FEATURE: A Cherry Kiss in Brooklyn: The New Rock and Roll: Is the Nature of the Headline Artist Changing?

FEATURE:

 

 

A Cherry Kiss in Brooklyn: The New Rock and Roll

IN THIS PHOTO: Dua Lipa on Reading's Main Stage/PHOTO CREDIT: Corinne Cumming, Frances Beach for DORK

Is the Nature of the Headline Artist Changing?

__________

I did have a pop at Reading and Leeds Festivals…

IN THIS PHOTO: Muse (often the go-to when it comes to a festival headliner)/PHOTO CREDIT: Muse/Getty Images

exclaiming the lack of exciting bands topping the bills this year. Whilst I am impressed there were some decent bands adding some fire to the mix – Shame was among them – there were a lot of others who had been around for years and were, to be fair, past their premium! I know there are some great bands around but, until they are ‘ready’ to step up to the big stages; do we need to book the years/decades-old bands who are rehashing their career-best and not providing anything new or relevant?! I can see some good and powerful groups coming through but it might be a few years before we have a lot of them ready for headlining slots; perhaps the scene is changing and we are gravitating towards solo acts. I know solo artists have headlined festivals before but, traditionally, it has been the bands headlining the big festivals. I got a bit miffed when Foo Fighters were asked to headline Glastonbury last year; a bit bored by previous years where Muse and Coldplay repeated sets we have seen before and offered nothing new. Maybe, then, we should look to the solo artist as the natural and exciting new headline force! Certainty, there is greater choice and variation – the best solo artists can put on an incredible show and project the same amount of passion as a band.

Whilst I still contend the most interesting artists at this year’s Reading and Leeds Festivals were non-headliners (or non-bands); it was a bit disappointing regarding band music. We did not get a lot to write home about and, in fact, solo artists performing at the festivals grabbed the biggest headlines. Dua Lipa, especially, was applauded for her confident and incredible set. She is a fairly new artist and, with one album under her belt, many might have felt her part in the festivities would have been reduced and unspectacular. I think, in many ways, her performance indicates where festivals are heading. There is still a place for Rock and Alternative acts on the biggest stages but, with relatively few bands producing intense and crowd-uniting music – ones we haven’t seen before – it is the likes of Dua Lipa who are producing the biggest bangs! Even if you are not a fan of her music, you cannot deny her charm, energy and skill when it comes to command a crowd and getting people engaged. She is among the strongest young songwriters out there – Sigrid, too, who played Reading and Leeds, gained a lot of love. If you look at the sort of love Dua Lipa received; you would be forgiven for thinking she was ready to headline Glastonbury. DORK, when assessing her set, said this:

“The forty-five minutes fly by with hit after hit landing true. ‘Be The One’ and ‘Hotter Than Hell’ overflow with jubilance and sparkle, ‘Scared To Be Lonely’ flashes quiet and vulnerable before thrashing through. A final one-two of ‘IDGAF’ and ‘New Rules’ underline this as a moment. In years to come it’ll been heralded as ground-breaking. Right now, Dua will have to make do with ground-shaking as she gets the whole of Reading dancing to her beat”.

NME were complimentary and noted how Pop – with artists like Sigrid, ALMA and Pale Waves – was getting more attendance and feedback than a lot of the bands on the bill. They were full of praise for this year’s Reading and Leeds Festivals' Pop artists – even if some, myself included, were unimpressed by the overall strength and validity of the headliners. One thing we are learning is how the bigger festivals are diversifying in terms of genre. There are fewer solo Rock artists than there is Pop (acts) so I am glad the genre is getting an airing and it not all about bands. Whilst I am a bit wary and worried when it comes to the lack of headline-worthy Rock bands around; I am pleased there are Pop artists capable of producing banging and epic sets. Does that mean, then, that future festivals will replace bands as headliners and go with solo artists? I think there is a definite turn in the tide and, whilst there are headline-ready bands that can fill slots; there are a lot more ready and ripe solo artists. It is not long until Glastonbury announced their headliners for next year and I really hope the same tired and predictable bands are not topping the bill. There have been rumours everyone from Arctic Monkeys and The 1975 could headline and, whilst I am a fan of the former, I feel they are one of those bands who has had their day and, whilst they can produce a great set, is it going to be more memorable than a newer solo artist?

Maybe Dua Lipa is ready to headline Glastonbury but, as she impressed last year, Lorde might also be primed. It seems, in many ways, the female solo artist is shining bright right now. We have Sigrid and Taylor Swift; Kacey Musgraves and Katy Perry are all capable of turning in stunning headline sets. Many might say that is too ‘Pop’ and caters to a certain market. Madonna is another rumoured Glastonbury name and Beyoncé would put together a thrilling set. Paul McCartney, too, would be an excellent choice. Maybe we will see the first Glastonbury in many years where all the headliners are solo artists! I agree bands such as IDLES and Arctic Monkeys could do a great job but one cannot deny solo artists taking more influence and providing a great alternative. Fantastic Pop/R&B artists are starting to stride out; Rap/Hip-Hop talent such as Kendrick Lamar and Cardi B; British newcomers like Jorja Smith are making waves. Nadine Shah, too - who has just been Mercury nominated - would put on an essential and incredible headline set. Once upon a time, these artists would play other stages but it would be bands, for the most part, who would be top of the festival poster. There is that never-ending debate regarding Rock music and whether it still holds sway in the mainstream. I long to see a revival very soon but, as we have been programmed to see the Rock band as the natural headline acts; are we becoming rigid and not opening our minds to other choices?  

IN THIS PHOTO: Kendrick Lamar (who played at this year's Reading and Leeds Festivals)/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

It is a faulty assumption to assume a solo artist is weaker and less exciting because there is one of them. Look at the festival headliners over the past few years and they are no more intense and exciting than the great Pop artists coming through: in fact, the more nimble and diverse nature of the genre means a more rounded, nuanced and interesting set can come together. Artists like Dua Lipa rely on energy and hooky songs but there are solo artists who bring pyrotechnics, big sets and production values to add grandeur and drama to their sets. Doors are being kicked down and windows opened. I am all for diversity when it comes to headline acts: so long as the quality is right up there, then we should be welcoming Pop and Hip-Hop onto the main stages. I am not sure whether Glastonbury will embrace the change and do something bold; I doubt Reading and Leeds, next year, will dispense with Rock bands and go with solo artists. What I do know is there are some incredible solo artists who are capable of producing the sort of headline sets bands have been famed for. St. Vincent is one of my favourite modern artists and I feel she is surely reading for a headline Glastonbury slot. She is much more than simple and fun Pop.

Her music has endless innovation and crosses genres; it is a banquet of emotions and, through her career, she has managed to remain essential and unpredictable. She is coming to London on 4th September to perform an intimate show. The stripped-back affair will be interesting to see and will show how she can go from a big and vivacious artist to a more tender and subtle musician. I would place money on St. Vincent being among the headline-worthy for festivals like Glastonbury. In reality, there is so much to choose from in the solo market. Look at the American Hip-Hop and Rap scenes; big artists like Beyoncé and Solange; British artists like Florence + the Machine and great female-led bands such as Pale Waves and Wolf Alice – the latter, especially, are a much more refreshing and appealing alternative to the slew of tired man-bands who headline the big festivals. Maybe this revolution and evolution will take a while to embed but we are already seeing it. Perhaps we are years off seeing true gender equality but when it comes to genre equality; I would say things are changing and the Pop solo artist, especially, is leading the charge. Many might scoff if I suggested Dua Lipa, Beyoncé; St. Vincent and Janelle Monáe could headline. What about SOPHIE, Natalie Prass or Phoebe Bridgers?!

IN THIS PHOTO: Beyoncé/PHOTO CREDIT: Tyler Mitchell for Vogue (September 2018)

How about Cardi B, Jack White (he is a Rock artist but not a band) or Tom Misch? These are names I would like to see replacing the bands as headliners. I keep saying how many great bands there are but, at the very least, we need a headline blend of bands and solo artists/duos – not just the same names, sounds and faces we are used to seeing. This year’s Green Man Festival saw great sets from The War on Drugs; Bestival found Chaka Khan and Grace Jones take the roof off; the Cambridge Folk Festival had Rhiannon Giddens, Patti Smith and First Aid Kit (not your conventional Rock act; a stunning duo who produced a great set) providing thrills and memories. Even bands like Black Honey and The Big Moon, not your traditional headliners, show much promise. It is sad to see a slight decline in great new Rock/Alternative bands but I can see a current of newcomers flexing and shaping up. Maybe their time is a few years away but, right now, there is a real place for the solo artist (or the duo). The likes of Dua Lipa have shown they can carry the responsibility and, whilst not a headliner, have the tools and songs to provide a memorable headline set. Festivals should be diversifying and shaking things up but quality needs to come top of the list. I argue the artists lower down the bill at events like the Reading and Leeds Festivals and Bestival are much more engaging and promising than a lot of the headliners. Look at the non-Rock festivals like what we saw in Cambridge and I wonder, next year, will Glastonbury take a risk and capitalise on a changing current?! I hope so. If anything, it keeps festivals moving and adapting to the times. But, fear not! It may seem like the traditional Rock and Alternative bands have had their time in the spotlight but, before too long, they will be…

 IN THIS PHOTO: Arctic Monkeys/PHOTO CREDIT: @ArcticMonkeys

BACK in the driving seat.

FEATURE: Stereo-type: Is Pigeonholing, Social Media Pressure and Musical Judgement Causing Mental-Health Issues?

FEATURE:

 

 

Stereo-type

ALL PHOTOS (unless credited otherwise): Unsplash

Is Pigeonholing, Social Media Pressure and Musical Judgement Causing Mental-Health Issues?

__________

A few news stories have caught my eye…

and caused some concern recently. We are being told, as this BBC article explains, how there is a rise in cutting and self-harm by teenage girls. Maybe it is not news to some people but if you look at the numbers and statistics; it is eye-opening and alarming reading:

“Nearly a quarter of 14-year-old girls in the UK said they had self-harmed, a report suggests.

A survey of 11,000 children found 22% of the girls and 9% of the boys said they had hurt themselves on purpose in the year prior to the questionnaire.

Rates of self-harm were worst (46%) among those who were attracted to people of the same or both genders.

The Children's Society report said gender stereotypes and worries about looks were contributing to unhappiness.

The self-harm statistics are included in the charity's annual Good Childhood Report, which examines the state of children's wellbeing in the UK.

The data on self-harm was analysed by The Children's Society after being collected in 2015 in the Millennium Cohort Study, a continuing research project following the lives of 19,000 children born in the UK between 2000 and 2001”.

We all know how common suicide rates are among young men and the extent and severity of the mental-health crisis in the country is worrying. This article, that told the story of Jamel Pierce of Denver, Colorado committing suicide after receiving homophobic abuse at his school really got to me.

The fact that he was a nine-year-old made it even more harrowing and distrusting. His mum, Leia, stated her son was proud to be gay and confided in her this summer:

“She said Jamel wanted to go to school and tell his classmates because he was "proud" to be gay.

Denver Public Schools (DPS) say crisis counsellors have been made available to students at Jamel's elementary school.

The school system sent letters to families on Friday about the additional counselling services for students.

The letter, addressed to the families of Joe Shoemaker Elementary School pupils, says Jamel's death "is an unexpected loss for our school community" and offers parents signs of stress to watch for in their children.

DPS Spokesman Will Jones told the BBC on Monday that the district is "deeply committed to ensuring that all members of the school community are treated with dignity and respect, regardless of sexual orientation, gender identity, or transgender status".

The fact that anyone, anywhere, would be bullied because of their sexual orientation is horrendous! I have heard, in the wake of this story, other gay men and women come out to reveal their stories of abuse and bullying. Another thing I heard, from U.S. songwriter Phoebe Bridgers, was the fact many people are judged on what they listen to.

IN THIS PHOTO: Nirvana/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

Young boys who listen to, say Nirvana, are labelled ‘cool’ and ‘hip’ whilst young girls who listen to mainstream Pop are seen as ‘tragic’ and ‘lame’ by some. It is a sexism and discrimination that is contributing to the mental-health burden. You may not think there is a link between these stories but there is so much judgement, hatred and bullying in the world but, more than anything, people are being labelled, defined and abused because of who they are and what they like. I am one of those people who has their musical tastes but would never judge anyone on what they listen to.  There is a lot of great Pop music and I think we should embrace everything and not lazily define people upon their tastes. I think social media is adding to this problem. There is a burden – on young girls especially – to look a certain way and carry themselves according to what they see on social media. They are told how to look and what a measure of success looks like – if you do not look like a celebrity or have a particular sense of fashion then you are nobody. Maybe this is not the only reason why the rates of self-harm have gone up. So, then…how does music come into things? I am seeing a lot of torment, bullying and labelling in the industry.

IN THIS PHOTO: Phoebe Bridgers/PHOTO CREDIT: Ray Lego for Under the Radar

Bridgers had a point when she said people are mocked because of what they listen to. Girls are meant to listen to certain music and boys another – if you fall outside the circle then you are exposed to derision. I know a lot of L.G.B.T.Q.I.A. artists and, whilst all of them are comfortable expressing themselves, there is that feeling they will not be taken seriously and not get any airplay. One of the reasons I feel a bit uncomfortable in my own skin is because of the music I like and the fact I listen to some artists who might seem ‘uncool’ to some. I shouldn’t care what anyone thinks but there is still a stigma about musical tastes and expressing yourself that way. I like to listen to some mainstream Pop and have very broad tastes. I still think we all get pigeon-holed and defined into neat little boxes and categories. People will raise their eyebrows if you, as a man or woman, like music that is normally bought by young girls; they will be sniffy and snobby if blokes, who are taught to like Rock and edgier music, likes an L.G.B.T.Q.I.A. artist or something with a bit more personality. I, as a thirty-something man, are being marketed to like genres like Rock and Hip-Hop and that is my ‘demographic’.

I get sent playlists and suggestions that are based on nothing but stereotyping and market trends. I have never had to come out of the closest or face the same pressure young girls do regarding images; my burden is not the same but I feel there is so much pressure from society and social media. Music suffers from easy labelling and tribalism. I like a bit of sugary Pop and Country but I also like music from black artists and, well, pretty much anything. I rarely get sent suggestions regarding Queercore or feminist music – which I like – and I feel streaming services and social media are narrowing what we are supposed to be and still too reliant on cliché and expectation. Right through school, I had to see kids getting teased because of the music they liked. They were not cool or credible because they listened to stuff that was different or new. The reason I brought in those news stories and statistics is because, in every corner of the world, we are seeing the effects of peer pressure, bullying and narrow-mindedness. Whilst it less pronounced and explicit in music; there is still a lot of negativity and judgement. This article, written in 2011, asked whether tribalism is dead

“The past decade has seen a tearing down of the walls that separated popular genres. These were not always walls between warring enemies, but the borders separating different kinds of sound, whether reggae from ska or rock from indie, have been the site of skirmishes since the first track was laid down on shellac, and probably before.

 "Speaking to the Observer this summer, musician and TV presenter Jools Holland commented on the shift in attitudes. "People are much more accepting of different genres," he said. "In the past, people used to actually hate people who liked different music to them." And while Holland conceded some regret at the passing of these passions, he is pleased that most fans are not "so blinkered any more".

The real heat of tribal animosity was certainly still in evidence in the 1980s when the so-called "hip-hop wars" raged within the offices of influential music magazine NME. "A huge battle was waged about whether or not you could put Public Enemy or RunDMC on the front cover. NME readers largely felt that it should always be the Fall or the Smiths. It was at that point I realised that most of its readers were actually pretty conservative," said Observer writer Sean O'Hagan”.

Whilst I have felt uneasy about liking particular music and expected to listen to a certain sound; maybe the vulnerability and I others feel can be a strength. Phoebe Bridgers, when speaking with NME, talked about her unique music and being herself:

“…She continued: “I think I did an OK job of being enough of a fully-formed human being in my art to show my personality and just to be myself – instead of having to fit a weird mould. I think I can do whatever I want for my next record. It’s vulnerable, but it’s nice that I don’t have to fake it.

“People are realising that vulnerability isn’t a weakness, and the rise of mental health-related humour is making vulnerability feel like a strength”.

Maybe it is a complex argument but I think we need to look at judgement and discrimination in wider society and use music as a positive tool. Maybe there is not the tribalism of past years and, with streaming services, we are exploring music in new ways. We are all broader and able to experience so many different kinds of music. I still think mental-health issues surround the way music is marketed and who is meant to like what. I feel one of the reasons there is a relative lack of exposure for L.G.B.T.Q.I.A. artists and less attention paid to black artists because we still have these clans and expectation of what is seen as popular, acceptable and fashionable. Social media has helped push artists to public consciousness but I feel it could go further and help battle sexism, racism and discrimination. I still get playlists and adverts relating to what men my age are listening to – not based on fact or personal perspective. I am very broad with my tastes but I hesitate listening to some music, not based on quality, but how I will be perceived.

IN THIS PHOTO: Rihanna/PHOTO CREDIT: Mert Alas and Marcus Piggott for Vogue

If I came out and celebrated a new song by an artist marketed at young girls or showed some love for an L.G.B.T.Q.I.A. artist then I worry about what the reaction would be. Similarly, one reason why so many teenage girls are self-harming is the images of their favourite stars online. There are these glamorous and glitzy shots that give this viewpoint of an ideal shape and look. Living up to that is tough and unrealistic. We have come a long way in many respects but I feel there is far too much judgement and tribalism still left in music. Maybe it is not based purely on genre and what is trending: many artists are struggling because their music is being targeted at particular groups and not seen as mainstream-worthy. This causes depression and anxiety in them and, for their fans, there is a mirrored pressure. There are walls to be broken down and I feel music has the power to unite people and help improve society. Perhaps we are more accepting of people who listen to different genres to us but we still have a way to go. It doesn’t help when you get targeted by sites like Spotify or you see artists being marketed narrowly. I feel everyone should be able to listen to anything and there is no such thing as ‘girl music’ or ‘boy music’.

Girls should be celebrated for liking Nirvana, say, and boys for liking artists like Rihanna or Lady Gaga. Music is music and there is no such thing as a guilty pleasure or an ‘appropriate’ sound. I feel one of the reasons I have warned myself off mainstream Pop is because it is not directed at me – it is seen for younger audiences and, in a lot of cases, teenage girls. A lot of artists are feeling confined and down because they are expected to play and market themselves to their ‘fans’ – defined by the media and history – when, in reality, every artist should be marketed to everyone. I know my mental-health would be improved if I felt safer confessing my appreciation of certain music and did not feel isolated. Maybe it would not involve me going to a Taylor Swift concert but there are so many artists marketed at particular groups I like and I feel, if I stated that on social media, it would be met with raised eyebrows. In all areas of life, the rise in mental-health-related deaths and injury is rising. Identity and image play a big part in these statistics.  Music is a powerful and beautiful thing that can change the world. I feel more artists should come out and sing/speak against labelling and groups; how important (or not) image is and why certain music is marketed to particular groups. So many of us feel overlooked and lonely because we feel different and not part of ‘normal’ society. The truth is, in society and in music, we are not all different: regardless of tastes and choice, we are all worthy and…

WE are all the same!

FEATURE: The Thrill of the Scream! Michael Jackson at Sixty: The Mind-Blowing Sound and Vision of Sibling Unity

FEATURE:

 

 

The Thrill of the Scream!

IN THIS PHOTO: Michael Jackson is presented with a GRAMMY Legend Award by younger sister Janet Jackson at The 35th Annual GRAMMY Awards/PHOTO CREDIT: Kevin Mazur  

Michael Jackson at Sixty: The Mind-Blowing Sound and Vision of Sibling Unity

__________

THAT title might be misleading…

IMAGES CREDIT: Getty Images

and the reason why I have not included a shot from the video as the main image is that they (images online) are all grainy, blurred or bad-quality! I have included an outtake/shot from it but, for the most part, I wanted to highlight one special moment from Michael Jackson’s career. I have talked about his music videos and legacy; what he means to me and how he managed to transform music. Whilst Bad is my favourite album from him and Remember the Time (from Dangerous) is my choice Jacko cut; I have so much interest and fascination for Scream. It was the lead single from his 1995 album, HIStory: Past, Present and Future, Book 1. The single, actually, was a double A-side – the other song included was Childhood. Scream is cited as an aggressive song that kicks out at the tabloid press. Whilst Janet Jackson was not experiencing the same sort of attention and hassle as her brother; there is a unified anger at the nature of the press and celebrity. Recorded between the Hit Factory, New York and Flyte Tyme Studios in Edina, Minnesota between October and December 1994; Scream seems to be the clash of siblings at very different points in their career. Janet has released janet. In 1993 and songs like That’s the Way Love Goes proved to be a commercial smash.

IN THIS PHOTO: Janet Jackson in 1995/PHOTO CREDIT: Patrick Demarchelier

There was a four-year wait until The Velvet Rope was released and, actually, that record was released after she recovered from an emotional breakdown! It seemed press intrusion, personal problems and pressures contributed and got too much. Michael, on the other hand, faced allegations of child abuse in 1993 and it seemed, for both artists, Scream was an expression of release and accusation – both coming from very different places. If Michael is aiming more at the press and being wrongfully accused; Janet’s aggression seems more personal and inward-looking. Maybe I am wrong...but I can hear nuances in their vocal performances that lead me to believe they approached the song from different angles. I said the title of this article is misleading because, whilst the finished product is siblings at their finest; smashing a song and creating something incredible; there was a bit of tension in the studio and competitiveness – I shall come to that later. The $7 million music video – which I shall address – was the most-expensive video ever at the time and, in 2018, still holds that title!

Scream’s video won three MTV Video Music Awards and the Grammy for Best Music Video. What I love about the song itself is the way Michael and Janet blend. If it was pitched as a Michael Jackson single and the lead-off cut from a new album; you cannot say he steals the show! I am writing to celebrate Michael Jackson’s sixtieth birthday but, for me, Janet’s vocals and input help tip the song over the edge! She brings a balance of warmth and tension that gives the song a palpable rollercoaster feel. Blending with Michael and working alongside him closely; you never feel like these are siblings recording different songs: both are on the same page and determined to send out a big middle-finger to the media! Michael Jackson had a difficult relationship with the press that dated back to the 1980s. What with his changing appearance and his controversial videos; he was courting bad publicity and it seemed, by 1994/1995, it has reached boiling-point! The press claimed Michael was slowing his ageing process by sleeping in a hyperbaric oxygen chamber and bought a pet chimp, Bubbles. Today, he would have been ripped by social media and I can only imagine how he would have dealt with the abuse. The man, in essence, was being himself and was fed up with the hounding he got – 1989’s music video for Leave Me Alone (from Bad) was a definite shot against accusation and falsehoods. By 1993, Jackson was having bad images of himself in the press – his altering and radical appetence – and he was getting his balls kicked at every opportunity!

IN THIS PHOTO: Michael and Janet Jackson during the filming of the Scream video/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

Taking Valium, Xanax and Ativan to cope with the stress; his health was deteriorating and his weight was a worrying thing to see – a very frail man who, once, was beaming and confident. Michael went to rehab and the media’s lack of sympathy and cruel headlines added to that pressure and upset. One can only imagine, as I shall investigate, what his mind was like when he stepped into the studio with Janet to record Scream – a mantra and bellicose mandate that unleashes all the pain and withheld words that he could aim at his tormentors! Critics were impressed by Scream and noted it improved on Jam’s slamming beats – and much of the material from Michael’s 1991 album, Dangerous. Around 1994/1995, even though he was the subject of press scrutiny; Michael was recording a lot and released singles like Earth Song and They Don’t Care About Us. The refrain of “Stop pressurin’ me!” compelled critics and seemed, for both Michael and Janet, to be them at their most alive and angered. The bite and spit both artists display throughout the song staggered journalists and was a big hit. In 1995, Scream’s eleven MTV Music Video Award Nominations was a record and the video has been listed by many critics as one of the best ever.

