FEATURE: From a Landline in England… Revisiting the Joy of Kate Bush’s Woman’s Hour Interview

FEATURE:

 

 

From a Landline in England…

IN THIS PHOTO: Kate Bush in 1985/PHOTO CREDIT: Dave Hogan/Getty Images 

Revisiting the Joy of Kate Bush’s Woman’s Hour Interview

_________

I have been looking back…

IN THIS PHOTO: Woman’s Hour’s Emma Barnett

at Kate Bush interviews from through the years. I have been listening to a lot to interviews she gave to promote 2011’s 50 Words for Snow. There has not been a lot since then. The odd bit here and there. Whilst we have read updates from Kate Bush on her official website, we have not heard her voice a lot. In terms of interviews, there was a 2016 chat she had with Matt Everitt for BBC Radio 6 Music. That was when she discussed the live album of 2014’s Before the Dawn. We did not really know what would come after that. I am reminded now of a bombshell that happened on 22nd June, 2022. Just over two years ago, we were treated to hearing from Kate Bush once more. There was really no warning! I guess it is not a shock that she would have something to say about the success of Running Up That Hill (A Deal with God). Used on the Netflix series, Stranger Things, it went to number one in the U.K. Introducing Bush to a new generation of fans. Because of the new success, we heard Running Up That Hill (A Deal with God) played widely across radio. It is her most-streamed song. Perhaps the song that people associate with her. That defining moment. Given how there was very little audio from Kate Bush after 2016, we sort of assumed that, if she had anything to add to her website updates, she would do that in writing. We might get a printed interview with her. That would have bene a gift. Instead, and without much warning, there was this spoken interview. We take music interviews for granted. Artists do this all of the time. You get YouTube and Spotify interviews. Plenty of radio interviews. More than enough chance to hear an artist discuss their music. When you think about Kate Bush, there has been this real absence of interviews for about a decade or so. Of course, her voice has not changed that much. She is still the same warm and down to Earth human. Even though we might never get another filmed interview, just hearing her voice was a tantalising thought.

As we have just past the two-year anniversary of this huge moment, I wanted to spend some time with it. The interview was conducted by Emma Barnett for Woman’s Hour. I will drop in the interview below. You can also listen here. There was so much to unpack and enjoy. For a start, it was that suddenness. No real tease or huge build-up. We saw an announcement shortly before broadcast that Kate Bush would be talking with Woman’s Hour. Despite the fact there was no new album or anything like that, it was a joy imagining Kate Bush speaking at all! Few fans thought we would hear unless there was a new album. June 2022 was also during the pandemic. Still quite a tough time for us all. There was something unifying and uplifting knowing we would hear from Kate Bush. The main reason for the interview was to talk about Stranger Things. Bush having this chance to thank fans. How Running Up That Hill (A Deal with God) was this totemic moment in the episode. How it meant to much to Max. A song that saved a life. It resonated with fans. The genuine sense of pride and passion in Kate Bush’s voice as she thanked fans and the show’s creators! It was a smart choice speaking with Woman’s Hour. Rather than have a couple of minutes on another BBC station, this was a longer interview that was wonderful to hear. Genuine respect and love from Emma Barnett. I am not sure exactly where Kate Bush lives though, as it is her, there is that sense of the peaceful and English. A nice garden and home. Not that many mod cons I would imagine. Keeping things nice but fairly basic. One of the first things to note about the interview is that Kate Bush was speaking on a landline.

Almost obsolete, it is refreshing and typical that Kate Bush has a landline! She did explain how she had this old, brick-like mobile phone that she could make calls from. She did not want something modern because of the distracting nature. Checking emails on the go was not her style. Instead, she wanted to go outside and not have to feel at the mercy of a smartphone. Emma Barnett did not ask about a new album or material – a missed opportunity I feel -, though Kate Bush did say that she was spending a lot of time gardening. Many fans took this as a sign that she was retiring. As I pointed out when I discussed this interview in a previous feature, it is no shock that Bush enjoys gardening. It is not an activity solely for retired people. Bush grew up on East Wickham Farm and would have been gardening as a child and young woman. She gardened before making Hounds of Love. Something relaxing and an interest of her. Rather than it being a sign of slowing down, gardening is useful when it comes to creativity and rest. Caitlin Moran introduced the interview (there was this separate audio recording). She talked about Kate Bush. Bush talked about Stranger Things and how it was this great moment. Thinking that the whole world had gone mad because of the success of Running Up That Hill (A Deal with God), this whole new audience discovered her. I liked how Bush, when talking about the song, always felt that its title should be A Deal with God. She discussed how many of her songs had strange working titles. I would love to have known some of them! Bush said how she does not listen to her older music. Bush reiterated how her song was used in a very special place and was a powerful thing. Music has this way of touching people, as she said. Despite the fact Kate Bush was speaking on a landline, she said how today is a very exciting time because of the advances in technology. Emma Barnett praised how Bush was so far ahead of people she was in terms of studio technology. How Before the Dawn, her residency, was phone-free. Bush wanted there to be a strong connection between those in the audience and those on stage.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by BBC Woman's Hour (@bbcwomanshour)

