it was just great.
The problem, I think, was the mention of Sinatra. Nowadays, everyone knows that Sinatra was the greatest singer of the American songbook ever but it was the height of uncool to like him back in the early 1980s (believe me, I know, I cleared rooms over and over again when I tried to get people to listen to Sinatra. I had a Sinatra pin I used to wear and everyone assumed I meant it as a joke. They wouldn't believe me when I tried to tell them that I really thought Sinatra was the greatest.
Anyway, that Stephen Bishop clearly saw something special about Sinatra made the song less credible back then. Nowadays, it has the opposite effect.
There was something prophetic about it too. Smooth would mean something different from now on.
I think I'll "Toss up my heart and see where it lands".
The series starts here.
The next song is here.
Thursday, June 30, 2011
Because it's summer: smooth song of the day #22
Escape (the Pina Colada Song) by Rupert Holmes
If you wanted to establish your I-don't-take-music-too-seriously bona fides, this was the song to do it with.
No, you don't hate it, so stop pretending you do. Yes, I'm sure you heard it too often but you haven't heard it in a while.
A narrative song is a hard trick to pull off in pop music because everyone already knows the story the second time they hear it and a song has to be a song you'll want to hear again and again in order to be a pop song. That goes double when the whole thing depends on a twist ending as is the case here.
It's a goofy song that doesn't take itself seriously. Why it's even terribly self-conscious irony, the defining attitude of the 1980s. Only it's carried off with considerably more ease and grace than the two Davids (Letterman and Byrne) could ever manage. Any seriousness in this song is a lot like the rum in a Pina Colada, the creamy confection overwhelms it so you can barely taste it.
Added: It's odd to think there was an era when a man would refer to the woman he loved as "my old lady". Yechhh! On the other hand, they at least had the sense to realize that anyone who was really "into yoga" was not going to be very smart. Something lost and somethings gained ....
The series starts here.
The next song is here.
If you wanted to establish your I-don't-take-music-too-seriously bona fides, this was the song to do it with.
No, you don't hate it, so stop pretending you do. Yes, I'm sure you heard it too often but you haven't heard it in a while.
A narrative song is a hard trick to pull off in pop music because everyone already knows the story the second time they hear it and a song has to be a song you'll want to hear again and again in order to be a pop song. That goes double when the whole thing depends on a twist ending as is the case here.
It's a goofy song that doesn't take itself seriously. Why it's even terribly self-conscious irony, the defining attitude of the 1980s. Only it's carried off with considerably more ease and grace than the two Davids (Letterman and Byrne) could ever manage. Any seriousness in this song is a lot like the rum in a Pina Colada, the creamy confection overwhelms it so you can barely taste it.
Added: It's odd to think there was an era when a man would refer to the woman he loved as "my old lady". Yechhh! On the other hand, they at least had the sense to realize that anyone who was really "into yoga" was not going to be very smart. Something lost and somethings gained ....
The series starts here.
The next song is here.
Wednesday, June 29, 2011
Because it's summer: smooth song of the day #21
Hungry Heart by Bruce Springsteen
It's a sing along song. You can open your mouth and belt it out. It's got a narrow range and it's in a key that pretty much anybody can sing with easy-to-memorize lyrics that aren't going to challenge your brain.
The series starts here.
The next song is here.
It's a sing along song. You can open your mouth and belt it out. It's got a narrow range and it's in a key that pretty much anybody can sing with easy-to-memorize lyrics that aren't going to challenge your brain.
Got a wife and kids in Baltimore, JackNow, strictly speaking this is a stupid lyric. What can "a river that don't know where it's flowin'" possibly mean? Perhaps he is thinking of all those other rivers that do know where they are flowin'. But it doesn't matter because a smooth, clean girl could lean back her head and sing those words with abandon knowing this wasn't about her life and it never would be.
I went out for a ride and I never went back
Like a river that don't know where it's flowin'
I took a wrong turn and I just kept goin'
The series starts here.
The next song is here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)