IN THIS PHOTO: Janet and Michael Jackson in a shot from Scream/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

Michael was very happy with the results and stated he had worked very hard on the song and video. The creative influence of the song extended to No Scrubs (TLC) and I’m Out (Ciara). Whilst not on the same financial scale; the futuristic look was quite new to Pop and it opened creative doors for artists. In September 2009, a few months after Michael died; Janet performed the song as part of a medley tribute to her brother. I feel both artists would have liked to have performed more together and the fact Scream has such a legacy and influence makes me wonder what we could have seen if more Michael and Janet songs came together! So, then…what was the actual recording like? I have quoted from this article before but it is worth noting again. Jimmy Jam, Scream’s producer, recalls memories from the recording of the song:

“When Michael went into the studio, the idea was that he was going to sing it first and then Janet would go in and sing after him,” Jam recalled. “So Janet’s sitting there, me and Terry are sitting there, and Michael goes in. Before he sings, he’s just real calm and quiet, 'Can you turn my headphones up a little bit?' Then all of a sudden the music comes on and he starts dancing around the room, hitting all his signature moves. When it was over, I swear to God, it was just silence in the room. He said, 'How was that?' We’re like, 'Yeah, that sounded really good.'” This caused a bit of problem for Janet who had planned to follow him into the booth to record her vocals. Instead she decided she'd do her vocal later in Jimmy Jam and Terry Lewis' Minneapolis studio, away from her brother. “So we go to Minneapolis with Janet, where she does a great job on her vocal,” Jam continued. “We send it to Michael, he goes, 'Wow, Janet sounds great. Where did she record that vocal?' I said it was in Minneapolis. 'I’m coming to Minneapolis.' So Michael comes to Minneapolis to re-record his vocal, and it was a real glimpse into his competitive nature. It didn’t even matter that it was his sister.” According to Jam, 90 per cent of Michael's vocals on the finished version was taken from that original New York session”.

IMAGE CREDIT: Getty Images

If there was some rivalry and healthy competition in the studio; it was all loving and, to be fair, it was Michael being himself! It was nothing against his sister: the man has that reputation and legacy and wanted to make sure the song was an emphatic and career-reviving shot! He wanted to make sure this not only got him back on the upper rungs of the Pop ladder – not that he had really slipped! – but it would shut the press up and let them know what was on his mind. Janet was coming from a similar place. She was an artist under the microscope and growing in popularity. She was gaining big respect and, with that, comparisons to Michael and another level of pressure. The song is that resounding and incredible thing that draws you in and involves you. I can listen to it endlessly and find something new each time. One can hear a continuation of Dangerous’ sound and that harder Michael edge; Janet matches him and brings something spectacular to the song! She and Michael weave their voices and have solo moments. The production is polished but allows all the tension and aggression to come through fully. The video, some might see as expensive, is the extravaganza to end them all! The article I have just quoted talks about the video and how the label felt when they received the concept/budget:

“…Needless to say the label weren't exactly over the moon when they saw the final budget, which was likely further increased by the initial three-day shoot running to over a week. “I got on the phone with the head of the record label and he had seen the budget and was apoplectic,” Romanek said. “He started screaming at me on the speakerphone, “do you think I'm the fucking Bank of America? Are you out of your fucking mind?” I said Michael and Janet want something huge, you've given me no time to do it, the song brings to mind images of a spaceship and if Michael Jackson has his own spaceship it's going to be really impressive. There was this dead silence on the speakerphone and then I heard (puts on soft voice) ‘yeah, that's right’ and I realised Michael was in the room on the other end of the line which I didn't know”.

IN THIS PHOTO: Michael Jackson in 1995/PHOTO CREDIT: Robert Deutsch

If Thriller (the song) was noted for its innovation and breaking ground in terms of concept and cinema; now, over a decade down the line, the King of Pop was taking the music video to new heights – it seemed cost was not an issue and he was willing to go to incredible lengths to stand out and shine! The image Jacko has of himself around the time – a king-like figure that was in a league of his own – made press ridicule easier but who could argue against (Michael’s) impression? The man was still the King of Pop (and is now) and carried the weight of press bile and delivered something stunning. Scream would have been weaker were it not for Janet’s voice and guidance. She is the perfect partner for Michael and someone who could read him and react to his unique voice and style. A perfect combination of D.N.A. and simpatico; two artists who knew each other inside out and wanted to deliver a unified and solid message against the press. I feel, in the one song, both artists unburdened themselves and made it know they were not going to take pressure lying down! Twenty-three years after its release; Scream still stands aside from other songs. Not only in terms of its video and concept but the performances and emotions that crackle and explode on the record! It is another reason why, on Michael Jackson’s sixtieth birthday, we should remember him and realise why his spirit, soul and music…

PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

ARE sorely missed.

FEATURE: The Great Entertainer: Michael Jackson at Sixty: How He Changed My Life

FEATURE:

 

 

The Great Entertainer

IN THIS PHOTO: Michael Jackson during his HIStory World Tour/PHOTO CREDIT: Phil Walter  

Michael Jackson at Sixty: How He Changed My Life

__________

PERHAPS I will put out another piece about…

IMAGE CREDIT: Getty Images

Michael Jackson but I wanted to provide something more personal to mark his sixtieth birthday. I will end by collating my twenty favourite songs of his (to go with a larger playlist I put together for an earlier piece) but there is so much about the man to admire! I have been looking out at the media world and seeing what is already published – slim pickings considering all he gave to music and how thankful we should be! I will talk about Jackson as a performer and star but, before then, I will reveal when his music came into my life. I cannot remember the exact date but I know Bad was the first album of his that I got my hands on – it was around the late-1980s. At that time in my life (when I was just starting secondary school); music was very much part of my social life and a bonding ritual. I had a group of friends who lived nearby and we would, in addition to general play, talk about the latest releases and play them on the stereo. It sounds rather idyllic and romantic but often we could be heard singing along to the latest chart hit and various tapes/albums we had procured – the neighbours must have been infuriated a lot! Jackson stood out because of his personality and sense of electricity.

I got more into his music through the 1990s but the man’s mannerisms and vocals tics lodged in my mind. In an affectionate way, I and my friends would copy his dancing and repeat his best-known tracks. I was aware of his Thriller and Off the Wall work (at that point) and would fall for Dangerous later down the line. My first tastes of Jackson came in the form of his Disco cuts with his brothers. The difference between The Jackson 5 and Michael Jackson’s work blew my mind and the sensation of seeing a man evolve and come out of himself reflected on me. I was a shy kid – and am a shy adult... – but the sense of expression and liberated Jackson provided rubbed off. Through something as simple as dancing to his music and listening to his music, I gained a level of confidence and sense of belonging that was missing up until then. It can be hard fitting into groups and making friends at school but, for me, I struggled a lot to belong and feel involved. Music is the way I find a sense of community and purpose now and, from a very young age, it was a way to connect with the world and find my way. I was a fan of artists like Prince but Michael Jackson opened my eyes like nobody else. Seeing him on MTV and videos like Billie Jean and Beat It (from Thriller) was a sensational revelation. I would happily spend hours listening to Bad and would dive into the songs and let them carry me away.

PHOTO CREDIT: Dave Hogan

Watching the man own music videos and strut like nobody could touch him was an emotional thing. I could sense, under everything, there was a struggle and need to belong – the same thing I felt! Jackson was a lot older than me but, even as a star and big name, I was detecting a vulnerability and loneliness that was being quenched by music. Jackson was an enigmatic musician and I wonder how he differed away from the stage and studio. Much has been said about his private life and the press spent most his career hounding and poking at him. The less said about their reprehensible behaviour and obsessions the better! For me, Michael Jackson’s personal life is irrelevant and does not need to be discussed. I idolised him because of what he brought to music. He was a gifted and incredible songwriter who could easily stun when writing ballads and stagger when spitting anger and providing something exhilarating. His movement and dance gave children like me a channel and way of feeling less quiet and alone. He wouldn’t have been aware but his live performances and stunning videos were giving so many people a voice! By the time Dangerous came along in 1991, with a harder and more anxious sound, I was seeing Jackson cast off a sweeter side – apart from a few songs - and react to the press and accusations.

The mire and controversy would reach a peak in the mid-1990s but, even by Dangerous, he was being hounded in his private and public life. I could sense that anger and disgust and, under all of it, detect a need for protection and help. That sort of understanding and heartache was very daunting for someone so young. I was about eight when Dangerous came out but, like Bad and Thriller, that album would, again, change my life. I was still struggling to find company and companions – apart from a small group of friends – and Jackson’s rising fame and huge gigs made me want to know more about the star. I was seeing much more than a songwriter come to life. In the way Madonna introduced me to the idea of an idol and performer; Michael Jackson was this rare and special human who was taking music to new levels. Few songwriters could touch him and, in terms of performance, nobody offered that blend of the physical, majestic and unique. Maybe Prince had his own vibe but I always preferred Michael Jackson! There are entertainers and great performers today but I feel we have lost the very best. Too much of Pop and R&B today seems the same and comparatively restrained. I do not feel the same way about today’s artists and, when I need that smile and boost of energy then it is Jackson’s music and videos I run to.

As I go through my adult life, he is still inspiring me and helping. Although he died in 2009; I can see how he has influenced artists today and how his legacy is bleeding into music. The fact nobody can touch him and Jackson stands on a plain of his own shows how mesmeric and meteoric his spirit was. I always get affronted by people who look at his past and accuse him; how they question his innocence and bring up all the bad things. They forget what he gave to music and how much he achieved. From breaking racial boundaries and raising awareness of racism on music T.V. to the staggering rise his career took – few others changed music and made more of an impact. I am still learning from Michael Jackson and do not think I will ever be able to get to the bottom of what made him tick. That mystery and complexity is in my blood and I am discovering new things about Jackson with every song and new spin – a man who keeps revealing fresh layers and eliciting new emotions. Not only did he help me find a place and remained focused as a child but I am compelled by him now. Among all the general pieces about Jackson – the ‘best of’ and his ‘ultimate albums’ – I wanted to provide something personal and state how he impacted (and still does) my life. Even though he is no longer around; his sixtieth birthday makes me happy and sad. I am glad I get to pay my respect and thanks but it is gutting to know we will never see the man release new material or tour. Many might come and go in music but the chances of discovering anyone who reaches Michael Jackson’s genius…

IN THIS PHOTO: Michael Jackson is presented with a GRAMMY Legend Award by younger sister Janet Jackson at The 35th Annual GRAMMY Awards/PHOTO CREDIT: Kevin Mazur

IS extremely rare!

FEATURE: Black or White: Michael Jackson at Sixty: How the Pop Genius Broke Down Racial Barriers and Revolutionised the Music Video

FEATURE:

 

 

Black or White

IN THIS IMAGE: Michael Jackson/IMAGE CREDIT: Andy Warhol

Michael Jackson at Sixty: How the Pop Genius Broke Down Racial Barriers and Revolutionised the Music Video

__________

THIS piece will bring in some treasured Michael Jackson videos…

IN THIS PHOTO: Michael Jackson in the video for Thriller/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

but it would do him a disservice to do a simple list and get people to look at that! We cannot think about the King of Pop and not talk about music videos. Today, there is a serious question as to whether videos are needed and how valid they are. A lot of new artists are making great videos on a small budget but it seems the Pop elite, with the bigger bucks, are able to do something more imaginative that gets the YouTube videos coming. Most of the videos are pretty forgettable and there is the odd one that sticks in the mind. Look at the Pop titans of today like Taylor Swift and Justin Bieber and how often are you stopped in your tracks by one of their videos?! Maybe it is harder to break ground and push boundaries. The fact we do not have MTV and music video television – not like we did in the 1980s and 1990s... – means few people are seeing videos or they do not place them high in the heart. I love music videos and feel they are an integral part of a song. Even if you have a tight budget; you can do something fantastic and get people’s attention. I wonder whether Jackson would be pumping out the high-concept videos at the age of sixty!

It would be good to see the King of Pop bust his moves and thrill the people. Maybe his videos would be more ‘sedate’ but I couldn’t see the man sitting down calmly and recording something laidback! There is that golden age of MTV – from the 1980s to the end of the 1990s – where the music video was an art-form and that was our introduction to music. There was no streaming (or Internet up until a point) and radio was the only channel we could hear music. Videos, therefore, allowed a song to come to life and see the artist perform. From Madonna and Prince to Soundgarden and Peter Gabriel; I remember those eye-catching and fantastic videos that took songs to another level and remained in the mind. To my mind, nobody progressed and changed MTV quite like Michael Jackson. I am slightly relieved MTV doesn’t hold much sway these days because I am not sure it would be as progressive as it should be. One of the reasons Michael Jackson pushed so hard to get onto the station and put so much into the video was the resistance from MTV to put black faces on the screen. That racism was embedded into their D.N.A. and it took a lot of protesting and fantastic creativity (for them) to give artists like Michael Jackson the same sort of coverage as white artists.

One might say that racism made the videos bigger and better and, as such, gave him an edge. How did the rocky association Jackson had with MTV start?

“Despite Jackson’s presence on MTV through 1986, the network faced allegations of racism for giving scant airtime to videos featuring people of color. MTV executives have denied that racism was at the root of the network’s “blackout,” saying that black artists received little airplay because their music didn’t fit the channel’s rock-based format.

“MTV was originally designed to be a rock music channel,” said Buzz Brindle, MTV’s former director of music programming, to Jet magazine in 2006. “It was difficult for MTV to find African American artists whose music fit the channel’s format that leaned toward rock at the outset.”

With so few black rockers, adding African Americans to MTV’s roster proved difficult, according to the network’s co-founder Les Garland, whom Jet also interviewed.

“We had nothing to pick from,” Garland explained. “Fifty percent of my time was spent in the early days of MTV convincing artists to make music videos and convincing record labels to put up money to make those videos…”

There may be those arguments that few black artists were making videos but the truth is there was a fear they would not be taken seriously and excluded. Jackson’s classic videos like Billie Jean and Beat It created a huge explosion and excitement. This was not an artist lazily producing a video and expending little effort: a superstar was born and you could feel the anger, determination and passion in every frame!

ILLUSTRATION CREDIT: Brett Jones/ART DIRECTION: Crush Creative

How, then, did Jackson change MTV and open doors for artists?!

“It took major prodding to get MTV to play “Billie Jean,” the second track from Jackson’s 1982 album Thriller. Released Jan. 2, 1983, the single would go on to top the Billboard 100 chart for seven weeks, but Walter Yetnikoff, president of CBS Records Group, reportedly had to threaten to remove all other CBS videos from MTV before the network agreed to air the video for “Billie Jean.”

Garland denied such a confrontation occurred, telling Jet that the network began playing the video on its own. “There was never any hesitation. No fret,” he said. Based on his account, MTV aired the video the same day that executives screened it.

However “Billie Jean” ended up on the network, there’s little doubt that it changed the course of MTV. The first video by a black artist to receive heavy rotation on the network, “Billie Jean” opened up the door for other artists of color to be featured on MTV”.

Once doors were opened and there was that visibility – quite small but a step – it meant Rock took a back-step and R&B artists came more to the fore. Given the popularity of Hip-Hop and artists like Whitney Houston and Prince in the 1980s; MTV was given no choice but to diversify its playlists and provide visual access to black artists.

You can chart back to Michael Jackson and Billie Jean as a moment when things started to change. I realise it was not Jackson alone who created change: Hip-Hop artists and other Pop artists help inspire evolution and Jackson was among those whose incredible music was finally being seen and heard! I will look at Jackson’s changing appearance but one can chart back to his role in The Jackson 5 as starting revolution and visibility for black artists:

“As the Jackson 5, Michael Jackson and his brothers "became a cutting-edge example of black crossover artists," said Mark Anthony Neal, a professor of black popular culture at Duke University's Department of African and African American Studies.

"You basically had five working-class black boys with Afros and bell bottoms, and they really didn't have to trade any of that stuff in order to become mainstream stars," Neal said.

Young Michael Jackson was the first black "bubblegum teen star" in the vein of Monkees singer Davy Jones, Neal said”.

Jackson continued as a pioneer in the black culture when he broke barriers by appearing on MTV, and by breaking sales records with the 1982 album, "Thriller".

Before long, as I shall examine, Jackson stepped into a league of his own and, with the respect and trust of MTV, was pushing himself into the stratosphere. That issue of race was still an issue when videos like Thriller (from the album of the same name) came out.

The concept, Jackson turning into a beast, was almost what white T.V. producers feared: the evil and unsettling black artist; something inferior and inhuman in a way. By Billie Jean, as this article explains; roles changed and he was being seen as a hero:

“However, on what could be his most famous song, “Billie Jean”, he takes it a step further and becomes the object of adoration and what is more, of obsession for women and perhaps men to the point he is portrayed as a monster, unhuman. Unbeknownst to him at the time, this would become the curse of his every-day life. As with Prince, people were unable to label him, to put him into a well-known category and be ok with it, because he could not be and refused to be categorized”.

If the videos he did for The Jackson 5 saw him as a cute child with potential; the post-Thriller videos made Jackson a megastar who was breaking boundaries and giving a voice for black artists. How did Jackson break moulds and change music/videos forever:

“…In the end, both Prince and Michael created powerful, influential on-stage personas who delivered electrifying performances, witty lyrics and memorable grooves. They became master manipulators and made the world believe whatever they wished by taking their prejudices and projecting them back onto the audience. Jackson broke down his own records – nobody came close to them ever again - whereas attendance and earnings from tours was concerned and Prince became arguably the most prolific musician in popular music, the first African American to have a song, a movie and an album at number one in the charts”.

There is that discussion, and irony, if a man who sung that it doesn’t matter if you’re black or white (Black or White from the album, Dangerous) changed from the fighting and inspiring black artist to what MTV was promoting before he made breakthroughs: a white artist. There have been medical explanations or maybe it was Jackson taking a stand and ensuring he was going to be respected. In any case; race played an important part in his career: from the black artist we saw up until Thriller to the white man we would see in Bad’s videos (from 1987) - his skin was lighter by 1987 but would look radically different by 1991's Dangerous. Bad, amazingly, spawned nine singles – the album only had ten tracks on its original release (Leave Me Alone was added on a later release). Videos for songs like Bad and Smooth Criminal saw Jackson liberated and pushing on. Aside from Thriller’s world-dominating concept and impact; there was much more ambition by 1987 – much more complex and richer; bigger storylines and budgets. The fact Jackson released so many singles meant there was a greater opportunity and a bigger role for him on music T.V. Look at 1991’s Dangerous and how far Jackson stepped. Again, budgets increased the concepts became more ambitious.

Look at Remember the Time where Jackson starred alongside Iman, Eddie Murphy and Magic Johnson. Its Egypt-set story finds Jackson stealing the queen (Iman) from Murphy’s pharaoh and seducing her. It is almost like a film in itself: a big start and that chase; Jackson acting as the hero but Iman being given a strong and memorable role.  Again, we saw nine singles come from the album (Dangerous) and Jackson was collaborating with other actors/figures more than his earlier career. Black or White is that big statement and, aside from starring a young Macaulay Culkin, it split opinions but definitely made people talk. That transformation from The Jackson 5 to this completely changed artist. There was a jumbled start to the video and mixed messages; no real cohesion but something great came out of that video:

“Yet it was the final four minutes that ignited the furor: Alone on a soundstage streetscape, Jackson, sans music, transforms from a black panther into a human, dances, and gradually loses himself in a maelstrom of destruction and unabashed eroticism. Interpretations ran rampant the following day. Was that final bit ”meant to portray Jackson’s interpretation of the panther’s wild and animalistic behavior,” as Sony said in a statement? Was it an overdone attempt to shed his good-boy image? Was it merely, as The New York Times opined, ”the narcissism of a spoiled child throwing his toys”? Was the son-versus-father segment with actors Macaulay Culkin and George Wendt an allusion to Jackson’s own allegedly domineering father, Joe Jackson? “.

Whether you agree with the storyline or think it was a publicity ploy; there is no denying Jackson was taking chances and stirring things up. In the Closet finds him cavorting and dancing with Naomi Campbell in a provocative and memorable video; Jam is him, yeah, jamming on a basketball court in a tough and playful shoot – a man showing different sides of himself and bringing his songs to life. Maybe there was some doubt as to whether the appearance change was a chance to get attention and not have to fight but, either way; the King of Pop took music videos to new levels. I remember watching Remember the Time and marvelling at this extraordinary film coming to life. It gave new life and lease to a song that I had visions of in my mind – nothing as bold and exceptional as that! It seems, whether through incredible art or controversy Jackson became the face of MTV and inspired legions of artists. He was not producing flaccid and predictable videos: his promotional efforts stirred the imagination, got people debating and, at times, got the press questioning his motives. His post-Dangerous work produced a few fine videos (Blood on the Dance Floor and You Rock My World among the best; Earth Song vivid and disturbing.

Whether you agree with the sentiments and messages on offerings like Earth Song; it is clear Jackson wanted to say something deep and urgent with the video. How many modern artists are using music videos to deliver political and conservation messages?! Maybe Hip-Hop and R&B artists are but, in the Pop forefront, there is still the reliance on love and rather uninspired concepts. In many ways, Jackson’s music videos are more powerful and potent today – artists should be looking at his MTV heyday as inspiration; revitalise the music video and get people talking. Maybe the absence of music T.V. means we have less fascination with videos but there is no denying how influential Jackson was and what he did for artists. He gave an opening for black artists and took the video to dizzying heights. Thriller, as his standout video, made some of the biggest leaps:

“Thriller sealed MTV's reputation as a new cultural force; dissolved racial barriers in the station's treatment of music (though MTV has always denied they existed); revolutionised music video production; spawned the "making of" genre of documentary ("The Making of Filler," as Landis said at the time); helped create a market for VHS rentals and sales, because fans were desperate to see it when they wanted, rather than at the will of TV stations; and, in 2009, became the first music video to be inducted into the Library of Congress's National Film Registry”.

IN THIS PHOTO: Michael Jackson with Thriller's video director, John Landis/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

Thriller was a multi-million-dollar beast but, in many ways, it captivated new directors, including Spike Jonze, and made them think there was a place for fun, filmic videos:

“Jonze took the freedom he sensed in Thriller – and also its eccentricity and humour – and ran with it, creating some of the 90s' most famous music videos, including the Beastie Boys' Sabotage and Praise You by Fatboy Slim, which also get continually spoofed. "When I made videos, whether it was with the Beastie Boys or Björk, we weren't chasing anything," he says. "It was never like some marketing thing. I just wanted to create something that would do justice to the song and I was excited about making, and I think Thriller was the same way."

Perhaps that's Thriller's ultimate legacy, and it's also why Jonze has become a key influence on film-makers creating videos for YouTube. As Psy's Gangnam Style proved, films shot relatively cheaply and quickly, and which don't require pluggers, or for the artist to necessarily have an existing profile, can have a global impact comparable to Thriller. The rules have been rewritten, unleashing a new surge of creativity”.

I love how Jackson’s creative effectiveness did not wane after Dangerous and he continued to explore the possibilities of the format. It is tragic to think how far he could have taken the music video has he of lived.

Look at the Scream video. With his sister, Janet, he managed to create a head-busting video whose budget made eyes water! This article looks at the song/video and its brilliance:

“Amazing lead single “Scream” – released twenty years ago today – however offered a more relatable and enjoyable sense of catharsis. A duet with younger sister Janet Jackson, and produced by Jimmy Jam and Terry Lewis, “Scream” finds the pair spitting out tightly wound lines railing against the press almost through gritted teeth, the industrial beats and clattering percussion encasing an incredible vocal performance from Michael that peaks with the line, “oh brother please have mercy 'cause I just can't take it”. Its sense of unleashed frustration makes it one of Jackson's most enduring songs outside of his 80s purple patch, the aggression sounding defiant as opposed to bitter. It also came with one of the best (and allegedly most expensive) videos of all time, director Mark Romanek housing the siblings in their very own wipe-clean, hyper-modern spaceship, complete with indoor zen garden, remote controlled art gallery and futuristic squash court”.