So much to enjoy and adore about the interview. Throughout, Kate Bush sounded engaged and warm. Bush said how she spent a lot of her day on the laptop. That need for peace when she goes out. Emma Barnett said how there is WitchTok, a subset of TikTok, inspired by Bush’s look in the video for Babooshka – to which Bush laughed and said it sounds ridiculous! Even if it was not a hugely long interview, it was a compassionate and very heartwarming moment that we were not expecting. Emma Barnett said at the end of the interview how Kate Bush can come back anytime. She did say that at the very end of the interview. It would be incredible if that were to happen! I guess there would need to be a new album or something big for us to hear her voice again. Even so, two years ago, we got this amazing moment we didn’t really think would happen. From somewhere in England, on a landline, the legendary Kate Bush spoke with Woman’s Hour. Social media was awash with people saying how happy they were hearing Kate Bush’s voice. As humble and relatable as she was back in the 1970s, it was refreshing knowing that not a lot had changed. It also means there is an appetite for something more. We all really want to hear from Kate Bush again. A reason for that to happen. Until that happens – if it does at all! – go and listen to that Woman’s Hour interview. Kate Bush sharing her thoughts on Stranger Things and how it helped bring Running Up That Hill (A Deal with God) to the world. Getting this whole legion of new fans. I still think about the Woman’s Hour interview. Even though it was a fairly brief chat, it was this revelation and thing we never imagined. This treat for everyone. Hearing Kate Bush speak is almost therapeutic and calming. For that reason alone, we all hope that we can hear from Kate Bush…

VERY soon.

FEATURE: The Sony Walkman at Forty-Five: The Importance of the Original, and the Modern-Day Alternatives

FEATURE:

 

 

The Sony Walkman at Forty-Five

The Importance of the Original, and the Modern-Day Alternatives

_________

ON 1st July, 1979…

the world was introduced to a piece of music technology that would change the world. Released in Japan and eventually rolled out to the rest of the world, the Sony Walkman drastically altered how we would listen to music. In terms of portable devices, nothing before had come onto the market. It was a huge moment in the way in which we could listen to music on the move. One would think that, as it was released in 1979, the Sony Walkman would be hefty and heavy to carry around. That was not the case. Actually fairly lightweight and sleek, its design would be refined through the years. As it is forty-five today, I wanted to celebrate it, also looking at what is on the market today. It is an important anniversary. Forty-five years after the Sony Walkman came out, there is relevance discussing it. Cassettes are still around today. As I have said in previous features about the Sony Walkman: there are not really enough options to play them on. I am going to explore some buying options for those who want to play cassettes on the move. Can anything really compete with the simply iconic original Sony Walkman?! I think it is one of the most important moments in music history. Giving music fans that freedom and mobility. Even the transistor radio arrived well before the Sony Walkman and meant that people could listen to the radio portability, it did not really compare with the Sony Walkman. The privacy you get with a Sony Walkman. How you could listen to any album on it. Not something that was possible with the transistor radio. Before looking at the modern equivalents of the iconic Sony Walkman, here is some information about the fateful day, 1st July, 1979, when it went on sale:

“On July 1, 1979, the first personal stereo cassette player, called the Sony Walkman, debuts for sale. It would spark a revolution in portable electronics.

The transistor radio had been the first technological marvel to put music literally into consumers’ hands in the mid-1950s. It was cheap, it was reliable and it was portable, but it could never even approximate the sound quality of a record being played on a home stereo. It was, however, the only technology available to on-the-go music lovers until Walkman appeared.