Anyone thinking the siblings would be harmonious and diplomatic was in for a shock. Michael, especially, was a bit of a nightmare. He spent, literally, a day looking for a perfect handclap sound. He would alter the volume and slave over his idea of the song. Janet Jackson’s career was faring better by 1995 – the song featured on Michael Jackson’s HIStory: Past, Present and Future, Book 1 – and this was seen as a chance to promote Janet Jackson.

The idea was for Michael to go in first and Janet to follow him. He went into the booth, asked for his headphones to be turned up and busted his moves. He asked how it was – they said it was good – and Janet had to follow him! The siblings were competitive and this was Michael’s way of regaining his crown and getting back into the public fore – even if the song was designed more with Janet in mind. Maybe the world-draining budget of Scream makes it impossible for other artists to replicate this today but, as this article continues; the promotional did inspire other artists and made changes to music videos well into the 1990s:

“…Needless to say the label weren't exactly over the moon when they saw the final budget, which was likely further increased by the initial three-day shoot running to over a week. “I got on the phone with the head of the record label and he had seen the budget and was apoplectic,” Romanek said. “He started screaming at me on the speakerphone, “do you think I'm the fucking Bank of America? Are you out of your fucking mind?” I said Michael and Janet want something huge, you've given me no time to do it, the song brings to mind images of a spaceship and if Michael Jackson has his own spaceship it's going to be really impressive. There was this dead silence on the speakerphone and then I heard (puts on soft voice) ‘yeah, that's right’ and I realised Michael was in the room on the other end of the line which I didn't know. From that moment the record executive guy knew he was pretty much screwed.” The space-age visual influence of “Screram” can be seen in the likes of TLC's “No Scrubs”, Lil Mama's “Shawty Get Loose” and, more recently, Ciara's “I'm Out”.

Look at the Internet and how the music video is changing and progressing. The interactivity we saw Michael Jackson project – bringing listeners into his world and giving them a sublime experience – is much easier to replicate now. The best videos from modern times (including Childish Gambino’s This Is America) are bolder, bigger and much more challenging the rather average and routine videos. There are other artists who have helped this leap but you can draw a line between Michael Jackson’s videos like Bad and Thriller and how artists are connecting with audiences today. I am not one of these people who has given up on the music video – even if there are fewer legendary offerings than past decades. Few artists have the same purse Michael Jackson had back in the day but his movements, physicality and concepts have filtered through the years and changed the modern music video. He transformed from this ignored artist who was held back by MTV and given excuses to the Billie Jean icon that changed the game; the megastar that produced more and more lavish and spellbinding videos. As we mark his sixtieth birthday and how he changed Pop and become a king; let’s not forget his arsenal of brilliant videos and…

 IN THIS PHOTO: Michael Jackson captured during the Bad video shoot/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

THE impact they created.

FEATURE: A Lament for the Crate-Diggin': The Decline of Sampling in Popular Music

FEATURE:

 

 

A Lament for the Crate-Diggin'

PHOTO CREDIT: Unsplash 

The Decline of Sampling in Popular Music

__________

I have written about sampling before…

PHOTO CREDIT: Unsplash 

and how some of my favourite artists splice myriad sounds and diverse elements together to create something wonderful. I will end this piece will some sample-featuring songs but the first artists that come to my mind are The Avalanches, Beastie Boys; DJ Shadow and Public Enemy. The former, especially, on their Since I Left You album laboured through countless recorded and created an all-samples record. I can only imagine how difficult and time-consuming it is ensuring the samples hang together and are interesting. The fact the Australian band took sixteen years to give us a follow-up album (Wildflower in 2016) shows how much work is required. I love their debut and get giddy when hearing these rare and unusual sounds come together. It is fun and exciting getting to sort through crates and your recording collection but there is immense technicality, experimentation and trial needed lacing all these (disparate) songs together and trying to create something that flows and resonates. It may seem like a dream expedition on paper but, once the vinyl is out; how long does it take before you get from the inception to the final product?!

IMAGE CREDIT: Getty Images

Like a lot of artists who use sampling in their work; we are not hearing mega-tunes and very familiar sounds. A lot of the time, they will mine older records or rare cuts to get something unique and fresh. Beastie Boys and Public Enemy used sampling to heighten their gritty and pulsating music. If Beastie Boys fused various samples with their humorous raps; Public Enemy were more political and used other songs to help deliver their potent messages. DJ Shadow, on the other hand, is a more traditional D.J. and takes influence from different areas of music. There is so much to investigate and drool over when it comes to the variations in sampling and how different genres approach things. Look at Hip-Hop sampling and compare that to artists who work in other genres. It is a fascinating blend and culture that seems to be diminishing and becoming far too conservative! From the 1980s through to the current time, we can definitely hear a shift in regards the prolificacy of sampling in music and how that is affecting the larger culture. 

Listen to an album like Entroducing….. and that 1996 debut features moody, slow tracks with more upbeat jams – taking from DJ Shadow’s early Hip-Hop influences. That album was produced over two years: other artists have taken longer and it is a real labour of love. The fact the Beastie Boys hit their sampling peak on their sophomore album, Paul’s Boutique (1989) shows that some artists can nail their best work very quickly. The Avalanches and DJ Shadow did it on their debuts and got huge critical acclaim: Beastie Boys didn’t fare as well and a lot of the album’s credit came retrospectively. Everyone from Sugarhill Gang and The Beatles were sampled on Paul’s Boutique; Entroducing….. features inclusions from The Heath Brothers and Jeremy Storch. It is interesting to see the differences between those albums. DJ Shadow has fewer samples on his album and uses his D.J. and production skills to create original threads and integrate samples. Beastie Boys use original vocals and lyrics but employ samples to add humour, light and new energy to their music. Sampling is not a new thing, I know. Ever since the birth of Hip-Hop in the 1980s; artists have taken from vinyl and the streets to unleash these kaleidoscopic and vivid songs full of sounds – from traffic noise and conversation to the streets – and vibrancy. I am a big fan of Beck and De La Soul. They use samples in different ways but, one will agree, their work is stronger for it.

I love sampling because it is a way of bringing older sounds and unheard-of beats to the people. I listen to a song from the Beastie Boys or The Avalanches and I not only get something new and giddy but I can disrobe the packed song and compartmentalise the samples. I then get to trawl vinyl myself and look where those sounds originated from. It is wonderful to be able to connect in such a way with artists and songs you might not have otherwise have experienced. I also love how dizzying a song can be with samples! Most tracks are predictable in their structure and what we can expect. Listen to a song and, before you know it, there is a political speech, classic Soul cut or familiar sound coming in and you are livened and taken aback. For an artist, there is that bittersweet experience of digging through crates and splicing music together.

PHOTO CREDIT: Unsplash

It can be infuriating narrowing things down and it takes a lot of discipline, patience and intuition. The good thing is you have access to a world of music and, as such, can dive right in and get to work. Perhaps the biggest talking point regarding sampling is its legality and expense. It is complex regards sampling because there are strict copyright laws and it can be expensive getting clearance for various songs. Some artists want to protect their music and will not give permission; others will charge a lot of want royalties from it. There are programmes and software where you can get free samples and use them but, in terms of bigger songs, it is more complicated.

I was reading exerts from a Science Friday show where host Ira Flatow was speaking about sampling and copyright with guests. The excerpts I am going to quote involve Max, a caller; Prof. Kembrew McLeod (co-author of Creative License: The Law and Culture of Digital Sampling (2011) and Dean Garfield (President and CEO, Information Technology Council, Washington, D.C.). These parts of the conversation stood out:

“FLATOW: All these free, use them as much as you want little riffs on there, little samples. But why can't I get something, you know, from some of these popular tunes that are going to be sampled any way the kids want to do it? Why can't we find a way to put those up on iTunes or add little bits of it, somehow, in a system there?

Prof. McLEOD: The short answer...

Mr. GARFIELD: In part, it is artistic integrity. It's the reason you now have The Beatles on iTunes where previously you didn't. You know, they made the determination, at some point, that it was appropriate. And before then, they thought it wasn't. And so, as the person who spent the time developing the work, you should, I believe, have some control over how that work is used”.

A caller rang in and added their voice to the mix:

“MAX: But I just want to say that I think a lot of creativity gets stifled. I mean, you can look at, basically, the golden age of sampling during the '90s for hip hop, and you just saw so much unique sounds coming out. And I - that's when I started deejaying. I've been doing it for 15 years. You can check me out at soundcloud.com/dj-eclipse.

“…But it's basically, you know, stifling a lot of the creativity because a lot of the people who get these samples and play them - a lot of people rediscover music from past genres by listening to these samples.

And, you know, I think those corporations that are holding those copyrights hostage are missing out on a huge marketing opportunity, basically, because they're not going to - these people are now getting into these electric genres where people aren't able to listen to snippets and soundbites of old music where they're going to say, hey, where did that come from?

Where did RZA get that sample from? Where did it RJD2(ph) get that sample from? And then rediscover past genres of music and buy those albums, because I know I did, through just sampling and through just being interested in the music and trying to research and find out how these sounds are put together. And I think that's one of the most lost aspects from the golden age of sampling that we have today, what you can call, I don't know, the Timberlanization(ph) of hip hop where...”

It is an interesting interview/show that talks about two different sides to sampling. On the one hand, there are artists and creators who are happy for others to use their work as evolution and getting the music to new audiences. They will get credit and, at the same time, others get to experience music not being played on the radio or readily accessible on streaming sites...

There is the other school of thought that argues, in a time when YouTube and Spotify make it easy to access any track out there; people can steal what they want and there are infringement issues. Rather than open up channels and make it a free-for-all; there are strict laws and rules that mean permission needs to be sought or too much financial compromise happens. I wonder whether past legal cases have made artists and labels scared their work is going to be copied and used without permission. Most modern artists are happy to give credit but I wonder whether labels are asking for too much money or being too unrealisable regarding credit and percentage. Certainty, artists like Beastie Boys would have had a hard time getting clearance and permission but the fact we are hearing fewer albums like Paul’s Boutique these days makes me wonder whether it is impossible to sample at all. Modern artists like SZA and Kendrick Lamar bring samples into their work but it is not as free range and expansive as the classic records of the 1980s and 1990s. There are people like me who would love to make a sample-heavy record that took from various genres and time periods – would that ever be legally and financially viable?!

Before I come to my arguments; I want to bring in this piece that looks at the most-sampled songs ever. As of 2016, The Winstons’ Amen, Brother has been sampled over two-thousand times. It seems some songs are not only being sampled easily but set up challenges for other artists – the same sample being used in different environments and settings:

“There’s one song that’s been sampled far more than any other, according to one measure. The website WhoSampled.com, whose audience obsessively tracks what’s sampled, says that a 1960s track called “Amen, Brother” by The Winstons is the most-sampled track in history, and it’s not particularly close. By its count, more than 2,000 songs have sampled a particular drum beat from “Amen, Brother” that’s now known as the Amen Break. As you play the clip below, you can hearThe Winstons’ drummer, G.C. Coleman, play the kick drums, snare drums and cymbals in a funky four-bar pattern.

PHOTO CREDIT: Unsplash

"MCs looking for an edge had to dig even deeper into the archives of rock, funk and Motown records that supplied their beats. Flores, who MC’d with Bambaataa, said that Bambaataa had found the track “Amen, Brother” on the B-side of a once-popular 1969 soul record by The Winstons, and kept it in his secret stash. (Attempts to reach Bambaataa, who has recently been accused of having committed sexual abuse in the 1980s, through his lawyer were unsuccessful.) The whole song was eminently danceable, but the party really got going during that six-second drum break a minute and a half into the track. Flores said Bambaataa would slow the break down — going from a 45 rpm to 33⅓ rpm — and play it again and again as B-Boys (or “break boys”) tore it up on the dance floor.

By the early 1990s, the Amen Break wasn’t just being used by acts such as Rob Base and Heavy D, it had become one of the foundational beats of an entirely new electronic dance music genre: jungle. Jungle artists often sped up the break, sliced it up into individual drum hits, rearranged it, and played it for minutes at a time while layering techno, reggae and a melting pot of other sounds on top of it”.

Mark Ronson, when interviewed back in 2014, was asked about sampling and today’s market. These quotes are taken from Part 1 of the TED Radio Hour episode, What Is Original?

 “Though the tools associated with sampling have changed over time — yesterday's used-vinyl crate diggers have become today's digital foragers, yanking their source material straight from YouTube — its power to shape culture has not. In his TED talk, Ronson offers a case in point by charting the 30-year journey of one of the most sampled songs of all time: Slick Rick and Doug E. Fresh's 1984 hit "La Di Da Di," a bare-bones rap and beatbox duet, which has been borrowed by everyone from The Notorious B.I.G. to Miley Cyrus to Spoon.

Do you think we live a post-sampling era?

You know, we used to go to record stores or record fairs to find these rare breaks. I see young producers today, kids who are 19, 20; they stay up all night just sampling straight from YouTube. I think things like YouTube kind of have made a lot of today's younger generation think thatthe "Well, everything kind of just belongs to us, right?" Because it kind of does: Music has been free for a long time now, for better or for worse.

In some ways, the culture of today is really just about taking whatever you feel like and making it your own. Which is dangerous — there are troubled lines there — because at the end of the day, credit needs to go to the people that created the stuff in the first place. But it does make for some incredible, exciting art. And it does mean that some little kid sitting in his basement in Ohio with a laptop can be making some of the most interesting music around”.

There are articles like this...and this that ensure you legally take samples and are not crossing any lines. Reading this article and one gets a view of the history of sampling and how it has evolved. It looks at copyright laws and how, now, there are libraries with samples available. It is great having access to free samples and sounds but what happens if you want to sample a Beatles track or something from Amy Winehouse; throw in an interview from Kurt Cobain or have some Funkadelic in there?! Is it a case of contacting their estate/management and asking politely?! I feel they would say ‘no’ and it would be very tricky to make that happen. They may say it is okay but only if a large percentage of a song’s profits were given to them. The fact streaming services and YouTube mean a lot of artists are giving their music away means people cannot afford to pay labels. I understand that need to protect a song and ensure it is not endlessly shared and illegally accessed. As many artists have been saying; sampling is a great way of carrying the torch and using a song in a different way - pushing music to new generations. If you are confused regarding sampling clearance and costs then articles like this might assist. It is worth doing research and not giving up completely. Many artists feel it will be financially ruinous using all the samples they want but there are compromises and ways to use samples.

IN THIS IMAGE: The album cover for Erik B. & Rakim's 1987 masterpiece, Paid in Full/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

Out of all of this, I wonder whether a more affordable and fair compromise/contract can come into place that ensures original tracks are protected and not illegally distributed but allows an artist, for a small fee, the chance to use it in their song. I wonder whether we will hear any big album that uses a lot of samples and whether a lack of progression in some genres – like Pop and Hip-Hop – is because there are such rigid laws regarding sampling. I would love to make an album that uses samples and mixes it together with sounds and library effects. It may not be on the same level as something from The Avalanches but I wonder whether artists are being frustrated because they cannot get clearance or permission.

I worry a lot of older music is being lost and getting duty because pioneers are unable to use them in their work. I said how I discovered older records because I heard them sampled by the likes of the Beastie Boys. That culture has vanished – or shrunk down at the very least – and that is a sad thing to see. Labels are red-hot regarding illegal use and big court cases are scaring musicians off. If something rational and sensible can be discussed between artists and labels then I think we could see an explosion and evolution that vastly benefits modern music – this will lead to future innovation and breakthroughs.  Modern music has plenty of treasure and promise but, for my money, you cannot beat a vinyl record…

FULL of great samples!

FEATURE: Patience, Poker and Snap: The Art of Music Photography

FEATURE:

 

 

Patience, Poker and Snap

IN THIS PHOTO: Hayley Williams captured in 2017/PHOTO CREDIT: Heather Hawke

The Art of Music Photography

__________

THE biggest problem I have with new musicians…

IN THIS PHOTO: Madonnatron photoed during the Green Door Store's seventh birthday celebrations earlier this year/PHOTO CREDIT: TLBrooker Imagery

is the rankle regarding photos – or a distinct lack thereof. My interviews and reviews are always full of great shots that give a visual edge to things. The reason I require about six or seven images, high-resolution, from each artist is that visuals are vital when making an eye-catching and interesting piece. If I had a long interview with one photo and a block of text; not only would it look dry and like an academic text – people would grow a bit weary. Photos keep you hooked and, more importantly, show different sides to an artist mere words cannot convey. It may sound like a whorey old cliché but a picture really can paint a thousand words (here is a useful guide regarding photography regarding beginners). A photo – maybe there are some swear words in there – can say so much more. Artists always come back to me and ask the question: Why do you need so many images?! The reason I love images and want to make my pages as rich as possible is to give them a professional look but show what great work is being done by music photographers right now. I have included shots from Heather Hawke, Georgia Penny and Thomas Brooker (among others) to show how each photographer has their own style and personality. I love seeing music photography because, in a digital age, it is more important than ever.

IN THIS PHOTO: Taking Back Sunday during a set at this year's Slam Dunk Festival/PHOTO CREDIT: Georgia Penny Photo

Maybe a certain vintage look and authenticity have been lost: so many snappers use the best cameras and want to get the clearest possible images. Although getting into photography is not that cheap – there is the camera and accessories to go with it – getting a basic kit together and going to as many gigs as possible is a great experience. Bands and artists always want to be captured and feel great when they see a photo of them in the music press. For me, photography in music is as vital as a video. Things are so digital and faceless at the moment – photos give music a sense of soul and colour that is lacking from streaming. We are all too busy flicking through playlists and not really looking up. Without a physical product (a vinyl or C.D.) and only the sound available, it can be hard to understand what a song/artist is about. Photos give you that important visual representation and bring new sides out. Of course, it can be a bit costly for new artists to hand over the cash when it comes to snaps. I often get people saying they cannot afford a photoshoot because they are new and do not have much money. I emphasise but would argue that even a top photographer is not going to charge mega-bucks for a single shoot – when you can get seven or eight good images to share with the press and on social media.

IN THIS PHOTO: Florence + the Machine in Lake Tahoe this year/PHOTO CREDIT: Lillie Eiger

Even if it is a bit of a cost it is all part of the marketing campaign and an investment that will pay for itself. Few things annoy me more than bands and artists with very few good images – Metal bands are especially guilty! – or a few crappy phone pictures they have put. I am not saying every artist needs to have an arsenal of professional and great images but there is something very pleasing viewing a portfolio when you have an option to choose photos that express a range of moods and moments. A great music photography can get an artist to come out of themselves or reveal something mysterious (if doing a portrait). In the live setting, they can capture that single moment members of the audience might have missed (especially with people filming gigs on their phones!). It is almost like watching wildlife: you are waiting for that defining shot that drops the jaw and cannot be easily replicated. Those who feel photography is an easy quality that we can all do now – on our phones – need their head checked. It is much more than selecting the right camera and being ‘in the right place at the right time’. The best music photos have a concept or design.

IN THIS PHOTO: IDLES/PHOTO CREDIT: Pooneh Ghana for DIY

Look at the image of IDLES above. It is a shot that shows them in all their game, gooey and goofy glory – a banquet of colours, bare flesh and intriguing interplay. Pooneh Ghana is an excellent photographer and someone I have been following for a while. It is a different discipline snapping from an audience or stage as opposed to a studio or on-location. The latter involves more concept, design and wardrobe. It is a subtler and more delicate procedure where you have the time to set a shot up but do not want to make it look fake and boring. The live shot is that instant and quick reaction where you need to get a great photo and be in the right position. I know music photographers take multiple images a gig but it is still about being in the moment and having the right equipment. Maybe the photographer is in that special place that captures a perfect angle; they are part of the crowd (moshing or dancing) or pick the right song that defines a gig. There is so much to consider, emotionally, physically and technically before you even take that shot. The greatest music photos ever can go down in history and be seen as works as art. We see rare photos of big artists and can learn more from a single image as we can an album or interview.

I will go on to look at music photography and how to get into it but, before then, I want to bring in a couple of articles. This piece, written in 2016, spotlighted Kana (Kana Waiwaiku) who uses a single moment and atmosphere to bring something unique and special from an artist. His shots vary between portraits and live shots but seem to convey so much emotion and texture. I shall quote from the piece that unearths valuable advice and insight from those looking to get into the industry:

“Music photography is a heavily saturated industry. With many emerging photographers happy to shoot for free to have their name associated with musicians, it has become very difficult to make a living by specializing in music. But there are a few pioneers who have risen amongst this heightened competition; this is the story of renowned music photographer Kana Waiwaiku.

The 31 year old Londoner, Kana, has swam against the tide his entire life both personally and professionally. He describes trying to establish himself whilst being true to his personal vision as an uphill struggle. But with great dedication to his craft, Kana's brand of music photography has gained many admirers. Yet the biggest compliment I can give is that you can identify his work without needing to look at the credits.

 PHOTO CREDIT: Kana

“…As a young, black, British man growing up in London, Kana’s early experimentation in photography is full of elegant anecdotes that he describes as love letter to the craft. My favorite one was of his run-in with the police when out taking long exposures in a dark London park.

I got stopped by the police once because they had thought I’d nicked all this camera gear. I’d tried to convince them I was taking 30 second exposures, but they were having none of it.

It’s this reality in his personal experiences that I feel comes across in his work, yet he never shies away from how difficult an industry it was to crack whilst trying to stay true to the spirit of his work. Even his first few times spent in the photo pit at gigs he was shooting film, then taking his work into the dark room to physically mark his expression in post”.

This piece, written for DIY Musician interviewed photographer Jason Gardner back in 2010. A few sage and interesting questions were asked that could be of help to budding photographers and musicians alike:

“Which advice would you give someone when selecting a photographer?

The first thing to do is look at the work. Look at the photos they choose to display on their site. You want to see a couple things, and if you can determine it from the photos, great. If not, that’s fine too. Do they specialize in outdoor/exotic locations, or is it all studio? That’s the big thing with music and photographers in general and speaks to what kind of work you want to produce for yourself too. Maybe I’m stating the obvious, but the outdoor work tends to be a little bit more visually interesting than just a blank wall. It tends to be less artificially lit. Studios inside could be five lights, and this could just be one light. Part of that is a little soul searching as to what kind of vibe you think you and your band mates would react to more. Some bands love to go into the studio with six lights because they feel like rock stars. And some have had so much of that they want to go to a random corner in remote Brooklyn where no one knows them and they can run around naked.

IN THIS PHOTO: Surfbort/PHOTO CREDIT: Sacha Lecca 

I am awful at being photographed because I never know what to do with my face or my eyes. Can you advise someone on how to take better photos? Is there something to being a good subject?

That’s a good question. Part of it is in the pre-visualization/collaboration. It’s talking about what image you want to portray. I shot this guy recently, who is starting a punk music label. He never smiles, and we knew that was happening. He was scowling and fist clenching. That’s kind of an extreme. It depends on the image you want to portray. You don’t want to be too smiley/goofy when the desired result is a somewhat serious photo. What I like to do is provide musicians with a whole different bunch of looks. Let’s say we’re doing five locations and three wardrobes. All the sub-categories within those. Some they are looking at the camera, some they are looking away, some they are looking at each other. Some they are with their instruments, and some without. Some are more contemplative, and some aren’t.

I don’t think musicians need to put a lot of pressure on themselves to be a good subject. I think part of that is the photographer’s burden/job. But part of it is keeping your mind and heart open to the photographer’s suggestions. A portrait is like a conversation, and not just a one-way conversation. A one-way conversation would be the subject saying, “This is what I have to say, and it’s here.” A two-way conversation would be the photographer judiciously and subtly art directing them and moving them here, to and fro or adjusting the group dynamic.

IN THIS PHOTO: Rhiannon Giddens (2018)/PHOTO CREDIT: Claire Harbage/NPR

If you can’t afford a photographer, are there some simple things you can advise people about their photographs? When you look at a crappy, amateurish photo, are there a handful of things you can steer people away from doing?

One thing I would say would be regarding your wardrobe. Unless your persona onstage is to wear crazy costumes or you are like KISS with full-on makeup, I would say for musicians it depends, but the photo should be about you and not what you’re wearing. What you’re wearing should not call the attention away from your face, instrument, facial expressions, mohawk, whatever. I’d say wearing plaids and polka dots and major patterns is more distracting than solid colored clothes. Of course someone like Eugene from Gogol Bordello would be a different story, because he is all about that kind of craziness”.

I have titled this article as such because I believe music photographer is a game of patience and cunning; you need a poker face and be able to, in a sense, bluff the intuition to just endlessly shoot and hope something sticks. You also need a certain amount of dare and risk when you are taking that shot. Is there a formula and set chemistry to getting that perfect/rare photo?! This article, written by photographer Sacha Lecca, shed some light:

“I’ve never been happy just shooting the first three songs at a concert, stuck in a pit with 20 other photographers all trying to get the same thing.

Traditional live shots can feel dated quickly. The challenge is to find a unique moment that will endure.

PHOTO CREDIT: Unsplash 

Rather than give an overall representation of the concert, the best music photographers will capture one sliver of stillness amid the madness – little details away from the stage, among the crowd.

I’m just as interested in seeing the opening act if they’re unknown to me. They’ll often play separate shows elsewhere in the city, leading me to other bands and other venues.

Letting those connections grow makes me excited to shoot as much as I can. Sometimes you never know what’s going to happen”.

Is it just a case, especially when taking live shots, for a photographer to simply rock up and start snapping? Sarah Arnold, for SmugMug, provides some useful tips for those who are new and not sure how to approach artists. She looks at the art of concert photography and raises some interesting points:

“Don’t be shy.

 The majority of the concerts I’ve shot, I’ve walked straight up to the band and asked them directly, “Would you mind if I take photos?” 99% of the time, they are excited a photographer is interested and have absolutely no problem saying yes. You have to be a bit of reporter when trying to track down the band. I usually find where they’re located backstage or wait until they are on stage setting up and simply approach them. In many cases, I’ve ended up becoming friends with the band members and am given stage passes as well as put on the guest list for future shows… 

Don’t get flashy, kid.

Whether it’s natural spot lighting or a colorful light show, concerts have unique lighting systems. Usually the stage lighting used produces a much more natural capture, while flash can distract the musicians during their performance and can interfere with the experience for those involved.

IN THIS PHOTO: Dua Lipa/PHOTO CREDIT: Heather Hawke

Location.

Moving around is key. You want to get entire venue shots showing the band and the concert attendees from behind, as well as those awesome detail shots taken from the front of the stage. The bigger the band, the more likely the front of the stage will be crowded and difficult to navigate. Staying in one place is easier, but you’ll miss some great shots”.

That might sound like a breathless and whistle-stop tour of music photography but I hope there is advice in there and useful guides – in addition to an explanation as to why photography is crucial in music and what a great photo can do. Those who turn their noses up and think that anyone can go into photography is half-right. Anyone, literally, can become a music photographer but your amateur capturing shots on their phone are not in the same league as the professional. I am yet to see a convincing argument for allowing people to use phones at gigs: I am yet to find a convincing argument that makes music photography irrelevant. Images are crucial and, at a time when competition is fierce and artists are struggling, having great photos is essential. Recently, I interviewed Delroy Matty about his experiences and asked him this question:

“One of my biggest gripes is artists without good photos. Do you think great music relies on striking visuals? How many words, in fact, can a picture/photo say?!

Photos and visuals are so, so important as it helps people to recognise you, the artist or the brand. Look. If there was a shelf with two rows of Coca-Cola; one row had the Coca-Cola branding on the can and the other row was still Coca-Cola but had nothing on the can; what one would you pick up? It would be the one with the visual because you know what to expect inside the can but both rows were Coca-Cola but the one with the better image looked more appealing. So, yes, image and visuals very important”.

Articles like this one offer some useful advice for those starting in the business. Have a read – but this closing point really stands out:

“I find this last point to be the most important one. You don´t have to pretend to be someone else. Be authentic, be real and people will appreciate you for who you are and your work. It´s good to have a look at what other photographers are up to and it´s great to seek some inspiration from them. But you have to find your own way. I believe that everyone has her/his own voice. Find it and you will be able to communicate your vision to others”.

Authenticity is important if you want to be a music photographer: creating your own style and dynamic will stand out to artists looking for photographers and means you are not lazily copying others. I will pop in a video as a guide how to become a music photographer but, before I go, make sure you keep a track of guides and articles that will give you a useful leg-up and push. I have included a selection of music photographs that show brilliant instinct, emotion and skill. Anyone who claims music photography is dead or irrelevant needs to have a look at the great work out there. Look at music websites like The Line of Best Fit and DIY; take a look at The Guardian and NME - stuffed with epic and perfect shots that ingrain themselves in the mind. There is an army of upcoming music photographers who are at the gigs getting that best representation of an artist; they are calling the shots in studios and bringing new life to bands; they are braving the bad weather, keen to capture a unique moment. They are the (largely) uncredited army doing sterling and incredible work that now, more than ever, certainly…

IN THIS PHOTO: Jimmy Eat World during a set at this year's Slam Dunk Festival/PHOTO CREDIT: Georgia Penny Photo

DESERVE your respect.

FEATURE: Aaliyah: One in a Million: Remembering a Rare Star

FEATURE:

 

 

Aaliyah: One in a Million

IN THIS PHOTO: Aaliyah/PHOTO CREDIT: Eric Johnson

Remembering a Rare Star

__________

YESTERDAY saw a lot of tributes paid…

PHOTO CREDIT: Sal Idriss/Redferns

to Aaliyah and everything she gave to music. She died on 25th August, 2001 aged twenty-two (she was born on 16th January, 1979) after a twin-engine Cessna 402B she was on crashed shortly after takeoff killing everyone on board. Aaliyah and her entourage were keen to depart back to the U.S. after wrapping up the video shoot for her single, Rock the Boat. The plane was overloaded and should not have taken off - a tragic and horrendous loss the music industry is still feeling. Rock the Boat is a cut from her third and final album – Aaliyah gained a huge amount of acclaim and an extra weight of sadness following her death. I was just about to leave for university and heard the news come through. I bought Aaliyah’s eponymous album – it was released on 7th July, 2001 – and I remember following the songs and being blown away by it! I had followed female R&B singers since the 1990s and was a big fan of girl groups like TLC and Destiny’s Child. I had grown up around powerhouse singers like Whitney Houston and Aretha Franklin but there was something unique and spectacular about Aaliyah. Since her debut – Age Ain’t Nothing but a Number – in 1994; this rare and very special creature was being taken to heart and producing some of the most beautiful music around. The breathy vocals and restrained performances had power and passion but there was so much seductiveness and beauty.

It is an album that sounds incredible and, whilst her best was still ahead, she was fifteen at the time and the fact an album of that confidence was out in the world blew people away! We only had to wait until 1996 before her second album, One in a Million, was released and, yet again, it was a step forward. Still a teenager; this was a young woman making her way through music and releasing big singles like If Your Girl Only Knew and One in a Million. I still listen to these songs today and look around at the modern scene. Although Aaliyah's fashion changed from a typical teenage look to something more grown-up and varied; the seeds were planted from the start and that authoritative sense of being and confidence was there. I have heard nothing like Aaliyah since her debut album in 1994 and, at a time when there are few stars and genuine personalities; Aaliyah is a star that still burns and continues to guide artists. The leap from her debut to One in a Million took me by surprise and confirmed my love for Aaliyah. I was entranced, fascinated and utterly shocked (in a good way).

ALL OTHER PHOTOS/IMAGES (unless credited otherwise): Getty Images

I was thirteen when One in a Million came out and could not quite believe someone slightly older than me was so commanding and confident. She has writers and producers around her – including Missy Elliott and Timbaland – but everything that came out of the speaker was her. There was no need for too much polish and hiding behind samples/sounds: this woman knew how to hold and control music; weave it and captivate anyone listening. The 1990s was a busy and extraordinary decade for music but no artist got into my heart quite like Aaliyah. I listen to her music a lot and discover new revelations and secrets every time I spin - a rare and impressive feat indeed! In this article, written in 2016, Rolling Stone looked back at Aaliyah’s start and how she managed to make such an impact right from the off:

“It is one of the greatest moments in modern soul history: The first few seconds when Aaliyah Haughton, then only a 15-year-old newcomer, opens her cover of the Isley Brothers’ “At Your Best (You Are Love)” with a few seconds of a cappella brilliance. “Let me know … let me know,” she sings with grace, before offering a wordless cry with incandescent softness”.

“…Back in 1994, Aaliyah’s career-defining interpretation topped out at Number Six on the Billboard Hot 100, but that was due to radio programmers and BET’s Video Soul spinning R. Kelly’s “Gangsta Child” remix, which relied on a bass-heavy G-funk beat and an alternate vocal from Aaliyah that’s more restrained than the version on her debut, Age Ain’t Nothin’ But a Number. But from its release, the LP version drew a cult following, first through constant airplay on the late night mix shows that still populate black radio; and then through samples and homages like Drake’s “Unforgettable” and Frank Ocean’s rendition for his recent “visual album” Endless”.

Listen to songs like Throw Your Hands Up (from Age Ain’t Nothing but a Number) and you can see how she inspired artists today. Whilst her best work was, as I said, to come; you could hear that intense talent and magic come from the music. Aaliyah, at an early stage, was a mysterious figure who would not lust after the camera – look at the cover for Age Ain’t Nothing but a Number where she is wearing sunglasses – and that sense of disguise has been adopted by artists like The Weeknd. One in a Million saw the glasses remain and, whilst there was a bit of restraint from the artist in a visual sense; listen to the music and it is expressive, powerful and intoxicating. Her voice would range from soft and inviting to hardcore and on top; she would switch between a soft and sensitive soul to someone who could step into the spotlight and own it! With her first hit, Back & Forth, she not only created an instant hit and unique piece but brought the black teenage voice to the fore.

A lot of the artists at the time – even contemporaries like En Vogue – were dressed more sexily and seductively. Aaliyah sported shades and baggy jeans; a tough and typical teenage look that was inspiring artists and allowing other teenagers to identify. They had a role model out there who did not need to flaunt or compromise to get noticed. Critics took a while to warm and appreciate the star. She was battling with big bands and, in 1994, we were seeing some of the greatest albums ever being laid down. By 1996, she was getting more airplay and acclaim but her big success, sadly, would arrive after her death in 2001. There was a gap between her second and third albums – five years... – and that built speculation and sense of expectation. The appeal increased and this teasing and engaging artist got people talking. Rolling Stone, in the article I just quoted, made some good points when talking about her legacy. A couple of points really caught my ears:

“She made Timbaland and Missy Elliott official
Every R&B fan alive and kicking in 1996 remembers when they first heard Ginuwine’s “Pony.” Its odd interplay of vocal percussion, whistles, and a sludgy yet swinging beat sounded like nothing we had heard before. Timbaland’s (who made the track along with the late songwriter Static Major) stylistic quirks could have been dismissed as a novelty, or gimmick with a short shelf life. (See Rich Harrison’s fusion of go-go and brassy hip-hop, which quickly lost steam after a few classic singles like Beyoncé’s “Crazy in Love.”) But when Timbaland and Missy Elliott brought the same kitchen-sink aesthetic to Aaliyah’s “If Your Girl Only Knew,” which appeared just weeks after “Pony,” we realized that their revolution was here to stay.

Aaliyah (Babygirl) I can only imagine how great you would be today winning oscars😉& creating sick music & still setting fashion trends! Your mom & brother @RAD_6 & your fans been holding it down 4 u❤️you will always be A One in A Million🙌🏾 sleep peacefully angel Babygirl🙏🏾 pic.twitter.com/daHhoIs8k5

— Missy Elliott (@MissyElliott) August 25, 2018

Her voice is unlike anyone else’s
Many R&B singers have tried to duplicate Aaliyah’s pillowy falsetto and sharp mid-range, from Ciara and Amerie to Teyana Taylor. She could do deep gospel runs, too – check her deep-hued inflections on the Age Ain’t Nothin’ But a Number track “Street Thing.” But she’s rightly remembered as one of the most influential singers of the modern R&B era”.

The piece went on to speculate where Aaliyah’s career would have gone if she had survived. She would have been in her late-thirties and I wonder how she would fit into a market where the likes of Cardi B and Nicki Minaj are fixtures. I will talk about her eponymous album and its influence but, even from the start, the songs popped and stood out. I can listen to tracks like Back & Forth and Street Thing (from her debut) and they sound so fresh and unusual. There is nobody in the scene today that has that mixture of talents and vocal blends. At a time where there are few teenage stars and newcomers; albums like Age Ain’t Nothing but a Number and One in a Million should be studied and followed. One in a Million showcased a more mature blend and saw Aaliyah grow in confidence. It was award-nominated and sold very well; critics were impressed by her artistry and abilities but, again, something was missing.

There were a lot of unfair reviews and negative comparisons to other artists. Whilst fans were responding and great reviews were coming in; there were many who did not see all of her wonder and what she stood for! Not only was Aaliyah a role model for black girls and fellow songwriters but she was creating something that fitted into the mainstream but was distinctly her own. Five years after her sophomore album, and with Stephen Garrett as the lead writer – replacing Missy Elliott and Timbaland –, there was a tougher and sassier sound. Listen to the squelchy electronics of More Than a Woman and the tense beats. Although there was only a five-year gap between her second and third albums; it seems like so much more than time affected her new direction. Much more boldness and intuition were coming into her voice; a woman who was aiming high and wanted to take her music to the next level. Those critics who dismissed her back in 1994 were earing their words in 2001. You could not escape the sense we were seeing a young woman coming into her own and aiming for the heavens. From the very start of Aaliyah; you know you are witnessing a spectacular album and one of the finest decelerations of the decade.

ART CREDIT: McFlyy

It is a tight and strutting funk that sees Aaliyah step out and nail it! More confident as a vocalist than ever before; one can hear shades of Aaliyah in Beyoncé’s later career. It is true that, in 2001, she was already shaping the future of Pop and R&B. We Need a Resolution features Timbaland and is a fantastic start to the album; Rock the Boat looks back at her earlier work and provides a more soothing and sweet cut; Loose Rap and Extra Smooth are indelible smashes that, again, show new sides to Aaliyah. AllMusic, when reviewing the album in 2012, summed it up perfectly:

“Where such peers as Macy Gray and Jill Scott work too hard to establish their ties with classic soul, Aaliyah revels in the present, turning out a pan-cultural array of sounds, styles, and emotions. This sound is entirely unfamiliar -- part of the pleasure is how contemporary it sounds -- but she sounds just as comfortable within the sonicscapes of Timbaland as Missy Misdemeanor Elliott and, possibly, less self-conscious. Aaliyah never oversings, never oversells the songs -- this comes on easy and sultry, and there's a lot of substance here, in terms of the songwriting and the songs themselves. Urban albums rarely come any better than this, and there haven't been many records better than this in 2001, period”.

By 2001; Aaliyah had a growing film career and was building her name. She could have sold out and created an album that was commercial and lacked any progression but, instead, she provided her most ambitious yet accessible record. It completed her transformation from a sensitive teenage artist to a sensual and fascinating woman. Aaliyah did not see the sweetness and vulnerability of her debut disappear completely – her third album was a chance to unite all her phases and expressions into one record! Whereas her previous two albums showed a little distance between star and collaborators; now, she was engaging with them and using them in a more noticeable and direct way. She was blossoming into a genuine artist who was having her say – some had accused her of being controlled by the studio before (not a shock considering her age and lack of complete critical backing!).

By 2001, contemporary R&B hit a new peak and the popularity of Neo-Soul increased. In a period when these genres were influencing more than Pop; Aaliyah’s self-titled album spoke volumes and pointed at a bright and exciting future – one that was cut tragically short. Despite the tragic plane crash that took her life, you can hear artists such as The xx and Beyoncé take guidance from her – especially that final album. Aaliyah inspired in so many ways: it was not only her music and creative growth that compelled and resonated. This Billboard article from 2014 explored her subtlety and textures and how, quite a few years after her death, so many upcoming songwriters were learning from her:

"The new generation pulls inspiration from Aaliyah, despite not growing up with her, because she was authentic," says 43-year-old Missy Elliott, who co-wrote many of Aaliyah’s songs. "Her music couldn’t be placed in a category."

Rather than the powerful pipes R&B is known for, Aaliyah’s vocals were intimate and low-key. "Coming from a church background, if you can’t hit high notes and runs, some say you can’t sing," says Streeter. "She made me feel OK about not screaming over every track."

 "We owe our chill vibe to her," says Tinashe, 21. "People were used to artists belting things out. She brought a new vocal styling that wasn’t represented in R&B. Not everything has to be so uptempo”.

I am always sad when we have to write about a musician posthumously – looking back on what they created rather than what they will go on to achieve. The thing with Aaliyah is you can hear her D.N.A. and voice in the guise of modern artists. With only three albums, she managed to transform music and, with Aaliyah, here is an album that is being spoken about as one of the finest of the decade (the '00s). Missy Elliott came out and paid tribute to Aaliyah; marking her death and saying how much she has done for music and what she would be doing were she alive today – it is scary to think what she would bring to music and how she could push it forward. I have fond memories of her music; hearing Aaliyah for the first time was a semi-religious experience. From the sweet and street-wise cuts from her first couple of albums to the mature and bold artist who presented a masterpiece in 2001; we reflect and remember a woman who is shaping and affecting music seventeen years after her death. I used one of her album (and song) titles, One in a Million, as the title for this piece. Some might see it as lazy wordplay but, for those who know her and what her music means, there are no other words we could use! In a music world where there are copycats and bland artists, it is true the astonishing Aaliyah was…

ONE in a million.

FEATURE: The Detail’s in the Devil: Have We Seen the Best of the Reading and Leeds Festivals?

FEATURE:

 

 

The Detail’s in the Devil

IN THIS PHOTO: A shot from this year's Leeds Festival/PHOTO CREDIT: @matteachus 

Have We Seen the Best of the Reading and Leeds Festivals?

__________

THE brilliant festivals at Reading and Leeds…

IN THIS IMAGE: An early line-up poster for the Reading and Leeds Festivals (there have been alterations since)/IMAGE CREDIT: Getty Images

have seen some magnificent line-ups through the years. I will mention a few years that have gone down in history but I wonder, as the festivals diversify and widen, whether we will see the Devil’s favourite music making a return. I love the fact Hip-Hop and Pop can find a place at Reading and Leeds but I wonder whether it is in the true spirit of the festivals. There are festivals for Pop and Hip-Hop artists and, whilst it is important to be as all-inclusive as possible; are there any huge Rock festivals that bring explosions and the best bands tearing the place up?! Maybe there are some smaller festivals making headway but we really do not have any big festivals that promote and showcase awesome, kicking bands. Think about the last couple of Glastonbury line-ups and this year’s Reading and Leeds Festivals. I think it is grand Dua Lipa has played the main stage and is getting props – her eponymous album charted well and got some big reviews. It is important, at any festival, to diversify and open up the line-up, especially when it comes to gender and race. Having a less blokey and white line-up in any situation is always good. I do not object to more genres splicing alongside the best Rock acts around but, when looking at this year’s line-up and the best artist high up the bill is Kendrick Lamar – a U.S. Hip-Hop artist who can bring plenty of passion and fire to any gig.

.@KingsOfLeon headlining our Friday night in Leeds! 💛 #RandL18 pic.twitter.com/AekuKTr0TC

— Reading & Leeds Fest (@OfficialRandL) August 24, 2018

It is not his inclusion I object to. Look at the so-called ‘big’ and ‘great’ names working alongside him: Fall Out Boy, Kings of Leon and Panic! At the Disco. Not only are those bands past their best but they do not have the songs, clout and reputation to inject credibility. Old hands like Muse are still kicking about and, apart from them, where are the traditional Rock artists who used to define the festivals? I like the fact there is a broadening of tastes and sounds but you still need to have that core of Rock/Alternative acts – where do those who love that kind of sound go to?! There are plenty of bigger, hard acts that could headline and enthral Reading and Leeds but there is still that problem where festivals are booking older, weaker acts based on past glories and their back catalogue – popular once but no longer cool and relevant! I agree it is rather fruitless comparing music of the past vs. today and living back then. Maybe there is a deterioration in terms of quality but you can argue music is much more diverse and eclectic now. I am glad acts like Post Malone have made the cut this year but I worry about the headliners and the fact that, in fact, festivals like Reading and Leeds are becoming safer and less exciting. It is great to see people’s minds opened to new music and a wide spectrum but how many will go away from this year’s event with a head full of memories?!

IMAGE CREDIT: Getty Images

More and more, it is down to smaller festivals like Camden Rocks to provide the sort of music that gets people bouncing, singing and thrilled. Now, less than one-third of festival headliners are Rock bands. We are embracing different genres but I think the decline speaks about the state of Rock and whether festival headliners are interesting in this day and age. This article highlights some of the Rock acts playing at this year’s event. Shame, Starcrawler; The Sherlocks and Shed Seven have pitched up and there is an argument that Reading and Leeds is aimed more at a younger audience in a streaming age – where you have a wider range of sounds that reflect changing times and a break from the past. I can get behind the assumption and view that there are some good artists around putting fizz into Reading and Leeds and it is good there are other genres mixing into the blend. My argument comes when we look at those BIG NAMES that are top of the bill and you salivate over. Look back at 1990 when Inspiral Carpets and the Pixies were topping the bill; 1992 had PJ Harvey, Nirvana and Public Enemy playing; 1995 had Smashing Pumpkins and Neil Young play Reading; Blur and The Charlatans were playing the festivals in 1999; Beastie Boys and Garbage were big draws in 1998; Oasis and Pulp featured in 2000; Arctic Monkeys and Radiohead provided tantalisation in 2009.

IN THIS PHOTO: One of this year's Reading and Leeds artists, Dua Lipa/PHOTO CREDIT: Erik Madigan Heck for GQ

Any one of those years would have got me out of my seat and over to Reading! It was nine years since Reading saw Radiohead rule and, whilst the line-ups before 2018 were less diverse and interesting; there was a lot more excitement, theatre and memorability. I am not slamming Reading and Leeds at all because they are not the only ones culpable. Aside from Radiohead’s headline appearance at Glastonbury last year; how many recent years have been defined by truly epic and pulsating sets?! We are living through a time where there is more choice and great options than any other time in music history. You have thousands of artists emerging and it seems, for all the variation, there are few artists capable of providing a scintillating and epic headline set. I am not even talking about Rock and keeping things pure: a huge act like Beyoncé or Cardi B, to replace the older and boring acts like Fall Out Boy, would be better. I know it is not healthy looking back and thinking everything now is weaker now than back then – although there is truth in that – but I feel big festivals like Reading and Leeds are comprising quality and excitement in order to be broader and more inclusive.