The Sony Walkman didn’t represent a breakthrough in technology so much as it did a breakthrough in imagination. Every element of the Walkman was already in production or testing as part of some other device when Sony’s legendary chairman, Masaru Ibuka, made a special request in early 1979. Ibuka was a music lover who traveled frequently, and he was already in the habit of carrying one of his company’s “portable” stereo tape recorders with him on international flights. But the Sony TC-D5 was a heavy device that was in no way portable by modern standards, so Ibuka asked his then-deputy Norio Ohga if he could cobble together something better. Working with the company’s existing Pressman product—a portable, monaural tape recorder that was popular with journalists—Ohga had a playback-only stereo device rigged up in time for Ibuka’s next trans-Pacific flight.

Even though this proto-Walkman required large, earmuff-like headphones and custom-made batteries (which, of course, ran out on Ibuka midway through his flight), it impressed the Sony chairman tremendously with its sound quality and portability. Many objections were raised internally when Ibuka began his push to create a marketable version of the device, the biggest of which was conceptual: Would anyone actually buy a cassette device that was not for recording but only for playback? Ibuka’s simple response—”Don’t you think a stereo cassette player that you can listen to while walking around is a good idea?”—proved to be one of the great understatements in business history.

After a breakneck development phase of only four months, Sony engineers had a reliable product ready for market at 30,000 Yen (approximately US $150 in 1979 dollars) and available before the start of summer vacation for Japanese students—both critical targets established at the outset of development. The initial production run of 30,000 units looked to be too ambitious after one month of lackluster sales (only 3,000 were sold in July 1979). But after an innovative consumer-marketing campaign in which Sony representatives simply approached pedestrians on the streets of Tokyo and gave them a chance to listen to the Walkman, the product took off, selling out available stocks before the end of August and signaling the beginning of one of Sony’s greatest success stories”.

I have bemoaned the fact that we do not have the Sony Walkman today. It would be great if they were reissued now. With new demand for cassettes, I think there would be call to have a modern update of the Sony Walkman. If you want to buy a portable cassette player, there are options on Amazon. Even though there are some affordable options, most of them are quite expensive. I think that, if we are going to make it easier for people to listen to cassettes portably, then we need to ensure that devices are affordable. As you can see from this website, there are stylish options from £129. I think that this is quite a lot to pay. Half of that would be much more feasible. How many people are splashing out £129 on a portable cassette player?! There are options if you shop around. It does seem that cheaper options like this are burdened with poor sound quality and a cheap feel. You can get a decent portable cassette player for £100. There are cheaper options, though you are never sure of the quality. It is great that we have options and there is a range of price options. I do feel that the great Sony Walkman could make a return. Price itself at under £60, meaning it would be a good investment and affordable to many music fans. Have a range of colour options. Making it sleek and similar, in terms of buttons/fictions to the original. Making it sturdy, shockproof and ensuring that the sound quality is excellent would make it a success story. Rather than have to search around for a dependable, cool and sturdy portable cassette player, reintroducing the Sony Walkman would solve that quandary.

The Sony Walkman does exist in modern form. It is a device that plays digital music, so it is not about cassettes anymore. Maybe a feeling that people do not want to play cassettes. I like how the Sony Walkman evolved through the years. The original is relatively bulky and has a distinct look. That refinement occurred. The initial price was quite hefty. That eventually came down. I do feel that we have flexibility now. You can get something quite good looking that does not cost a fortune. If we are to have a modern equivalent of the Sony Walkman, there is a lot to consider. Making sure that it is environmentally friendly. A price that is as low as possible. Ensuring that it is tough and does have excellent sound quality. Many might say that, forty-five years after the introduction of the Sony Walkman, do we really need it now?! Something has gone out of music. That sharing culture. The mixtapes. I do feel there is a place for them today. Not something you hear much of now. Whilst there was a fear that the Sony Walkman would lead to more antisocial behaviour, it was also a bonding experience:

“Not everyone was on board with the Walkman though, public use of portable music devices was banned in Woodbridge, New Jersey in 1982 due to a rise in pedestrian accidents. Others had more ideological issues with the “isolating” and “detached” nature of the new private listening experience. However, Japanese professor Shuhei Hosokawa had a more positive outlook, describing the “Walkman effect” as giving listeners more control over their environment and more power in how they inhabit a space. Sony even preempted the potential for antisocial behaviour, giving earlier models a second headset jack, but demand for single-jack models turned out to be much higher.