.@wolfalicemusic headlining the @BBCR1 Stage tonight! 💛👊#LeedsFestival pic.twitter.com/MrSbVLAtsw

— Reading & Leeds Fest (@OfficialRandL) August 25, 2018

I welcome a wider community but I look at the poster for this year’s festival and it makes me sigh. There are few acts I would see and, considering the cost of one day there, are punters getting value for money? Fine if you want to see a line-up that reflects your Spotify playlist and tastes but why books fading and bygone acts like Kings of Leon?! They have not made anything decent in years. Fall Out Boy are distantly average and Sum 41…there must be more recent artists who are worthy of slots?! All the finest acts are lower down the bill why the headliners, aside from Kendrick Lamar, are distinctly boring. I realise music has changed since the 1990s but I am not suggesting we go back and feel anything that does not measure up to the 1992 line-up is inferior. There are many positives to be found in this year’s line-up. Upcoming artists like Wolf Alice and Dua Lipa are great bookings but look at artists high up the bill like The Kooks and The Wombats! You cannot blast those who are nostalgic and then book artists who have not recorded anything new and are being booked based on their past glories. If you want to take that approach then why not book decent and edgy artists! Don’t go for obvious bands like Foo Fighters and Muse: throw Arctic Monkeys back in there or get Chrissie Hynde ruling the stage! In order to reflect the modern times, we are doing well regarding equality – more women and minority artists – but lacking distinct quality at the top of the bills. Long gone are those titans artists that could get you sweating before you have even bought a ticket; a weekend that you will kill to attend – do you really look at this year’s Reading and Leeds Festivals and open your eyes wide. I don’t. Hooray for progression and sonic boldness but will the Devil smile and feel there is enough to keep the festival fires burning?! Based on the ‘big’ names booked for this year – and rain lashing as we speak – it seems, in many ways, a lot of the magic and passion…

 IMAGE CREDIT: Getty Images

HAS been lost.

FEATURE: We Were All Being Watched in 1984; Nobody Was Listening in 1986: Is I986 the Worst Year in Music History?!

FEATURE:

 

 

We Were All Being Watched in 1984; Nobody Was Listening in 1986

ALL IMAGES/PHOTOS (unless credited otherwise): Getty Images 

Is I986 the Worst Year in Music History?!

__________

THERE have been a few articles flowing…

that reflect on 1986 and how, well, none of us really liked the music! Look at the so-called ‘best-of-the-year’ lists and there are few albums from the pack we hold dear. I will come to some of the gem albums from 1986 but if you asked anyone to name a year in music that was a bit quiet, most of would probably gravitate towards the 1980s! Consider all the Pop geniuses that were around in the 1980s and they were not releasing material into the world. Michael Jackson brought Bad out in 1987; Prince did release Parade in 1986 but it would be another year before we saw the mighty Sign o’ the Times. In fact, many are being a bit cruel towards 1986. Prince’s Parade is considered masterful and Madonna released True Blue (in 1986) – another album that is seen as pretty damned good! Paul Simon unleashed the incredible Graceland and we had some other great albums in the form of The Smiths' The Queen Is Dead and Metallica’s Master of Puppets. Whilst there are iconic albums that helped elevate 1986; it is hard to make up a top-ten that you actually like! Think about years like 1991, 1994 and 1997; throw in 1967 and even 2001 and you are not struggling to name some phenomenal albums – it is hard narrowing it down to a definitive top-twenty each year!

Look at albums that did come out in 1986 and it makes for some tough reading! For every Lifes Rich Pageant (R.E.M.), Raising Hell (Run-D.M.C.) and Different Light (The Bangles) there was a slew of dodgy and 1980s-ruining efforts. Nobody can claim The Rolling Stones’ Dirty Work is anything to shout about; Billy Idol’s Whiplash Smile is pretty awful and the less said about Lionel Richie’s Dancing on the Ceiling the Better! Sure; we had Licensed to Ill from the Beastie Boys but Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds’ Kicking Against the Pricks was a bit ho-hum. Elvis Costello did please with King of America but, again, there is little to rave about. Maybe that is the standard we set in past decades: unless there are bangers galore and classic albums spewing from every artist then we deem that year a failure. Look at the past few years and are they any stronger than 1986?! Perhaps a lot of the Pop artists were resting or releasing work that the public were adapting to. That horrible feeling and view we have of the 1980s – big hair and plastic Pop – was taking more of a stand and there was an odd sense of unease and lacking purpose. The big revolutions that were to come were not even in sight; the past glories were dead or dying: 1986 marks a big of a blot in the music landscape.

PHOTO CREDIT: Unsplash

This article provides some viewpoints:

“Music really WAS extra-awful in 1986.  According to a new study of 17,000 songs, that year was a low point in creativity and a high point in boredom. Too many drum machines and overuse of synthesizers led to too many similar-sounding songs.

The study also shows that there were three big revolutions  in pop music over fifty years.

  1964: The rise of guitar-based rock bands by the Beatles populated by members who wrote and performed their own songs.

  1986: The era of endless drum machines leading to a world that sounded like Duran Duran.

 1991: Hip hop enters the pop charts in a big way”.

1986 was (apparently) so dog-turd-awful that, in 1987, Newsnight dedicated a show to investigating its music! I do not have a clip of the show but the fact a respected news show felt the lack of invention and fun in 1986’s music is a bit worrying. It was the year drum machines and compacted beats ruled music. Not even artists like Madonna and Prince, with iconic tracks, could save the rather boring and derivative sounds coming from the mainstream. What was it about 1986 that irked us and provided so few great hits?! The Independent explored the topic in 2015:

“It was the year that Madonna begged Papa Don’t Preach and Peter Gabriel dropped his Sledgehammer. Now a scientific study of pop music’s evolution has concluded that 1986 was the most repetitive year on record.

Whilst the hits of 1986 morphed into one repetitive thud, 1991 was the most revolutionary year in popular music, as rap broadened the vocabulary of pop, researchers from Queen Mary University of London and Imperial College London found.

With help from music website Last.fm and using the US Billboard Hot 100 as its source material, the scientists employed cutting edge methods including signal processing and text-mining to analyse the musical properties of songs.

Their system automatically grouped 17,000 hit songs by patterns of chord changes and tone allowing researchers to statistically identify trends with what they believe is an unprecedented degree of consistency”.

PHOTO CREDIT: Unsplash

It seems some disagree 1986 was the nadir and absolute worst. Alexis Petridis, writing in 2011, argued 1976 was far worse:

“If you haven't seen it, it's difficult to express how awful TOTP – and by extension – pop music seems to have been in 1976. Every week, something comes on that causes you to be gripped by the absolute certainty that an unequivocal nadir has been reached and that things can only get better: second-division glam-rockers Mud going disco in a desperate attempt to stave off the inevitable; Dave Lee Travis's mirthless novelty record Convoy GB. It's invariably followed by something even worse: JJ Barrie's No Charge; second-division glam rockers the Rubettes going country in a desperate attempt to stave off the inevitable; and, my personal favourite, Paul Nicholas's awe-inspiring Reggae Like It Used to Be.

This, just to clarify, features the bloke off Just Good Friends boldly announcing that in 1976 – the year of Lee "Scratch" Perry's Super Ape, the Mighty Diamonds' Right Time, Max Romeo's War Ina Babylon and Augustus Pablo's King Tubbys Meets Rockers Uptown – the only reggae worth listening to is that made by Paul Nicholas. His jaunty presentation of this controversial theory, for which he wore a bowler hat, could only have been improved had he been forced to perform in front of an audience composed entirely of angry Rastafarians”.

It is easy to poke fun of the 1980s because we feel it was a time when nothing great came out. I argue some more recent years have eclipsed 1986 in terms of boredom and unspectacular albums.  It is true, though, that 1986 was synonymous with its awful drumming sounds and something rather pale. If Paul Simon’s Graceland used percussion in new ways; Madonna was putting big choruses and career-altering songs into the ether; it appears Pop artists of the day were more concerned with something machine-fed and robotic. Songs like Miami Sound Machine’s Bad Boy and Pet Shop Boys’ album, Please, were, in some ways, defining the worst of that year. Although Pet Shop Boys did provide a good debut album, the beats and sensations of West End Girls (the single was released in 1985 but inspired a movement in 1986) became a staple for other artists – all you seemed to hear was that sort of drumming sound! This article, when looking at Now That’s What I Call Music! 1986, noted there were some missteps and, even when highlight ‘good songs’, there is a definite familiarity regarding sounds:

“Dire Straits ruined Brothers In Arms by including the awful Walk Of Life halfway through side one. Peter Gabriel’s most successful solo single came with Sledgehammer and an extremely potent video while Prince wrote Manic Monday for The Bangles who had a very bountiful ’86. On the other side of the scale, Eurythmics had their last brush with the top 10 – Thorn In My Side which originally was served up on Hits 5. Also featuring on the big dice sleeve were Paul Simon’s heavily-caned You Can Call Me Al and the Pretenders’ storming Don’t Get Me Wrong. The big pop album of 1986 was Invisible Touch; the title track is here and was the first of five singles released from the LP. Like Queen, Genesis also had their day out in Wembley [coming a year later in 1987].

"...The Queen Is Dead was my most played album of the year. During the first couple of weeks it was getting five spins a day. Mid-June was quite hot; the school holidays had kicked in. I’d get up before 6.00am and pick strawberries until lunchtime, come back and play The Smiths and then head off to play golf. Panic was another non-album single and reached #11. I remember the chart rundown as our ship sailed from Rosslare Harbour to Fishguard en route to Italy. That unforgettable school tour. This mini indie sequence also includes The Housemartins’ jangly cynicism of Happy Hour and Public Image Limited’s hot-wired Rise. And then it’s David Bowie’s magnificent Absolute Beginners. Director Julien Temple shot the music video which echoed the 1950s style of the movie.

Rock for the ages next with Robert Palmer’s driving Addicted To Love. After ABBA and before Ace Of Base, Europe came out of Sweden to reach #1 with The Final Countdown. Then there was the great hope Owen Paul; My Favourite Waste Of Time chugs along without breaking sweat. Cutting Crew’s slowburner (I Just) Died In Your Arms Tonight continue to pop up all over the place while Status Quo’s slump lasted all through the decade. Thumbs down for In The Army Now. It’s followed by Huey Lewis and The News’ monster hit Stuck On You before Mr Mister’s mournful but epic AOR of Broken Wings. This somewhat unremarkable path comes to an end with Chris De Burgh and the dreaded Lady In Red. Sing when you’re winning: it’s just like reliving American Psycho”.

The fact that article opens with the words ‘Dire Straits’ leaves me smiling – it was a rather troubling time for music. Were there some good sides to 1986, though? Tidal summed up the year in music:

“But 1986 was also about new music, and a lot of it. Huge ’80s superstars like Madonna, Prince, Bon Jovi, Genesis, Queen and Janet Jackson all released essential albums this year. Hip-hop was starting to peak above the surface above underground with newcomers like Run-D.M.C. and Beastie Boys, while alternative college radio favorites like The Smiths and R.E.M. were just about to break big.

Often mocked for its glossy synth-laced productions, the mid 1980s was not only a rich playground for various kinds of music, it left us with some truly memorable tunes, as we showcase on this playlist.

Best-Selling Album: Whitney Houston by Whitney Houston
Longest No. 1 Single: “That’s What Friends Are For” by Dionne and Friends (4 weeks)
Grammy – Album of the Year: No Jacket Required by Phil Collins
Grammy – Song of the Year: “We Are The World” by USA for Africa
Groups Formed: The Afghan Whigs, Boards of Canada, Cypress Hill, Green Day, N.W.A., No Doubt, Sebadoh, The Vaselines
Groups Disbanded: Black Flag, Dead Kennedys, Electric Light Orchestra, Men at Work, (Prince &) The Revolution, Weather Report, Wham!”.

It is clear the entire year was not an absolute bust: we had some great albums and some really fine songs. I think, aside from Paul Simon, Madonna and The Smiths; it is hard to define the year and highlight too many positives. I have tried to make a case for 1986 in a playlist below but, to be fair, there were far stronger years for music in the 1980s – 1987, in fact, was a pretty strong one! I was only two when 1986 started and I was not really aware of what was happening then. It is amazing to believe, in the space of a year, we saw such an explosion. 1987 gave us Guns N’ Roses’ Appetite for Destruction and U2’s The Joshua Tree; Prince’s Sign o’ the Times and Eric B. & Rakim’s Paid in Full! Throw in Midnight Oil’s Diesel and Dust and Fleetwood Mac’s Tango in the Night; Pixies’ Come on Pilgrim and George Michael’s Faith – changes were coming in and Hip-Hop, especially, was taking more charge. Maybe we are being a bit harsh calling 1986 the worst year for music ever. We did have some classic records – from The Smiths through to Madonna – but it seems like there was this annoying habit for artists to use the same drum programmes and spew them in every track. A tinny, anodyne and fake sound was defining a lot of music at the time: artists who were creating groundbreaking albums were being buried in a sea of synthetic beats, samey tunes and the worst side of the 1980s. Music did recover pretty quickly – 1987, as I said, was a fantastic year – and 1985 was a big one (classic albums from Kate Bush, Tears for Fears and Prefab Sprout made it pop). Maybe Pop music has moved on since then but I still feel there is little personality and fascination to be found. 1987 came along and threw more colour into the palette: maybe 2019 will see other genres come to the forefront and it will be a more memorable year! Aside from all the naffness and general awfulness that defined 1986; it is clear, as the below playlist shows, that there were a few…

 IN THIS PHOTO: Madonna in 1986

DECENT songs out that year!

FEATURE: Long Live the King! Michael Jackson at Sixty: Why His Crown Will Never Fall

FEATURE:

 

 

Long Live the King!

IN THIS PHOTO: Michael Jackson/ALL PHOTOS/IMAGES (unless stated otherwise): Getty Images/Redferns

Michael Jackson at Sixty: Why His Crown Will Never Fall

__________

IT is amazing to think…

IN THIS PHOTO: Jackson on tour in Rotterdam (1992)/PHOTO CREDIT: Paul Bergen/Redferns

that three music legends celebrate their sixtieth birthday this year! Michael Jackson’s, granted, comes with a tinge of sadness – given that he is no longer with us – but Madonna and Kate Bush have also turned sixty. It seems like 1958 was a vintage year for great musical births – I wonder what was in the water?! In the same way radio stations celebrated those female icons by playing their best tracks and focusing on aspects of their art; there is so much to unpack and note when you look at Michael Jackson. From the budding genius who was part of The Jackson 5 to the solo artist who rose to become the King of Pop; there was no stopping that rise and regency! I followed Michael Jackson for most of his solo career and first encountered his work shortly after Bad was released. Jackson would have turned sixty this coming Wednesday so I do wonder how far he would have gone had he lived. As I say, my first taste of his music was with 1987’s Bad. I was only four when it arrived on 31st August but have memories of those incredible songs infiltrating my young brain! Maybe it was around 1990 when I became more immersed in the album and I distinctly remember it being played around the neighbourhood.

I, with my friends, would play the cassette and pump the volume right up! My early favourites – from the record – were the title-track, Leave Me Alone and Dirty Diana. Smooth Criminal became a favourite very soon and, in fact, most of the album left a huge impression! Although Bad did not score the big reviews and celebration of 1982’s Thriller; it was a record that offered, in my view, more consistency and a new direction. It is amazing to think Jackson left a five-year gap between records but that was to ensure the sound was brilliant and, inevitably, allow some of the heat to die down following Thriller’s release. I tracked back to Thriller and Off the Wall (1979) and ingested as much as I could from those records. I will discuss the impact of those albums soon but, looking at Jackson’s career and you can see a man shifting and evolving. Early solo albums like Ben (1972) sound radically different to, say, Dangerous (1991). One reason why Michael Jackson stood in my young eyes was because of his videos on MTV and the way he broke ground. He was denied early access because he was black and, during the 1980s, that was a rarity – the station was playing white bands for the most part and that infuriated Jackson! If one connects his changing appearance with a desire to be taken more seriously – an ironic thing considering the messages on his track, Black or White – I am not sure but it is obvious Jackson broke walls and pushed music forward.

His epic videos for songs like Billie Jean and Beat It (both from Thriller) were stunning and were his statement of intent. It is amazing to think there were racial barriers on MTV and they were holding back artists like Jackson. Things (slowly) changed but one can only guess how influential Michael Jackson is regarding black artists and their ascension onto music T.V./the mainstream. It is those videos that defined what Michael Jackson meant to me. After the success of albums like Thriller and Bad; Jackson saw himself as this king and prince: a statue and monument of greatness that was ruling the Pop landscape. Although the truth was not far from that impression; as such, Jackson’s promotions became bigger and more expensive. Look at videos for Dangerous cuts Remember the Time and In the Closet and you have a man who was turning music into cinema. You can argue he was doing that as early as Thriller – the title-track, especially, renowned for its images and story. Where’s Pop’s queen, Madonna, was showing her sexuality and confidence; Jackson was turning in these mini-films that elevated his music to new heights. I have selected a definitive video list below and it charts how they became more sophisticated and high-concept.

I wonder whether we will ever see a Pop phenomenon who can do that with the music video? The visual feasts and eye-catching promotions did not get in the way of the music itself. I am not sure which Jackson album is my favourite but it would be a fight between Bad and Dangerous – quite appropriate given their titles! Bad mixes some romance and shows its muscles here and there: Dangerous is Jackson releasing his first album of the 1990s and showing a tougher, distinct sound. Maybe the production is a bit compacted and the album is over-long but you can hear a real shift in terms of themes and the effect. Dangerous is more accusatory and wracked: the growing and exposed star feeling cheated and betrayal; coping with hate and keen to change things. If songs such as Heal the World – Jackson claims this is his favourite song – were mocked for being sugar-sweet and a bit naff; one cannot argue against the intent and impact of songs like Jam and She Drives Me Wild.

Replacing Quincy Jones – more about his partnership with Jackson later – with new producers, Teddy Riley, Bill Bottrell and Bruce Swedien; you feel Jackson break free from his more innocent days and embrace a more sexual, tough and defiant star. By 1991, he was properly in the public eye and could not escape the endless press intrusion. If some critics felt Jackson sounded nervous on the album and lyrics were dogmatically pragmatic; the production not allowing proper expression and pleasing tones then the swirl of attention and airtime the album received compensated. Jackson would release two more albums before his death – HIStory: PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE - Book 1 in 1995 and 2001’s Invincible – but nothing matched that heyday of 1979-1991.

Before tracking back to the start and looking at that partnership with Quincy Jones; we can see, even shortly after his death (in 2009), how many articles were written regarding his influence and legacy. The Atlantic, in 2010, looked at Jackson and how his status rose to the level where he was untouchable. He could be any character he wanted and created his own world. Whilst allegations of child abuse and various controversies meant he was reviled by many; time will sanitize his memory and we will focus on what made him special: that music, incredible vocal gymnastics and something truly unique. The article talked about Jackson’s videos and the ability to hold a live audience in the palm of his hand:

“Jackson, though, was something else entirely. Something new. Obviously he made great records, usually with the help of Quincy Jones. Jackson's musical influence on subsequent artists is simply unavoidable, from his immediate followers like Madonna and Bobby Brown, to later stars like Usher and Justin Timberlake.

Certainly, Jackson could also electrify a live audience. His true canvas, though, was always the video screen. Above all, he was the first great televisual entertainer. From his Jackson 5 childhood, to his adult crossover on the Motown 25th anniversary special, to the last sad tabloid fodder, Jackson lived and died for on TV. He was born in 1958, part of the first generation of Americans who never knew a world without TV. And Jackson didn't just grow up with TV. He grew up on it. Child stardom, the great blessing and curse of his life, let him to internalize the medium's conventions and see its potential in a way that no earlier performer possibly could.

 "...The result, as typified by the videos for "Thriller," "Billie Jean," and "Beat It," was more than just great art. It was a new art form. Jackson turned the low-budget, promotional clips record companies would make to promote a hit single into high art, a whole new genre that combined every form of 20th century mass media: the music video. It was cinematic, but not a movie. There were elements of live performance, but it was nothing like a concert. A seamless mix of song and dance that wasn't cheesy like Broadway, it was on TV but wildly different from anything people had ever seen on a screen”.

Rolling Stone, reacting to his death and looking at the artists he inspired, talked about the lines of Kanye West and Beyoncé – how their music took ideas from Jackson and inspired new audiences:

“Kanye West: Jackson’s influence on hip-hop may be harder to trace, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t there. Of all of hip-hop’s current stars, only West possesses Jackson’s knack for allowing a singular vision to yield huge commercial dividends. West has Jackson’s superstar drive, the consuming desire to do everything bigger and better than anyone before him, and the ability to bring a very particular vision to a mass audience. Like Jackson, West is enamored of the spectacle: the scope and grandeur of his Glow in the Dark Tour was positively Jackson-esque, and his ability to sell hip-hop — in massive quantities — to a pop crowd rivals what Jackson did for R&B.

Beyoncé: Cue up any given track on B’Day, whether the stuttering “Get Me Bodied” or the searing “Ring the Alarm,” and hear Michael Jackson’s trickle-down effect. Her contemporaries may have Jackson’s pop flair, but only Beyoncé possesses his fierceness. The spry toughness of “Survivor” and “Independent Women” are distant cousins to Jackson’s darker, meaner numbers (like “Dirty Diana” or “Give it to Me”), and Beyoncé’s gradual transformation from bright-eyed ingenue to the new First Lady of Soul rivals Jackson’s own ascent to power”’.

It is hard to say just how far and wide his influence extends. Certainty, you can hear influence in everyone from Justin Timberlake and Beyoncé to Lady Gaga; Hip-Hop artists like Childish Gambino and the new breed of Pop pretenders who want to follow Michael Jackson’s lead. We listen to the music and know what he was capable of but, as this piece shows the sheer volume of sales and awards he won is eye-watering!

“There are different numbers on the exact amount of copies that Thriller has sold both nationally and internationally. Many say it's sold 66 million, while others say it's sold over 100 million. Either way, Thriller still remains the first album to become certified 33x multi-platinum. Moreover, due; to Thriller’s success, MJ became the highest-selling recording artist up until the time of his tragic death in 2009.

In his career, Jackson was inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall Of Fame not once, but twice, with The Jackson 5 and as a solo artist. On top of that, he’s won 13 Grammys, 86 Billboard Awards, cracked 31 Guinness World Records, has stars on the Hollywood Walk Of Fame for The Jackson 5 and as a solo artist, won eight World Music Awards, won 26 American Music Awards, has been named the  "Artist of the Century" at the American Music Awards, and so much more”.

We say the same thing with all musical icons: they have given so much to music but, no matter how hard you look, you will find nobody else like them. If fellow icons like Madonna spoke about feminism, sexuality and caught the public imagination with changing fashions; Jackson looked at race, the environment and pushed the limits of what a music video could be. That is a simplified view of his genius but he definitely had his passion and concerns; ensuring every album was different and each conveyed important messages. Those vocal tics and effects – much-parodied but never matched – became his own and was like a language. The sheer range of his voice and the emotional spectrum has not been equalled in music. Maybe Prince matched him vocally but there is something about Michael Jackson’s aura and personality that put him in a league of his own. The complexities of the man include bad – relationship splits and allegations; his changing appearance and eccentricity – and good – him breaking racial barriers and becoming the voice of a generation. Jackson has recently been represented in a series of portraits and paintings (On the Wall) at the National Portrait Gallery and there are rumours his posthumous material did not feature him on lead vocals. It seems, nine years after his death, Jackson is never far from the news!

There are great biographies and books you should get to read up on Michael Jackson and some interesting documentaries. I have included a few in the form of hyperlinks (look at selected words and phrases) and Jackson’s sixtieth birthday is a great excuse to study the great man and how he came into music. I have included some of his best interviews in a collection above so I hope, by the end of this piece, you have all the information you need regarding Michael Jackson. We often look at Michael Jackson’s career in the context of the work he did with producer Quincy Jones. Jones’ reputation and input helped shape Jackson’s work and bring new light from it. The two worked together on Off the Wall and it was a travesty the record did not scoop every Grammy it was up for! Jackson wanted to separate himself from the work he did with The Jackson 5 and wanted a different-sounding record. Jones’ new approach and the drafting of Heatwave’s keyboardist Rod Temperton – who wrote three songs – gave Jacko a funkier, tauter sound that fused R&B, Disco and Pop. Temperton tracks such as Off the Wall and Rock with You sit alongside Jackson offerings such as Don’t Stop ‘Til You Get Enough and Working Day and Night. The album established Jackson as a genuine star and showed he could step away from his brothers’ band and thrive as a solo artist. It is the Thriller-Bad period that many see as his watermark.

This article, written in November 2012, looks at Thriller and how Jackson changed the game:

 “On this date, 30 years ago, Jackson released Thriller, and with it, changed the landscape of contemporary pop music. Before Thriller, established rock guitarists did not collaborate with soul, R’n’B and disco singers. Before Thriller, black artists were very rarely featured on MTV.

The album came three years after Jackson’s first non-Motown solo record, Off the Wall – itself a smash hit which had sold more than eight million copies. Released when Jackson was 20, Off the Wall had been seen as a departure from his brothers and his childhood stardom. Many were sceptical that he could survive without Motown but Off the Wall had proved them wrong and it was assumed that Jackson had reached his peak. Jackson, on the other hand, knew that he was only just getting started. Off the Wall had been a decent disco record, but Thriller was set to span genres and break both boundaries and records.

Jackson and his producer Quincy Jones approached the project with enormous ambition. They wanted to make an album that would appeal to fans of all genres and prove so important that the press that would normally give a black man little coverage would be forced to pay attention to him. To give the record true rock credibility, Jackson and Jones drafted in Eddie Van Halen to play a solo on Beat It.

 “…Compared to the enormous success of Thriller, Bad did not sell as well and only won two Grammies. But with time it has found its place in history. Both Bad and Thriller can easily be named as Jackson’s finest album, depending on who you ask. That said, it could be argued that Bad is the stronger album simply because it doesn’t contain the utterly dire Paul McCartney duet, The Girl is Mine.

The legacy of both albums, along with Jackson's individual dancing style, voice, and inclusive approach to different genres is well-documented. Love them or hate them, even brand new artists such as Justin Bieber cite him as an influence. With the countless bizarre stories now associated with the artist, it's all too easy to forget just how innovative, talented and groundbreaking the work of Michael Jackson was, and still is today”.

Although Bad (1987) received a lot of love; we often associate Jackson’s best moments with 1982’s Thriller:

 “Jackson was at the top of his musical prowess on “Thriller,” with these songs inhabiting whole worlds and traversing multiple sonic terrains without pausing for even a moment. Through a combination of music video presence and radio reliability, the record became a resounding critical and commercial success-thanks also in no small part to Jackson’s meticulous musical vision and a mainstream music atmosphere that was ready to embrace the next big phenomenon. Though he really never left the spotlight, it was on this record that he produced some of his greatest and most innovative compositions, resulting in the creation and continuation of his mythic pop stature that would exist long after he passed away.

 “…It was through this legend that Jackson became a lightning rod for both fans and detractors. And so his musical history continues to go-there are those who tout his music as being some of the best ever recorded and those who see only the controversy and less-than-favorable conditions under which he was often scrutinized. But setting aside his storied personal life and focusing solely on his music, you see just how imaginative he was when it came to his songs. These are fully formed lengths of pop wonder and inclusive melodic narratives. There was no one else who even came close to creating this kind of expansive pop music, and after “Thriller” was released, no one even bothered to question his authority on the matter”.

There are events being held to celebrate Michael Jackson’s sixtieth and BBC Radio 2 will be heavily featuring his music – choosing the sixty best tracks. I have merely scratched the surface regarding Michael Jackson and there is a lot more to be said regarding the King of Pop. I am sure I will put other pieces up but, right now, I wanted to wish him an (early) happy birthday. On Wednesday, make sure you get involved with everything Jackson-related and revisit his impressive catalogue. From the mesmeric videos and best-selling albums to his images and legacy; there is no denying the fact nobody can succeed…

THE King of Pop!

FEATURE: The Benefits of Skipping Class: The Miseducation of Lauryn Hill at Twenty: An Album That Shows How Much We Need the Icon Back in Music

FEATURE:

 

 

The Benefits of Skipping Class

IN THIS PHOTO: Lauryn Hill photographed in New York City (1998)/PHOTO CREDIT: Anthony Barboza/Getty Images

The Miseducation of Lauryn Hill at Twenty: An Album That Shows How Much We Need the Icon Back in Music

__________

I have not long put my fingers down…

IMAGE CREDIT: Getty Images

from writing about another legendary artist who only released one solo studio album (Jeff Buckley, Grace) before I come to another! Grace has just passed twenty-four but, today, we celebrate Lauryn Hill’s The Miseducation of Lauryn Hill turning twenty! I am not sure what is happening in Hill’s camp but, through recent years, she has been involved in legal problems and occasional appearances. It is a sad day today: Aaliyah, a celebrated American artist, died seventeen years ago today. As I mourn the loss of a great and innovative talent; I have been looking at a brilliant, decade-owning album that managed to elevate Lauryn Hill from Fugees member to a standalone star. Forty-three-year-old Hill has been in the worldwide media for the wrong reasons the last couple of years. I wonder whether there is music brewing and we will ever see a follow-up to her 1998 gem. I recall buying the album and excitedly headed down to the record shop to snap up something I have worn to death. Back when we discussed music and shared albums; The Miseducation of Lauryn Hill was a revelation and profound earthquake in my circle. I had experience of music from black American music but had not experienced anything like Hill’s magnum opus. The incredible passion and command throughout the album blew me away; the way she switched from fighting and primed to tender and revealing was like nothing I had experienced before.

IMAGE CREDIT: The Ringer

The fourteen-track record documents social injustice and the plight of the black population in America; personal strife and romantic distress; emancipation and liberation in the face of repression and judgement. One gets history and sociology; politics, feminism and civil rights in an album that never judges and pushes people away. It involves listeners of all races and classes and captivates you with its moods and incredible dynamics. There are interstitial fragments of a classroom – the opening gambit sees Hill absent from the role-call – and it is a nice narrative and hook that gives the album a real sense of immediacy and response. In a way, it is a concept album but not one that is stiff and off-putting. When I was in school (in 1998) I was hanging with other kids my age (fourteen/fifteen) and we were chatting about the best cuts from the record and quoting lines. My instant favourites were Doo Wop (That Thing) and Everything Is Everything but, in recent years, I have started to embrace Lost Ones and Final Hour.  Although there have been lawsuits and accreditation issues regarding The Miseducation of Lauryn Hill – the songwriter working with other musicians but not giving them propers – we cut that aside and revel in an album that is Lauryn Hill taking charge and setting a bar. She opened doors for many black musicians and left a huge legacy.

Hill became a media icon and was adorning the cover of magazines around the world. It was rare in 1998 to have a black female being proffered and celebrated – it is weird and alien today in many ways! Hill helped assimilate Hip-Hop into the mainstream and provide a female bent. Her debut solo album brought Soul (1970s) to the fore and pushed boundaries. It is a sloppy listen but its lack of technical perfection is its masterstroke: the freedom and easy nature mean it is more accessible than you’d imagine. Hill’s delivery is flawless and she has inspired legions of musicians. I will continue to offer my thoughts and perspectives but, as it turns twenty, The Miseducation of Lauryn Hill has been receiving tributes from the worldwide media. Kuba Shand-Baptiste, writing in The Independent, shared her experiences and love of Lauryn Hill:

“Gifting the world ageless, raw anthems, and endearing skits about life, love and spirituality, The Miseducation spoke with an honesty that only a select few in mainstream R&B could indulge in at the time”.

The author went on to look at Hill’s recent output: a yearning to record new material but a reputation that is synonymous with tardiness, controversy and an all-too-brief Fugees reunion. She says, in spite of that, The Miseducation of Lauryn Hill is being utilised and resonating with modern artists:

“…That aside, The Miseducation has had a rebirth of sorts this year. “Ex-Factor” was sampled twice – in Cardi B’s “Be Careful” and Drake’s hit feminist-lite anthem “Nice For What” – renewing conversations about the lasting legacy of the 1998 album…There’s a reason that this album refuses to fade into the background. So groundbreaking was it, with its penchant for infusing social commentary with R&B, soul and hip-hop beats, that you could argue that Lauryn’s The Miseducation, like Erykah Badu’s Baduizm the previous year, was one of a small selection of albums responsible for changing the face of soul and R&B as we know it”.

“Her voice, just as powerful as it was sweet, soared on every track on the album. “Nothing Even Matters”, a timeless, honey-dipped duet with D’Angelo, could have easily faded into the background had it been sung by someone else. Miss Hill’s vocals, pained yet understated, transformed it into something much more”.

USA Today were among the thanksgiving that concentrated on different aspects of the album’s brilliance/birth:

“…And, beyond its numerical success, “Miseducation” is a true expression of artistic greatness. Interestingly enough, the two songs from Drake and Cardi B, which serendipitously sent Hill’s music back to the top of the charts, both channel one of the album’s most compelling narratives -- the power and pain of womanhood. Released when she was just 23, “Miseducation” was famously recorded amid several defining events in Hill’s life -- her pregnancy and birth of her first child, the dissolution of the Fugees and her breakup with former bandmate Wyclef Jean -- that provided emotionally fertile conditions for her to record a classic.

In particular, Hill credited her pregnancy for giving life to this period of creativity. “When some women are pregnant, their hair and their nails grow, but for me it was my mind and ability to create,” she told Ebony in 1998. “I had the desire to write in a capacity that I hadn't done in a while. I don't know if it's a hormonal or emotional thing ... I was very in touch with my feelings at the time".

 

TIME looked at the album’s twentieth and how it exceeded all expectations. One would think Hill, stepping away from a successful band like the Fugees, would bury herself behind a team of producers and writers; play it safe and bring in a raft of collaborators! Instead, she demanded to be paid for every interview around the album’s promotion and was not going to be guided. She fought against control and bad decisions; stood out as this raw and defiant personality who was taking no sh*t and wanted to be remembered. TIME looked at the record and how the creator created change and conversation:

“The album bends expectations in other ways, too. On the masterful “Doo Wop (That Thing)” — which debuted at No. 1 on the Billboard Hot 100 in 1998 and won two Grammy awards the following year — Hill’s gaze is broad, and she cautions men and women against being exploited for sex and money. “Guys, you know you’d better watch out / Some girls, some girls are only about / That thing, that thing, that thing,” she sings on the tinny piano-backed hook. But also: “Girls, you know you’d better watch out / Some guys, some guys are only about / That thing, that thing, that thing.” Meanwhile, the strings-heavy “Everything Is Everything” is arguably a love letter to black communities and a meditation on injustice: “It seems we lose the game / Before we even start to play / Who made these rules?” Hill asks, extending a revolutionary sort of affection”.

PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

One can say this – the sassiness and boldness – was a media campaign and a publicity trick. It was not at all: Hill was on her own and not willing to be dictated to and have her material changed. Here is an artist who was speaking about women’s rights and race; she was discussing heavy topics and, in an industry that sees labels and managers control and dictate; Hill was not going to let this happen. TIME looked at other effects and ways in which Hill stood out:

“In this light, one thing that makes Hill stand out is how boldly she’s sought to take to task the very system that catapulted her to international stardom in the ’90s. In the past, for instance, she’s refused to give interviews without being paid for them, and once reportedly demanded $10,000 to participate in a cover story for Oneworld magazine. While some may see this behavior as excessive, you could argue that, for Hill, it was a show of power — or at least a means of trying to reclaim power from a system with a history of nickel-and-diming black artists. (This seems to be why Aretha Franklin often brought her payment-filled purse on stage with her, within eyesight.) Even something as outwardly bizarre and eye-roll inducing as Hill’s insistence on being called “Ms. Lauryn Hill” (her artist page on Spotify is listed as such) reasonably has meaning: It’s a way for her to command respect for herself when others fail to deliver it, and to do so specifically in an arena in which the status of female artists and rappers always appears to be up for debate — something Nicki Minajhas pointed out in recent years. The New Yorker’s Doreen St. Félix got it exactly right when she wrote earlier this year, “I resist the narrative that Hill is crazy or lost — that she has failed because she has chosen not to participate in” — or, I’d add, has chosen to subvert — “that which causes her strain”.

Many are stating how, in 1998, The Miseducation of Lauryn Hill was a dynamite that shook things up and opened eyes! In terms of women’s rights and racial tensions; one can argue we have gone backwards and not really made progress. There are fantastic black artists making changes and speaking loud but they are in a minority and there is a huge struggle ahead – so much inequality and a long way to go. Lauryn Hill’s incredible debut demands a follow-up. I wonder whether we will see that because, at a stressful and divided time, she is this endlessly-inspiring voice that could create some order and inspiration. Maybe it is the fact Hill has not followed up on her success and promise that creates the biggest impression. There is a chance a follow-up can be disappointing or take something away from her debut; maybe it will be ill-judged and lack any real bite. In any case; we have this incredible album that desires a brother or sister. Maybe, as The Ringer investigates, Hill’s age and youthful vigour might have inspired the album’s direction and quality:

“When an artist makes such a massively successful, groundbreaking, and format-defining work at a precocious age—think Mary Shelley writing Frankenstein at 20 or Orson Welles directing Citizen Kane at 25—it usually inspires the less precocious members of its audience (so roughly, everyone) to feel some combination of adoration and human inferiority: What were you doing with your life when you were 20, or 25, or 23? But maybe, too, there is something inherently youthful and thus reassuringly communal about such be-all-and-end-all swings for the moon. And so I like to temper this vision of an inhumanly precocious Lauryn Hill with the more human hubris of youth. “Lucky for us, like everyone in their twenties,” writes Kierna Mayo, the woman who famously put Hill on the cover of the preview issue of Honey magazine, “Hill imagined herself wiser than she really was”.

The piece also looked at modern black icons and the confidence of the contemporary female best. These are words I can get behind:

“The lesson is particularly resonant right now, this year. On social media, hyperbolic god-and-goddess worship of celebrities runs rampant. Queen Bey exists in a place so far above censure that SNL parodied what happens when a person suggests that something she’s done is anything less than great. Nicki Minaj, who is currently promoting an album called Queen, has been lashing out at anyone who dares question her greatness, sometimes sending her fan base to do her bidding and other times attacking constructive critics herself. But I was reminded reading Morgan’s book that criticism at its most measured and thoughtful can be an act of love, an act of seeing another person’s humanity and his or her potential for growth. Maybe this is what Hill needed—after all, Lauryn is only human. Perhaps that is how she should have been seen all along”.

I have vivid memories of The Miseducation of Lauryn Hill arriving in my white, working-class background – something that seemed so far away from Hill’s existence and what she was singing about. It didn’t matter, mind: I can relate to every note, in a way, and so too could my friends in the schoolyard. The album became a bit of a favourite and taught me so much about the world. I was more educated – ironic, given the fact I was in school! – and excited to dive into every song and note. As I mark the twentieth anniversary of the album with new appreciation and ears; I wonder whether we will see Lauryn Hill return to class and grace us with another biblical seminar. That is in her hands but, if you have not heard The Miseducation of Lauryn Hill; get in touch with a record that set a standard…

FEW have got close to touching!

FEATURE: One of These Days! How the Eagles’ Greatest Hits Compilation (1971-1975) Toppled the King of Pop’s Thriller as the All-Time Best-Selling Album

FEATURE:

 

 

One of These Days!

ALL PHOTOS/IMAGES: Getty Images 

How the Eagles’ Greatest Hits Compilation (1971-1975) Toppled the King of Pop’s Thriller as the All-Time Best-Selling Album

__________

IT is strange to think a greatest hits package…

that covers four years in a band’s career could outsell Michael Jackson’s epic album, Thriller. I always associate Jackson as being the artist who could not be beaten but it seems like a new wave of Eagles appreciation has seen their greatest hits record become the all-time biggest-selling disc. Compare Michael Jackson and the Eagles’ albums and there are big differences. Thriller is the album that finally got the King of Pop his throne and made up for a lack of award success following on from Off the Wall. That album gained huge critical acclaim but did not scoop as many Grammys as expected. Thriller, released in 1982, became an instant seller and was a step up from the 1979 smash, Off the Wall. Maybe, compared to other albums in his cannon, Thriller contained a few weaker moments. We do not often replay Baby Be Mine (on the first side) or P.Y.T. (Pretty Young Thing) (on the second side) but the nine-track album suffers no bloating and few wasted moments. The truly biblical tracks – Thriller, Beat It; Billie Jean and Wanna Be Startin’ Something – have gone down in the history books and, between them, saw Michael Jackson stand in a league of his own. Whilst there were various writers and producers that helped Thriller pop and resonate; it is the central performances from Michael Jackson that ensured the record sold by the millions!

Thriller has shifted over thirty-three million units (in the U.S.) and it seemed like its position as the best-selling album ever was cemented. It is no surprise Jackson’s masterpiece gained big applause back in 1982 and, given the fact it is a sleek and polished selection of Pop gems, is promise and brilliance will not dampen for a very long time. The tracklisting on the Eagles’ greatest hits selection is a banquet of treasures that, unfairly to Michael Jackson, is the cream of the band’s crop. Take It Easy, Lyin’ Eyes and Desperado; One of These Nights, Take It to the Limit and Tequila Sunrise are all Eagles classics and it is not the only album from the band in the top-ten best-selling albums. Hotel California, with the title-track as mysterious and popular as ever, is at number-three and there is a big appetite for the band. Look at the remainder of the top-ten and there are offerings from Led Zeppelin (Led Zeppelin IV), Pink Floyd (The Wall) and Fleetwood Mac (Rumours). The Eagles’ collection, Their Greatest Hits (1971-1975), has shifted five-million more than Michael Jackson’s Thriller and I wonder whether that balance will shift. The tussle between the top-two albums has been going on for a while now. Jackson overtook the Eagles in 2009 after posthumous popularity surged Thriller into the lead. Now, nine years down the line, and it seems like the leader is confirmed and in no danger of shifting.

I feel there is something old-school and romantic in the collection of songs. Maybe the Eagles, at their peak, represented an America that has been lost and forgotten. If Hotel California has been seen as a wild night with a band ripping up a hotel – there are numerous interpretations and theories – there is something settled, safe and memorable regarding the Eagles’ greatest hits. We can all hum the songs and recognise the brilliance at work. This piece asks why the Eagles’ greatest hits has overtaken Thriller and lodged into the mind of millions:

“…Now, it’s not a bad album by any means. “Take It Easy” is a good song, as are “Desperado” and “One of These Nights.” But how has a run-of-the-mill best-of collection sold more than 29 million copies? How did it, in 1999, manage to surpass Michael Jackson’s Thriller—a moon-landing of an LP—as the best-selling album in American history? (Thriller would reclaim the top spot 10 years later, following Jackson’s death.)”.

“When Their Greatest Hits was released in 1976, “best of” albums were a relatively new phenomenon in rock and pop music. The album’s initial success prompted a trend piece in The New York Times, one that included primers on nine other new best-of compilations”.

“It’s no wonder that record companies love to market these collections,” the Times’ Henry Edwards rationalized. “They cost almost nothing to produce; they sell with a minimum of advertising; and they are spared bad reviews by pop critics who, for the most part, ignore them.” (This didn’t prevent Edwards from slipping in some critical musings: “A genuine gift for melody coupled with vigorous playing and harmonizing occasionally enables the Eagles to overcome the vacuity of their recent hits.”) While Edwards understood why these albums were so beloved by labels, he couldn’t predict how fervently fans would eat them up”.

You may think it is a bit of an unfair advantage having a best of out there when Michael Jackson’s Thriller is an original studio album. I argue some of the Eagles’ best songs are not on that compilation but it is a solid collection of tracks that seem to connect. The fact so many of the songs have been endlessly played on the radio means they have embedded themselves in the mind and become the soundtrack to many of our lives. It is amazing to think, in a streaming age, we are still celebrating the album and have a lot of love for artists like the Eagles. I mentioned how America has changed and, in my view, the Eagles represented core values that have disappeared from the nation. One can hear something old-world and romantic in the best songs on that album; there is an easiness and open road that portrays a gentler and more hopeful America. Maybe many yearn for the past and turn to the Eagles because they have scored many of our lives. I wonder, as does this article, whether we can accurately determine what constitutes a world-class album and whether that mirrors cultural tastes/preferences:

“In 2018, sales numbers of any sort can seem like a quaint metric for success—the methodology for gathering and collating those numbers hasn’t caught up, in any satisfying way, to cultural shifts in how people actually consume music. It wasn’t until 2016 that the R.I.A.A. even agreed to tally on-demand audio and video streaming. (Now fifteen hundred streams count as one sale.) Yet, even long before streaming complicated the mathematics, accurately determining a record’s sales was something of a fool’s errand. Prior to the introduction, in 1991, of Nielsen SoundScan (itself a flawed point-of-sale electronic tracking system), the Billboard charts were determined by “store reporters,” or record-store clerks who would call the magazine and simply describe what was selling”.

IN THIS PHOTO: The Eagles

Do we really value the album as a concept and put much stock in the sales figures?! We are all so consumed by the streaming statistics and how many times a video is viewed on YouTube. Albums still sell but we rarely take a look at the top-ten and go and buy that album – why would we when we can hand-pick the odd song on Spotify?! The article I have just quoted asked whether we should care which albums are selling well:

“You might be thinking: But who even cares what is selling? The monoculture is dead! This is the age of personal autonomy! Commercial popularity is surely no longer a useful barometer of the national condition! But it’s also an era in which “influence”—as determined by the number of followers a person can amass on any given social-media platform—can be quantified with horrifying precision. This leads, on occasion, to a very modern sort of numbers panic. Earlier this month, the rapper Nicki Minaj released her fourth album, “Queen.” When it débuted at No. 2 on the Billboard chart, behind Travis Scott’s “Astroworld”—“Queen” sold a hundred and eighty-five thousand copies in its first week—she logged on to Twitter and posted a series of heated grievances, opining on the system and how it can be gamed. Numbers matter less than ever—until they matter the most”.

I wanted to raise this article because it is fascinating to see two big albums tussle and change positions through time. This Rolling Stone article whether the Eagles’ greatest hit has gained new reputation because of its influence on modern artists:

“The ubiquitous compilation influenced generations of future country stars. “A lot of younger country musicians did experience the Eagles [through Their Greatest Hits],” says Ken Levitan, a veteran country and rock manager who represents Kings of Leon, Trace Adkins and LoCash. “Every household had a copy of that record. If they didn’t hear it themselves, their parents were listening to it, so it became part of a fabric of their life. That record, and Skynyrd and Hank Jr., influenced the whole range of country artists”.

I can understand why Michael Jackson’s Thriller gained its millions-selling reputation and continues to shift: it is peerless and sees the Pop maestro at the top of its game; the songwriting is superb and you can listen to the entire album and not feel the need to wander off and skip through tracks. So, then, why do many people like the Eagles’ greatest hits – given that so many find a lot of the songs hard to swallow?! This piece offers some guidance:

“That still doesn't answer the major question: Why did The Eagles benefit so much more than anybody else? If yuppies were re-buying their favorite records to relive the music of their youth, shouldn't a plethora of similar albums be threatening their record? Yet outside of a similar Billy Joel collection that has now exceeded 23 million in sales, no other greatest-hits record has approached the dominance of "Their Greatest Hits." (Of course, Billy Joel's sales figure is assisted by the rule that counts each sale of a double album as two units.)