Despite the moral panic around perceived antisocial behaviour, relationships were formed around the sharing of mixtapes, the forerunner to the modern-day Spotify playlist, marking a moment in consumer culture where listeners took control over what they heard and in what order. This individuality that the Walkman introduced paved the way for now ubiquitous tech like laptops and mobile phones, becoming the first piece of personal tech to be seen as cool to walk around with.

While the rise of the iPod, mobile phones and streaming services may have posed challenges for Walkman devices, Sony has sold over 400 million units across multiple platforms from cassette to CD, mini disc and MP3 since the first Walkman in 1979. The original Walkman cassette players with their clunky buttons and oversized headphones stand as one of the prevailing images of the 80s and 90s and one of the biggest music listening, tech and lifestyle shifts before or since. Monsutā will be back with another Japanese Icon in a couple of weeks. Until then, crack open a can of Monsutā, and don’t forget your headphones”.

On 1st July, 1979, the Sony Walkman went on sale. It changed everything. The start of portable music listening beyond the transistor radio. We would then get C.D. players, MP3 devices and the iPod. It can all be traced back to the Sony Walkman. On its forty-fifth anniversary, I wanted to look at its introduction, but also investigate what is available on the market now. The modern equivalents. There are choices for those who want to keep playing cassettes. I do hope that, one day, we get the Sony Walkman back. There would be demand. When you think about the Sony Walkman, there is no underestimating…

HOW important it was.

FEATURE: The Digital Mixtape: Courtney Love at Sixty

FEATURE:

 

 

The Digital Mixtape

PHOTO CREDIT: Juergen Teller

Courtney Love at Sixty

_________

ON 9th July…

the legendary Courtney Love turns sixty. The lead of Hole, here is someone who is a pioneer and hugely influential artist. There will be a lot written about Love ahead of her sixtieth birthday. A remarkable artist who has influenced so many others, Courtney Love was an artist I connected with as a teenager. In the 1990s, when male bands were the preference and women were as worthy but not getting the same attention, Hole made a big impact. Their second studio album, Live Through This, and the 1998 follow-up, Celebrity Skin, established Hole as one of the bands of their generation. Their latest album, Nobody’s Daughter, was released in 2010. Courtney Love also released the solo album, America’s Sweetheart, in 2004. She is someone who has made a distinct and enormous impression on music. I will come to a playlist in a minute of her solo and Hole work. Maybe I am repeating a previous feature. Though, as she is sixty soon, it is worth revisiting. Before getting to the playlist, this biography gives us some detail and key information about the peerless Courtney Love:

"Love her or loathe her, the opinionated, brutally straightforward, and seemingly always controversial Courtney Love is one of the most notable figures in alternative rock. Born on July 9, 1964 in San Francisco, CA, Love was raised in Oregon. As a teen, Love began listening to new wave and punk, musical styles that would influence her band Hole. After traveling to countries like Ireland, Japan, and England, Love moved to Los Angeles, CA. In 1986, Love appeared as Nancy Spungen's best friend in Sid and Nancy, director Alex Cox's film about Sex Pistols bassist Sid Vicious and his lover Spungen. Love was also cast in Cox's Straight to Hell. Neither picture brought Love the stardom that she craved. Love then relocated to Minneapolis, MN, and formed the all-female post-punk group Babes in Toyland with Kat Bjelland. Bjelland eventually tossed her out of the band. After working as a stripper in Alaska, Love returned to Los Angeles and started Hole in 1989 with Eric Erlandson (guitar), Jill Emery (bass), and Caroline Rue (drums). Hole released their debut album, Pretty on the Inside, in 1991.

A year later, Love married Nirvana frontman Kurt Cobain. Rumors of drug use between the two began surfacing in the press, and a Vanity Press article revealed that Love was using heroin while she was pregnant with their daughter, Frances Bean Cobain. In April 1994, Kurt Cobain committed suicide; two months later, new Hole bassist Kristen M. Pfaff died from a heroin overdose. Although it was recorded before those personal tragedies, Hole's second album, the ironically titled Live Through This, captured the searing pain and violent anger of somebody undergoing a tragic loss. Rumors persisted that Cobain co-wrote a large portion of the album, a claim that Love vehemently denied despite claims to the contrary by many of Cobain's closest friends. No concrete evidence was ever released to back those claims, and she maintained a semi-professional relationship with his former bandmates by forming a partnership with them called Nirvana L.L.C. The organization would control all Nirvana-related releases and try to protect the interests of the three parties, but strife between Love and the rest of the band developed through nasty press comments made by both sides.