More credit must go to the changing sounds of country radio in that time period. Steel guitars and southern accents gave way to guitar solos and bigger drum sounds. The gigantic country acts of the time, most notably Garth Brooks, acknowledged the influence of songs such as "Take It Easy" and "Lyin' Eyes," and a 1993 country tribute to The Eagles topped the charts with more than three million in sales. This was a previously untapped market for the band, and a greatest-hits compilation certainly would be a perfect entrance”.

I am one of those people fascinated by the album and why some sell big and others do not really catch on. I wonder whether Michael Jackson and the Eagles will tussle and battle for those top-two spots for the rest of time? You have to ask which other albums can get near to them and would be able to budge their crowns – nothing from modern times has any chance of getting anywhere near! I think the Eagles’ greatest hits package seem to hold a lot of sway for modern artists in Pop and Country. There is timelessness to the material that seems to puts us in a better mood; a sense of satisfaction and reminiscence that other albums do not hold. Whatever the reason behind the success of the work; I have approached the album with fresh ears and appreciation. In an age where we care less about the album and need to see a reversal in our habits; I am happy to throw light on a couple of records who have been battling for the best-selling spot for years and years. Maybe Michael Jackson will come back and put Thriller back on top but, right now, the Eagles’ four-year-spanning songs of solid gold…

IS outstripping anything else out there.

FEATURE: Grace at Twenty-Four: Why Jeff Buckley Is More Influential Than Ever

FEATURE:

 

 

Grace at Twenty-Four

ALL PHOTOS/IMAGES (unless credited otherwise): Getty Image 

Why Jeff Buckley Is More Influential Than Ever

__________

THERE are few musicians I love more than Jeff Buckley.

PHOTO CREDIT: Mikio Ariga

Maybe Kate Bush steals the honour of my absolute-all-time-brilliant-and-best musician but there is something about Jeff Buckley that continues to make my heart skip a beat! He died in 1997 but, since then, he has managed to make a gigantic influence on the music scene. It is like the old Jazz masters who gained modest applause during their lifetime: the adulation and respect followed when they were not able to appreciate it. I have mooted, in previous Jeff Buckley-related pieces, how the man would have dealt with his current fame. He would have been pleased to know his music has endured and continues to get radio play and respect. I think the modern music would not suit his needs and personality. Even before he died, he bemoaned the stadium gigs and not having access to intimate spaces – he performed anonymously in some venues to get back to his roots and escape the sort of places he was expected to play. I feel future albums and movements would have had the obligatory stadium tours and endless T.V. gigs. He would be (if he had lived) in his fifties now so would have been enjoying the slightly more settled life of a middle-aged musician. Given the fact there was huge attention paid to artists like David Bowie and Prince when they hit that age; I wonder whether he would have had much rest and chance for privacy...

In any case; one of the reasons I hold Jeff Buckley in a special place in my heart is that honesty and warmth he gave. There was no ego and the need to hold back. Listen to any of his interviews and you are greeted by that soft voice and knee-buckling sound. He often flirted with the camera and pouted; sometimes he was shy and cool – at others, he would be quite angry or baffled. Maybe there was an air of playing up to expectations and projecting a more mysterious version of himself but listen to the way he talks and projects and you get a pure and beguiling artist who just wanted to make music and not be subjected to the glare of the media. I guess you cannot be a musician, at any age, and escape the rumours and endless demands. There is one reason why Jeff Buckley will always be in the news: his incredible debut album, Grace. Technically, it is his only studio record – he was starting work on his follow-up but died before completing it – and stands as one of the greatest records ever. Every time I interview an artist and ask for their influences; you always get a nice mixture of names. Jeff Buckley’s Grace is the album that, time and time again, keeps coming up.

I am not surprised Grace continues to compel musicians some twenty-four years after its release. Released through Columbia on 23rd August, 1994; Grace was an unusual album that did not fare too well. There were some good reviews but sales were pretty poor. 1994 was a year when gritty and bombastic albums were gaining the most critical acclaim. From Oasis’ Definitely Maybe and Blur’s Parklife to Hole’s Live Through This and Soundgarden’s Superunknown; Manic Street Preachers’ The Holy Bible and Portishead’s Dummy – it is, perhaps, music’s finest year but one where something harder and more ‘exciting’ was being favoured. Perhaps it was the transition from Grunge and the reaction to changing tastes; perhaps the role of the sensitive singer-songwriter was limited and ahead of its time. Tori Amos released Under the Pink in the same year but there was something strange and dark enough to impress the public and fit into the scene. Grace was the outsider that provided alternatives and options for those seeking something more sensual, emotional and tender. Buckley, on the album, showed plenty of passion and intensity in certain songs – Grace and Eternal Life – but it is the range of moods and extraordinary songwriting that, for some reason, evaded critical love. One need only look at Grace’s cover to realise what you were in store for: a brooding hero whose mystique and beauty would infuse every note of the album.

PHOTO CREDIT: Anton Corbijn

I feel the lack of genuine Rock bands and a solidified, central music movement – like Britpop – means the landscape is more varied and less cohesive. One cannot identify a particular taste and preference in today’s music. If 1994 was defined by its Britpop wars and brilliant American guitar music; today, there is nothing definitive and identifiable that artists can use as a guide. Buckley was not going to compromise and make something Nirvana-like or Pavement-sounding. He was outside the Grunge/Alternative nucleus and, instead, was taking guidance from artists like Joni Mitchell and Edith Piaf when creating his debut. Look at documentaries made regarding Grace and you get to see Buckley and his band entering the Woodstock space and all the magic coming together. Personnel and commentators noted how Buckley knew exactly what he wanted from his music and would often throw in strings and unconventional sounds to elevate a track. Many artists would play it safe or follow the scene: Buckley was an innovator and curious musician who wanted the music to stand out and was true to who he was. There are subtle shifts and turns but it all adds to a majestic and era-defining album. 

From the rush and ecstatic power of Grace – a song about true love and not fearing mortality – to the weaving and wordless runs of Mojo Pin; the heartache and loss of Last Goodbye and the fantastic cover versions (including Lilac Wine); it is a banquet of brilliance and wonder that could not have come from any other artist. I will talk about the legacy of Hallelujah but I have sort of side-stepped my original question. The reason so many modern artists are discovering and name-checking Grace is the role of more sensitive and evocative songwriting. Maybe the changing role of masculinity and the male singer-songwriter means there is greater room for an album like Grace. 1994 was a bad year for a tender and richly textured L.P. With the likes of Oasis and Soundgarden claiming big focus; Jeff Buckley delivered this terrific debut album that had nothing in common with its peers. Maybe it would have fared better in the 1960s and 1970s but it took a while for the music world to open its eyes to Buckley’s brilliance and voice. Today, there are a lot more albums like Grace and one can attribute that opening to Jeff Buckley. Artists are less afraid of being sensitive and exploring different areas of music. Whereas, back in 1994, bands were more popular than singer-songwriters; today, that balance has shifted and I wonder what would happen if Grace had been released today.

One suspects there would be the odd, criminal two-star review and some would turn their noses up. It would be a much more instant hit and see Buckley get his face all over T.V. Maybe that would be a poisoned chalice: a popular album means that exposure and many would put soundbites and personal life over the quality of the music. Look at other interviews Buckley conducted around 1994/1995 and you can see interviewers coming back to the same old subject. Whether it is his late, estranged father Tim Buckley or something else personal – it must have been tiring hearing the same things and always being compared to his dad. Grace is an album that has plenty of unanswered questions and deep thoughts; sweeping moments and some of the most beautiful music ever recorded. Conspiracy theorists and the media went nuts when Buckley drowned in 1997 and asked whether he foresaw his death in 1994. Songs talking of waves and water, perhaps, a sign of what was to come. The truth is that none of those songs foresaw anything but that is the way people’s minds work! Consequence of Sound, writing last year, encapsulated what Grace meant and why it delivered such an enduring and empathic punch:

“There is no replacement for the kind of singing Buckley does on Grace. It has an uncanny ability to summon memories of loss, a quality that’s almost intrinsic to its sound. But it’s also an instrument of blunt force, every high note finding the frequency of heartbreak, articulating how love feels at its most devastating.

 IN THIS PHOTO: Jeff Buckley with Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan, in New York, in 1995: Buckley called the Pakistani legend "My Elvis"

Yet for all the power contained within his voice, Buckley’s presence as a songwriter is the real reason why Grace endures. There was an almost magical innocence to Buckley; in interviews, he answered questions with soft, dreamlike speeches, and he was known for carrying around a sketchbook brimming with doodles and poems (many of which would later evolve into songs). He cared about music — both listening to and making it — with a fierce conviction utterly at odds with the slackerdom of his generation. This rare blend of innocence and intensity characterizes every scrap of music Buckley produced in his short career, from his grandest compositions to his barest demos.

We know this because, in the more than two decades since Grace was released, countless covers and demos have been dug out of the corners of Buckley’s career. In all of these posthumous releases — including the recent You and I — he can be heard finding his way as an artist, searching for his own sound through the music of his heroes. As enjoyable as these collections are, none can quite recreate the synergy that happened on Grace. It’s an album that Buckley crafted with passion, and it encapsulates everything that made his musical style so special. Some of the musicians and artists who worked alongside him in the studio still grapple with how Grace came to fruition”.

I agree with everything written there but would suggest post-Grace recordings are worth a look. From the songs on SKETCHES for My Sweetheart the Drunk – Buckley’s second album was to be called My Sweetheart the Drunk but he drowned as the band flew out to meet him and record – and his live albums; there is so much material that gives you a complete impression of the man and master. Maybe Grace is his defining statement but it is not the only thing Jeff Buckley put out into the world. Many people associate him with one album and, in many cases, a single song. Hallelujah has been much-covered since Buckley’s definitive version of the Leonard Cohen track (which he released in 1983) but it has never been equalled. The track is the mixture of everything Jeff Buckley was about. Every emotion and ember of his being went into making that song what it is and, as such, I argue there has not been a pure and transcendent like it. It is a sensational delivery that makes you shiver and takes you somewhere special. Even if the remainder of Grace were weak and inferior, many would still hold the album up as a treasure. The fact there are so many wondrous moments in the album makes it astonishing critics missed the boat in 1994. It is also no shock to see the record making an impact and finding fresh eyes twenty-four years after its release.

The Irish Times, writing in 2014, investigated Buckley posthumous work and stated how, in no uncertain terms, everything leads back to Grace:

“As with Tupac Shakur, the posthumous myth is often much different to what happened when Buckley was actually still around.

In terms of assessing Buckley’s work, all roads lead to Grace, the document that he gave us in August 1994. He had made various statements of intent before then: he had played in experimental rock combo Gods and Monsters with Gary Lucas, before striking out for solo turns in New York’s cafes and coffee houses, which produced the Live at Sin-é EP. But Grace was the big calling card.

The recording emphasised his vision for emotionally driven rock music with sweeping string arrangements. Aside from some cathartic, lovely original tracks, his debut also featured that mesmeric version of Leonard Cohen’s Hallelujah, a beautiful take on Nina Simone’s Lilac Wine, and a stunning ambient, choral version of Benjamin Britten’s Corpus Christi Carol. The album was a sign that Buckley was on the way to much greater things”.

So many people are coming into music because of Grace and what Jeff Buckley gave to the world. It is a record that never ages and is never too personal: everyone can understand what it is about and relate to the lyrics. The musicianship and incredible nuance mean even those who experienced the album first time are picking up on new things!

The genius behind the music might be gone but, more and more, we are seeing songwriters compared with Buckley; Grace is mentioned and it seems like the fascination will never end. Grace was not part of a scene or captured a single time in musical history. It was a stunning and unique perspective of an artist who was making music for people rather than the scene; someone who was happy to create the way he wanted and not compromise and negotiate. That sort of attitude and boldness did not translate to huge sales back in 1994 but, more importantly, the enormous legacy and reputation it has gained since then are more important. Many of the artists who created 1994 albums have either passed, retired or made less-effecting work. Buckley’s debut remains cocooned and protected as this sublime piece of work that cannot diminish and weaken with age. I think we need to mark the album with each passing year but look backwards and forwards. Visit the Live at Sin-é collection (the Legacy Edition) and these are recordings made in a New York coffee shop in 1993 – just before Buckley signed a record deal and headed to make Grace. It is the man performing in a space he felt at-peace in and wanted to return to. You can hear embryonic versions of Grace tracks taking shape and the maturing musician causing jaws to drop. The post-Grace recordings are hit-and-miss but there is ample evidence to suggest the follow-up album would take in a sharper and more Rock-driven sound. It is upsetting to realise Buckley would have made many great albums and, let’s hope, still hitting the road today. Rather than mourn his death - and the lone studio album - it is a great time to listen to Grace – and the documentaries and interviews conducted around the time – and discover an artistic statement like no other. The first lines of Grace’s title-track speak: “There’s the moon asking to stay/Long enough for the clouds to fly me away”. It is a shame the man who spoke those words is among the stars but, as we listen to his timeless masterpiece it is true…

PHOTO CREDIT: Mikio Ariga

HE will never leave our hearts.

FEATURE: Sisters in Arms: An All-Female, Summer-Ready Playlist (Vol. XXIV)

FEATURE:

 

 

Sisters in Arms

IN THIS PHOTO: Taliwhoah/PHOTO CREDIT: Undine Markus

An All-Female, Summer-Ready Playlist (Vol. XXIV)

__________

I am not giving up on summer…

IN THIS PHOTO: The Aces

and feel this collection of female-led music is the perfect way to keep the sun going and the heat rising! I guess we have another few weeks of summer so, until then, I am going to provide the perfect soundtracks to keep the body moving and the positive high in the mix. Included in this latest outing are Pop gems, R&B seducers and some brilliant, harder moments and some of the best music from new artists. Some of the songs are a year or so old but are perfect when matched alongside the brand-new and unfamiliar. Sit back and enjoy another selection of brilliant tracks that are definitely going to…

IN THIS PHOTO: Lauren Ruth Ward/PHOTO CREDIT: Tess O'Connor

KEEP the great weather flowing!

ALL PHOTOS/IMAGES (unless credited otherwise): Getty Images/Artists

_____________

PHOTO CREDIT: Adeline Mai

The Aces – Fake Nice

Amara La Negra - Insecure

PHOTO CREDIT: @exquisite_eye

Taliwhoah - Sweetest Escape

PHOTO CREDIT: @mandorlalondon 

Lial – Heart Scars

PHOTO CREDIT: Leslie Colon

Ashe – Choirs

PHOTO CREDIT: Paul Bellaart

Sofie Winterson – Military Man

Empress Of – When I’m With Him

Your Girl Pho – I Can’t Take It

PHOTO CREDIT: Marcus Maschwitz

The Wild Things – Loaded Gun

bülow – You & Jennifer

Lauren Ruth Ward – Sideways

Jasmine Sokko – HURT

Ivy Adara – Rebels

PHOTO CREDIT: Will Edgar

Sloan Peterson – Our Love

SAARA – Sangria

PHOTO CREDIT: @Jan Lenting

Inge van Calkar - River

Fears – Blood

Eves Karydas – Damn Loyal

Clara Mae – Rooftop

KT Tunstall - The River

Liza Owen – Fallin

Indiana – Paper Cut

Eva Lazarus – Bad News

Hannah Wants (ft. Kate Loveridge) – How Long

PHOTO CREDIT: Cameron Brisbane Photography

Zoe Graham – Industrial Strength

FEATURE: The August Playlist: Vol. 4: I’ll Park in One of the Loading Zones and Call Your Mother…

FEATURE:

 

The August Playlist

 IN THIS PHOTO: Kurt Vile 

Vol. 4: I’ll Park in One of the Loading Zones and Call Your Mother…

 __________

THIS is an interesting…

IN THIS PHOTO: Anteros

and eclectic weeks in terms of new music. I have been getting to grips with all the various sounds coming out this week. There are new cuts from Kurt Vile and Villagers; Anteros and Disclosure have all released fresh music. Whilst there are few big-hitters and mega offerings; it is a consistent and varied week that should please most people out there.

Have a listen to all the gems and diamonds that have come out and I am sure you will hold many of them dear to the heart. A packed and busy week for music that is guaranteed to get into the head and lift the spirits!

ALL PHOTOS/IMAGES (unless credited otherwise): Getty Images/Artists

___________

Kurt Vile – Loading Zones

Villagers – Fools

Anteros – Call Your Mother

Pale Waves – Eighteen

Menace Beach – Satellite

Disclosure – Where Angels Fear to Tread

Empress Of – When I’m With Him

Interpol – If You Really Love Nothing

The Chainsmokers (ft. Emily Warren) – Side Effects

Danny Ocean – Epa Wei

Courtney Barnett – Charity

LANY – I Don’t Wanna Love You Anymore

Cardi B (ft. Kehlani) - Ring

Christine and the Queens - la marcheuse

Grace Carter – Why Her Not Me

Vivienne Chi – Under Your Skin

CAGGIE – Thinking About You

KT Tunstall – The River

Liza Owen – Polite

Spring King – Paranoid

Indiana – Paper Cut

PHOTO CREDIT: Hysteria

Jain – Oh Man

Bill Ryder-Jones - Mither

MoStack – Liteness

Seinabo Sey – Good in You

Fall Out Boy – Lake Effect Kid

Zoe Graham - Industrial Strength

Hero Fisher – If I Die and Nothing Happens

Kodaline – Head Held High

Kiiara – Gloe

LAUREL – Adored

Jack Vallier - Anyway

Fyfe – Be There

Blood Orange – Chewing Gum

Barns Courtney – “99”

Eves Karydas – Damn Loyal

White Denim – Performance

Sivu – Submersible

FEATURE: Beat the Monday Blues: Songs to Energise the New Working Week

FEATURE:

 

 

Beat the Monday Blues

ALL PHOTOS: Unsplash

Songs to Energise the New Working Week

__________

EVERY Monday morning is a slog…

and it can be hard getting inspired to face work and the rigours of the week! Maybe it is the thought of the weekend or a daily ritual that gets you through that tough Monday – we all have our ways of coping and enduring. I do think music can create positive vibes and give the boost needed to get through the cruelty of Monday. I have inspired a short playlist of songs to give that lift of energy, keep the sunshine hot and ensure you have enough energy to make it through Tuesday. Have a listen to these tunes; take a little from each of them and, hopefully, they will give you the ammunition to make Monday…

A good day.

FEATURE: What Attitude Problem?! Are Modern Artists Fighting Against the Bland?

FEATURE:

 

 

What Attitude Problem?!

IN THIS PHOTO: IDLES/PHOTO CREDIT: Pooneh Ghana for DIY

Are Modern Artists Fighting Against the Bland?

__________

I wonder whether there is personality and spark…

PHOTO CREDIT: Unsplash

in the modern music scene. Following the death of Aretha Franklin and what she gave to music; I asked whether there are modern artists and will we ever see someone who has that true gift to elevate about the average and stand the test of time. After writing that, I got to thinking about modern music and the characters that stand out. I chose IDLES as the cover stars because, right now, they are promoting their album, Joy as an Act of Resistance. It is their second effort and will be released on 31st of this month and a lot of attention has been swirling around the Bristol band. Their music is mixing the attitude and physicality of Punk but the subject matter is much deeper and more profound. The band are striking against toxic masculinity and values that have actually been passed through society for decades. There was a time – and it still happens now – where a certain way of living and expressing was seen as ‘manly’ and normal. It involves bottling things and being tough; being hard, lary and keeping emotions down. IDLES want to speak out against that and show how stupid that way of life is. They manage to perform music that has spit and plenty of grunt without subscribing to that notion a band needs to be all about sex, violence and promoting bad messages. They have vulnerability and sensitivity but mix that with youthful, everyday and relatable subjects.

Not only is their music and lyrics packed with depth, humour and intelligence but the band seem like the genuine deal. It has been many years since Punk died and there are very few modern bands that match the energy and inspiration of the past masters. Whilst few of the Punk bands of the 1970s talked about anything emotive or vulnerable; their music and electric spirit captured a mood and there was that rebellion – the ability to ignore crowds and strike a chord. A lot of modern bands are producing music that fits into the mainstream and does not really stand out. Aside from bands like IDLES and Goat Girl; Shame and Wolf Alice; I wonder how many groups have genuine personality, depth and resonance. It has been years since artists like Madonna and Michael Jackson ignited the scene and compelled people with their personality and incredible music. There was something at once edgy and revealing that stood them out and means, this many years down the line, we think of them and keep them in the mind. Modern Pop and R&B has some inspiring artists but I am rarely compelled by what I hear on the radio and T.V. Those genuine personalities and characters are fewer than they used to be and I wonder whether we are too spoiled and less concerned with vigour and true depth – too distracted and involved in technology to look up.

IN THIS PHOTO: Madonna/PHOTO CREDIT: Luigi & Iango for Harper's Bazaar

Maybe there is a definition difference between ‘edgy’ and ‘soulful’. This article, where the author recounts experiences of the 1990s compared to today seems to back my general thoughts:

“Compare how people partied back then to how people party now, you'd think the '90s partying was conservative. Let's not forget American Pie of all great things, creating the word "MILF" as well. Things were peachy in retrospect; the driving force was teenage angst and that's how great the '90s were. We could afford to have the countries main musical reflection be because of teenagers being teenagers, not because we had war or the country was in a major economic slope. Nirvana, Offspring, Pearl Jam, Sublime all appealed to the rebelling youth emotionally, and because you could smoke to them all. As baffled as I am, things were entirely great, plus I was born. America was a Triple-A economic powerhouse, eventually being led by Bill Clinton leading just the very beginning of what would dramatically change the next generation; the technological evolution”.

I would not go as far to say modern music is boring and lacks soul but it seems like there are few artists talking about things that matter today in a meaningful and interesting manner. There are artists fighting against the Government and evil in the world but most artists tend to speak from the heart and write in many familiar and safe ways.

PHOTO CREDIT: Unsplash

Perhaps we will never see true icons and decades-enduring artists emerge but I wonder whether music has lost its fun, edge and force. Alongside the promising R&B/Pop artists and new bands; how often do you listen to a song or see an artist play and are genuinely moved and stunned? I started my looking at IDLES because you can never accuse them of being boring. There is so much to their work and they have so much heart and soul to go alongside the brilliant songs and sweat. Bands, once the reliable source of rebel, fascination and drama, have become a little restrained. There is invention and great albums being released but the sense of cool and swagger seems to have gone. Maybe it is still here but seems less real and exciting as it did years ago. It is a strange time where we have all sorts of artists, sounds and options available. The industry is as varied as it has ever been but there is not much brightness and boldness among the beige and lacklustre. It goes back to my feature regarding icons and whether the market encourages artists to make a difference and speak out. I listen to a lot of music but I rarely see interviews (or listen to them) and are hooked by what is being said; listening to songs and feeling here is a hero/heroine that is saying something new and compelling. The only real idol we have – who has been performing since the 1990s – is Beyoncé, I would say, and that seems rather sad.

IN THIS PHOTO: Beyoncé/PHOTO CREDIT: Mark Pillai for L'Officiel (2011)

Like Aretha Franklin; Beyoncé is more than an artist who performs her songs and that is it: she is an activist and modern-day figure who wants to inspire generations and, as such, is fascinating to watch. I love a lot of her R&B peers and, whilst I think their music has edge and firepower; I am not overly-drawn to the person behind the songs. Do a quick Internet search – asking questions around music’s lost cool, magic ad substance – and there are articles that look at older artists and what is coming through now. I understand how hard it is being unique and saying something real and fitting into the modern scene. So many artists have to compromise and watch what they say. Mainstream artists of the past had to follow rules and watch what they say but you did get those genuine articles who whipped up a storm and caused eyebrows to raise. Can you see that happening in the modern market? Music is always interesting and meaningful but there are far fewer characters and creators putting genuine enticing and enigmatic albums; we do not have many bands that can get the eyes widened and linger long in the memory. I wonder why there are few willing to take risks and turn their noses against the rather controlled, conservative and conventional music scene.

PHOTO CREDIT: Unsplash

I think we owe it to those musical pioneers and icons to look at modern music and encourage free spirit and excitement. I am being rather harsh on modern music and I know full well there are exceptional writers and performers who are doing wonderful things. Aside from the odd band and solo artist; so little of today’s market and offering blows my mind and get my standing up, excited by what is coming from the speaker. IDLES are a small example of a band that can have fun and genuinely rally against the ordinary but deliver a potent and emotional truth. The music world has so many brilliant artists doing great things but I think a lot are holding themselves back and not exploring their full potential because they fear commercial backlash and criticism. We are becoming safer and more scared to be bold and create these fantastic and original artists – talking about politics, sex and modern life in a very fascinating and new way. Maybe it is impossible to reverse reality and modern music so we can please everyone and set the world alight. Music has changed vastly over the years and, like it or not, what we hear now is how much will sound and fare for many years to come. I can accept that but long to discover artists who break rules and the mould and stick their tongue out – where have all the pioneers, big personalities and rebels gone?! I have not lost all hope but, as I listen to older music more than what is coming out now, I yearn to see the day when we see something interesting and inspirational…

 IN THIS PHOTO: Unsplash

BACK in the music industry.

FEATURE: The Second Summer of Love: Thirty Years On: Its Controversy and Headiness – and Whether a Third Summer of Love Is Possible

FEATURE:

 

 

The Second Summer of Love: Thirty Years On

IN THIS PHOTO: Spectrum in Jubilee Gardens (6th June, 1988)/PHOTO CREDIT: Time Out/Getty Images

Its Controversy and Headiness – and Whether a Third Summer of Love Is Possible

__________

IT seems each Summer of Love…

IN THIS PHOTO: A crowd of hippies during the Summer of Love in 1967/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

involves a degree of excess and controversy! Not many of us were alive in the 1960s when there was that viewpoint of hippies joining together and a certain amount of 'experimentation' and free love ruling the scene. Artists like The Beatles, and Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band (1967), seemed to soundtrack something extraordinary and unusual – a unity and community that we do not often associate with the modern world. It may sound idealistic to suggest that Summer of Love as all perfect and countercultural. There was some violence and the drug-taking courted enough media focus. Against warfare and political tensions; it seemed like there was that hunger and desperation for a more peaceful and ‘relaxed’ lifestyle. Maybe it was a bit of a dream and ambition that did not properly define what the 1960s was all about. I only hear about the 1960s’ Summer of Love through photos and archive footage but I am always supportive of any movement, however brief, that provides chance for people to bond and detach from the starkness of the world. The music coming from that time was as experimental and blissful as the substances that were being ingested; the recklessness and lack of consequences. It may seem like I am bagging that time but the colour, music and spirit that was in the air captured something.

The spirit and sense of freedom being exposed and explored helped lead, through a few decades of separation, a second Summer of Love. It happened in 1998 and was a little different to the 1960s’ version. The 1980s’ incarnation has different music and drugs of choice. I keep coming back to that subject of drugs but, as I shall explore, it, again, became the centre of the media’s attention. Maybe acid was the ruling muse then – whereas pot and acid, in combination, was dominant in the 1960s – but the music was the biggest difference. A lot of celebrations will happen next week that look back at that time when, once more, the nation was together and something incredible was in the air. Whereas the Summer of Love extended to America back in the 1960s; the raves and Acid music (House and Dance, too) seemed to be a particularly British thing. Britpop was years away and, after during a time when Margaret Thatcher was in charge and there as so much division around. If you are foreign to how the 1988-started movement captured the nation; here is a rundown from Mixmag:

“In 1988 a seismic change occurred in British society. It was caused not by a violent insurrection, demonstrations in Trafalgar Square or shadowy forces manipulating social media. The source of this bloodless revolution was a bunch of records from Chicago, Detroit and New York, a love drug called ecstasy and a load of potty youngsters doing the St Vitus Dance.

The hippie original may have been way back in ’67, but dance music’s Summer of Love was 30 years ago, an explosion whose shockwaves are still now rippling out across the world. It changed the fashion, the drugs, the clubs, the politics and the high times.

 IN THIS PHOTO: Danny Rampling at Shoom, 1988/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

“…The music of that period became known as acid house, but it’s a shorthand for wildly divergent sounds that range from funky pop records played by Alfredo in Amnesia to Detroit techno, Chicago house, New York garage and even hip hop. In 1988 this music combined with a powerful new narcotic to create arguably the most far-reaching and long lasting youth cult we’ve ever seen. It was the year that British youth discovered how to turn on, tune in and drop one.

Suddenly, all previous certainties melted away like a pill dissolving on the tongue. A new era was afoot. It was all about giving it a go and not giving a fuck. Gas fitters became DJs, aircraft personnel became record label owners, bank managers jacked it in to run clubs. Everyone was an impresario, everyone knew someone who’d made a tune. Qualifications? Fuck ’em. All you needed was the gift of the gab and a set of decks”.

To be a part of this new movement and scene; you did not need any qualifications and expertise. The somewhat grey and ordinary scene of 1988 – when music was not at its peak – was causing a lot of youngsters to feel isolated and purposeless. Suddenly, there was this wave of mind-opening music and spaces where everyone could congregate and lose themselves. The soundtrack – which I shall explore later – seemed to open doors and change things. I was a child in 1988 but was already aware there was not a lot to get excited about during that period. Each city had its clan of D.J.s who were bringing music to the people. Liverpool had Andy Carroll and Mike Knowler; there was Graeme Park in Nottingham and Nightmares on Wax in Leeds. London has Colin Faver and Eddie Richards whereas clubs like Asylum became hotbeds for this new expression and freedom. We look back at the 1960s and drugs that were circulated during the first Summer of Love. Whereas a lot of club experiences before 1988 involved hostility and drunken recklessness; ecstasy came in and seemed to change everything – something Mixmag reflects on in their article

“There was another magical ingredient that had turned house music from a fad to a phenomenon: ecstasy. “Ecstasy was the accelerator,” says writer Matthew Collin. “Ecstasy was the drug that bound people together. It didn’t create the music, but it did help to create a community around it. And it gave it that passionate intensity. Of course, there would have been an electronic dance music culture without it, but it definitely wouldn’t have happened in the same way.” Once they’d been thrown together, it seemed as blindingly obvious as two parts hydrogen and one part oxygen”.

PHOTO CREDIT: Dave Swindells and Gavin Watson

There was confusion as to the extent of drug-taking behaviour; many were actually taking acid as it was cheaper and more available than E. The new Summer of Love was disconnected with Margaret Thatcher’s Britain and gave a voice to a generation that felt like they were being ignored and shunned. Thatcher did not speak for them and represent Britain how they viewed it. These D.J.s, clubs and songs seemed to emancipate the masses and, as with any great movement, create a wedge. There were the conservative and stuffy clans that turned their noses up and felt the new Summer of Love was all about drugs and disregard for the authorities. There were iconic spots coming up that have lived in the memory and we still talk about today:

“In Manchester the resident DJ at The Haçienda’s Friday night, Mike Pickering, had been playing house since the first releases on Trax in 1985. By 1988 he had built the night into one of the strongest in the city. Then ecstasy arrived. “We were going to The Haçienda before it all kicked off,” recalls clubber Catherine Obi. “And then we walked in one weekend in our normal club outfits – black tights, DMs, MA1 bomber jackets – but people were all in T-shirts, sweating. I was like, ‘What the fuck is going on?’ Within a month we’d had our first pill and we were just loving it. It was very, very strange how quickly it switched. It was like mass hysteria. But that was what was so good about it. All of a sudden it was like, ‘oh my god, look – everyone’s in it together! One nation under a groove’”.

PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

I will talk about the legacy of the 1980s’ Summer of Love but the scene was always threatened. U.K. laws made after-hours clubbing challenging and there was the fear that police raids and surveillance would compromise the fun and longevity. A lot of clubs were sprouting around the M25 and there was easy access to the countryside and city. It was easy for people to drive to raves and become part of something exceptional. The intensity of the raves and parties meant the scene died down when the 1990s came around; it was harder to license big parties and the media scandalisation created moral panic and Government uproar. The media’s uproar and the obsessive tabloid coverage meant the Summer of Love would close down. Writing in 1998, The Independent spoke with Adamski about his experiences and what defined the times:

“Adamski was one of the first to perform house music live. "NRG" was a top 20 hit in 1989; 1990 saw his collaboration with singer Seal, "Killer", reach number one. His new album, `Adamski's Thing', is released on 27 October. His daughter Bluebell sings on one of the tracks.

"Acid house suited me: I loved partying, l loved taking drugs, I loved music that sounded good when I was on drugs. Some gay friends took me to Ibiza in 1988. And I popped my first E there. From then on it was wild, hedonistic. My hits provided me with a lot of disposable income and fuelled the drug-taking. I'd spend a few hundred quid every weekend. I went to Thailand, Goa, Glastonbury ... potentially spiritual places, but all I can remember was being off my nuts. I'd mix everything with E: acid, charlie, vodka. I would shag everyone in sight, male or female. My seven-year-old daughter, Bluebell, is a love child from that era. I met her mum at a boat party. We bonded over chemicals. [They split up in 1991 and Bluebell lives with Adam]”.

PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

The Summer of Love was a revolution and revelation for those who were in boring jobs and wanted to break free. The struggling economy and a Government run by Margaret Thatcher was not designed for a lot of youths who were ignored and not part of her plans. The great music and legendary D.J.s provided a temple and safe space for those who wanted to be with their tribe and feel loved. That almost-spiritual connection between person and the music was, in many ways, aided and heightened by drugs. Maybe we associated E and acid with that time and feel it is the reason why things came to a halt. Were it not for a certain ‘inspiration’ one could argue we would not have seen such media coverage. That coverage brought the Summer of Love to the majority and showed there was this new movement who did not want to be part of the Thatcher-ruled Britain.  Whether you see that as good or bad; one cannot deny the necessity and influence of the Summer of Love that happened in the 1980s. I shall leave it to Mixmag to talk about the legacy of the movement:

PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

“But the Summer of Love was in no way a failure. It changed our views on sexuality, race and class. As Genesis promoter Wayne Anthony says: “It would have taken decades and decades of awareness campaigns to bring us all together. MDMA did more for multiculturalism than anything the government has ever done.” Acid house influenced advertising, film-making and art. It worried governments so much they introduced legislation to control it. It terrified breweries to the point where they introduced hilariously lurid alcopops to tempt kids back to booze. It transformed city centres and ushered in a new era of late-night licensing. It changed the way pop music was consumed. It changed pop itself.

What happened yesterday is what has allowed us to make today better, and the future bright. The values of the Summer of Love continue to influence a generation of young clubbers who are actively engaged in club politics, from the rights of transgender dancers to safe spaces for women, and whose activism has also been instrumental in the mushrooming of female DJs on our scene – nowadays some festivals have a 50/50 gender booking policy. Unthinkable in 1988”.

There are good and bad parts of the Summer of Love – much like the original in the 1960s – and it would be unfair to say it was a fad or ill-conceived revolt.

It was less about rebelling against boredom as it was creating a platform and space for those who felt isolated and lost. The music and innovators that came out during that time have influenced music today and I feel, like 1967 and 1988, there is a need for something in the air. The nation, again, is under a Tory rule and there is more isolation and division, arguably, then those two time periods. Music, now, does not have a singular movement of life-force that defines the time and unites people. There is this division and segregation; so many loose threads of scenes that have not woven themselves into a cohesive and colourful whole. The drug laws and rules would be huge and strict but you need not have a scene that is defined by drugs. Maybe it would be hard to have that much fun if it were not for stimulants and excess. You could have alcohol and some fun but it is important not to create a movement where the law and Government are clamping in from the very off! There are great D.J.s who could fuse elements of the two Summer of Loves and create new and exciting music. We have great clubs out there and I feel 2018 or 2019 would be a perfect backdrop. There is a lot more music and variety now than back in 1988 and the options are open for artists and D.J.s to create their own soundtracks.

PHOTO CREDIT: Dave Swindells

I feel there is more dissent and stress circulating than any other time in recent times. The mainstream does not have a Britpop-like force that will unify us and bring something joyful. The bliss and reaction we need will come from the underground and the clubs. Whether a third Summer of Love involves House music or something retro; a modern reworking of Dance or something completely new – there is a chance to mix things up and go wild. That wildness can be through creativity and music but there is always going to be the risk of drugs and drink playing a part. I am not condoning it but it is arguable the other two Summer of Loves would not have spread and caught on like wildfire were it not for substance. Everyone feels the strain of modern-day Britain and I think something accessible could be created so music lovers of all tastes could unite and enjoy. We often look to the mainstream for that massive inspiration but I feel, when it comes to something blissful and pure, there is not the talent and mindset available to initiate such grandeur and credibility. As we celebrate the 1988 Summer of Love and all it gave to music, good and bad, it makes me think, thirty years down the line, it is a prime time for…

 PHOTO CREDIT: Matthew Smith/Rex/Shutterstoc

A third incarnation.

FEATURE: The #WHPowerList: Bringing the Influence of Women to the Next Generation

FEATURE:

 

 

The #WHPowerList

IMAGE CREDIT: BBC

Bringing the Influence of Women to the Next Generation

__________

I am never too far from the subject of women in music…

IN THIS PHOTO: Woman's Hour's Jane Garvey (who has interviewed various female artists/musical figures about their experiences)/PHOTO CREDIT: BBC

and ensuring I do all I can to promote their fine work. Not only do I publish regular all-female playlists and scathing looks at sexism in music – I am committed to being one of few male journalists tackling the subject regularly and asking what more can be done. It seems to me, a lot of the time, men are not talking with other men about the gulfs and issues that have plagued the music industry since time began! The exposure and availability of social media mean we are all aware of problems around gender rights but I wonder whether enough is being done (by men) to ask why attitudes pervade and, for no reason whatsoever, all the fantastic female talent across the music industry has to fight harder than the men. Maybe it is an ingrained attitude that suggests music and the arts is really a ‘man’s domain’. I have been compelled by Woman’s Hour’s Power List 2018 that seeks to define and highlight the most important and powerful women in music. Whether you feel artists like Florence Welch or D.J.s Jo Whiley are the most influential; producers like Catherine Marks or great female journalists in the mainstream – it is a chance to have your say and get involved. What, then, is the concrete and foundations of the Power List?

“The Woman’s Hour 2018 Power List will recognise the Top 40 most successful women having an impact on the music we’re all listening to – whether that’s on radio, vinyl or streaming services.

 IMAGE CREDIT: BBC

This won’t be a list of who’s sold the most records, or who’s making the most money. We're seeking out women who are demonstrating power in the industry, innovators and ground-breakers supporting and championing the work of other women or changing the industry from within – making it more equal, diverse and creative and an even more exciting business to work in”.

It is impressive and overdue such a commemoration and time for activism has come about. I hope the results and build-up around the Power List will prick some ears and, as ever, highlight the sexism and divides in music. I am always writing about the topic but feel my (meagre) voice is not capable of projecting real gravitas and impetus. The women judging this year’s Power List include columnist Jasmine Dotiwala and producer Catherine Marks; singer-songwriter Kate Nash and radio presenter Tina Daheley. It is an exciting and expert panel who will be able to look through the nominations and pick the most influential and powerful women in music. Power, essentially, does not have to mean business acumen and financial stock: a political voice or constantly intrepid songwriter is just as striking; producers and journalists who champion women’s music or muscle alongside the men in the industry are worthy of nomination. It is amazing that, in 2018, we are still four years off music festivals pledging a fifty-fifty gender split in terms of performers.

I will come onto festivals later but there have been a couple of changes. This year’s events like the Cambridge Folk Festival have given larger spotlight for women; in America, the 2018 Philadelphia Folk Fest has become the first to provide that desired balance:

“Keychange, led by the PRS Foundation and supported by the Creative Europe program of the European Union, is an international campaign which invests in emerging female talent by encouraging music festivals to sign up to a 50/50 gender balance pledge by 2022.

Nordell said the Philadelphia Folksong Society sort of bent the pledge’s rules for this year’s festival — by going over the 50/50 margin. The lineup is made up of 55 percent women acts, and all of the headliners (Patty Griffin, Valerie June and Wynonna Judd), are women.

“The Philadelphia Folk Festival is all about coming together and appreciating music and one another,” Nordell  (Justin Nordell, executive director of the Philadelphia Folksong Society) said. “It is open to anyone of any particular race, creed, beliefs or what have you”.

It is amazing to think we have to highlight festivals when they provide equal footing for men and women – given the sheer scope and ability of women in the industry. There are a number of reasons why I feel the Woman’s Hour Power List needs greater oxygen...

IN THIS IMAGE: The judges for the Power List 2018/IMAGE CREDIT: BBC

I still think there are those gender divides: women are fighting and promoting rights for women but how many men are getting involved and joining the fight?! I do not think there is deliberate segregation; a time for actual unity and productive discussion is paramount. When talking about the Power List; BBC Radio 3 presenter Suzy Klein had her say:

“Music is pretty far behind lots of other businesses and industries. I think less than half of people in the music business work in a place where there’s any kind of equality drive, which is far lower than other sectors.” She added: “I think progress has been happening but at a slightly Jurassic pace. Some of the things, like Marin Alsop conducting The Last Night of the Proms obviously helps. It shouldn’t be a big deal…but for that to have only happened in the 21st century! Come on!”

For me, personally, the reason I am keen to undress the debate and reveal the women making a big impact in music is because of the past and current influence they have on me. I am a big radio fan and can see the imbalance that seems inexplicable. I am a listener of BBC Radio 6 Music and see, aside from a racial imbalance, there is a big majority of men on the station. The women on the station, including Lauren Laverne and Mary Anne Hobbs, are among the most passionate voices. They are keen to promote new musicians, have that deep love for what they do and, if anything, are more striking and resonant than their male peers – the fact there are no female drivetime presenters on the station is worrying.

IN THIS PHOTO: BBC Radio 1 D.J. Annie Mac/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

The same goes for BBC Radio 2. I love the likes of Claudia Winkleman and Sara Cox and, the latter, especially, gives me such a buzz and sense of warmth. Cox is the only reason I really tune into the station. She presents a 1980s music show and always leaves a much greater impression than anyone on the station – her bonhomie, witty and connection with the listener leads me to believe she would be perfect for primetime BBC Radio 2. I am a massive fan of Annie Mac and have been listening to her for years. In terms of sheer passion and the knowledge she has…there is nobody like her. I cannot think of a more skilled and essential D.J. in music right now. I have voted for her in the Woman’s Hour poll and know Mac speaks out against sexism and the role of women in music. Jo Whiley, when talking about the Woman’s Power List had her views where we need to make improvements:

“Education is where it should all start really, that message should be put out there straight away. If girls want to work in any different area of the music industry, they should be told which colleges to go to, to start really young and be tenacious.” She is hopeful the Power List will achieve some change in this direction. She says: “I want my daughter to think she could head up a record label sometime or she could be a music producer in the studio. That’s what I want young girls to aspire to, not just to be on Pop Idol”.

I think education, or lack thereof, is a big issue. A lot of musical education involves paying for tuition and something that happens a little later in life. We ingrain useless information into children and give them lessons they are not going to carry through life. I feel sex education needs to be modernised and a little bolder; a General Studies course that talks about racism, politics and everyday subjects – music definitely needs to be a mandatory core.

The fact we have just celebrated Madonna’s sixtieth birthday and mourned the loss of Aretha Franklin shows how much respect those women hold. Both are very different but they are icons who have shaped music. I feel children coming through school need to know about them and their peers; producers and D.J.s who have changed the game; businesswomen and spokespeople who have asked for change and are electioneering on a daily basis. I would not be as interested in music and its awe-inspiring power were it not for women. Kate Bush is an idol and someone I am endlessly fascinated by; Björk is one of those musicians who continues to change music and innovate over twenty years after her debut album. I can rattle off countless names (of female artists) who have inspired me and the current flock who warrant great respect. The same goes for women in every corner of the industry – not only recording artists and those we see on stage. We go through our days and listen to music but do we really think about what happens behind the scenes and the gap between male and female artists? Mabel, daughter of Neneh Cherry and Cameron McVey feels a safe space for female artists is the business is a good step:

“I would love to start some kind of safe space where females can collaborate, like a studio, where you can do what you want and experiment.” She described it as a “liberating moment” when she realised another woman’s success did not mean her downfall”.

IN THIS PHOTO: Musician and songwriter Jorja Smith/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

We never really celebrate women in music the same way as we do with men. We all know about the rich, stadium-filling male artists who get admiration and are seen as the biggest in the game. They have all the money and they get the majority of the press attention. The access of online music sites means we are seeing more female-made songs and news articles getting out there. Internet radio stations are spreading the love and, as great as that is, is it translating into industry change and genuine pledges?! A lot of female-fronted bands, like Wolf Alice and Chvrches, find interviewers treat them differently (to their male support) and see them as a curiosity. Look a festival floors and line-ups and it is still male-heavy. I am happy there are small changes happening and greater discussion happening. I think a lot of the mandates and promises are far too weak and insincere. Festivals, here, have pledged to create a gender balance by 2022 – why does it take four years to do something so simple?! The talent is out there waiting to go and I am baffled why these changes cannot happen next year! Rising British talent like Stefflon Don and Jorja Smith have talked about finding confidence and what it is like being a woman in music. Look at the way a woman writes and how she articulates her emotions compared to that of a man. I get something very primal, pure and long-lasting regarding female songwriting. We know most of the chart hits out there today are written and produced by men – this is something that needs to change.

IMAGE CREDIT: Getty Images

There is a lot more to talk about but we all know the truth: there is a huge way to go before there was equality and parity. I have written extensively on the subject of gender rights and would like nothing more than celebrate women’s rights and music on Woman’s Hour or a similar format. I feel there are not enough men coming through and do struggle to figure out why. The Power List is a rare chance to put women in the spotlight and look at the vast array of inspiring and strong creatives who are relatively unsung and making an enormous contribution. Head over to https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0695d4c and have a look and listen to all the great videos and article about the Power List 2018. I am eager to hear the results and what happens once they are out there in the ether. I hope there is a rolling of the ball that leads to genuine change and greater involvement from men – not hiding away and assuming they do not need to alter their attitudes. Radio 1Xtra’s Jasmin Evans is among the selection of women who are giving their experiences and calling for greater understanding. It seems strange for a bloke to wade in so heavily but music is not one of those industries that is about gender and we are unsure how to integrate women in.

IN THIS PHOTO: BBC Radio 2 D.J.Jo Whiley/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

I often think of the army and how many women are held back from the frontline. The musical trenches and frontline are full of women striking and shooting hard and showing immense strength. If we deny their voices or assume it is the men who hold the most power and prestige then that will do irrevocable damage. Look at the Power List page and there are email addresses and Twitter handles where you can cast your voice and vote and talk about the women in music you want to see honoured. We have a long way to go but, if we have yearly polls and events like this, it will make a big difference and pass positive messages to the next generation. The lack of education regarding music and gender roles is something I hope is overturned and addressed. I have a (very) long list of the women, through time, that has led me to where I am now. We would all be so much poorer and emptier were it not for the women in music and all they have given – and all they continue to do. From behind mixing desks and inside studios; D.J.s and producers pushing great music to hungry ears to those artists campaigning and delighting the masses…we need to bring these stories and humans to the forefront. Maybe a fifty-fifty music society is a way off – if we can ever achieve that – but I am confident, with great vocalisation and intent, we can all help to create a fairer and more even business. Let’s get that ball rolling and let’s get it…

IN THIS PHOTO: BBC Radio 1Xtra D.J. Yasmin Evans/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

ROLLING now!