Meanwhile, Hole released Celebrity Skin in 1998, but the album came nowhere near the popularity of her previous effort. Despite the band's best promotional efforts (which Courtney dove headfirst into, as always), sales were discouraging enough for bandmembers to start dropping off, essentially dissolving the group while her acting career was taking off. In 1999, Love was nominated for a Golden Globe for her performance in the movie The People vs. Larry Flynt. She would stay relatively quiet for a few years, making a few film appearances and bragging up various projects with Louise Post and Kat Bjelland that never surfaced. But when former Nirvana members Krist Novoselic and Dave Grohl announced a 45-song Nirvana retrospective that would include two never released tracks, Love immediately brought them to court in an attempt to wrestle away the rights to the material. Manager/boyfriend Paul Barber tried to become the peacekeeper in the situation, even showing up at the studio for the mixdown of one of the unreleased songs. But Love moved to dissolve Nirvana L.L.C. and managed to stop the release of the album until the matter could be brought to court. The box set was aborted and the three individuals began to hype the upcoming court hearings like a boxing match, inviting the press out and making sharp barbs at one another in interviews. She announced her intentions to spearhead a Nirvana "greatest-hits" album à la the Beatles' 1, and claimed that she had hundreds of home tapes to go through and a journal that she planned on publishing.

Love also began to speak out on musicians' rights, suing her record company and bringing to light unfair business practices on the part of the industry. She began making her interviews and speeches platforms for her newfound cause, and created quite a stir at the South by Southwest Music Conference in the spring of 2002 when she directly announced her intentions of starting a music industry revolution. All that was forthcoming, however (beside more eccentric publicity), was a solo album, 2004's America's Sweetheart, released on Virgin. The following year she began working on new songs, despite battling an alleged eating disorder and a stay in rehab after violating her probation by using drugs. Working with artists including producer Linda Perry, Billy Corgan, and guitarist Micko Larkin, formerly of Larrikin Love, the album Nobody's Daughter began to take shape over 2006 and 2007. In mid-2009, Love announced that Nobody's Daughter would in fact be a Hole album. She began promoting the album in earnest in early 2010, performing shows in Europe and the U.S. -- including gigs at SXSW and on The Late Show with David Letterman -- before its release”.

To salute Courtney Love ahead of her sixtieth birthday on 9th July, I felt it only right to showcase her incredible songwriting. She is one of the most magnetic leads in music history. I am a big fan of her. A truly iconic artist. If you are new to Courtney Love and Hole or have not heard their music for a while then reacquaint and familiarise yourself. You can hear and feel just how important she is. Here’s to the…

AMAZING Courtney Love.

FEATURE: Taking Pride: Has Culture and the Music Landscape Changed So L.G.B.T.Q.I.A.+ Artists Can Fully Express Themselves?

FEATURE:

 

 

Taking Pride

IN THIS PHOTO: Chappell Roan/PHOTO CREDIT: Jade Greene for NYLON

Has Culture and the Music Landscape Changed So L.G.B.T.Q.I.A.+ Artists Can Fully Express Themselves?

_________

AS someone born in the 1980s…

PHOTO CREDIT: Barcelos_fotos/Pexels

who grew up with the music of the 1990s, a few things were very clear. One of those very visible and obvious aspects was that the music landscape was vastly heterosexual. There were artists who identified as gay or bisexual though, especially when it came to mainstream artists, there was far more secretive exclusion. Songs written from a heterosexual point of view. Maybe not explicit all of the time, the narrative through the decades has been that music is for heterosexual artists. That is what is seen as normal and fashionable. Artists like George Michael writing songs about being in relationships with women. How much stigma was there involved coming out? I realise that there is still some now, yet I feel there has been progress. You did have heterosexual artists toying with the notions of flirting with the opposite sex. Really, there were not that many out and proud artists. I don’t think that the culture and conversations happening at the time made it possible. This continued until relatively recent. Not only was it a case of L.G.B.T.Q.I.A.+ artists not being able to be free and true to themselves. There were fewer in the mainstream than there should have been. Perhaps seeing that the industry was not going to support and accept them. As it is Pride Month – the final day of -, it is important to look at how things have shifted. I will end with a thought that some have asked. That relates to whether we have a modern-day L.G.B.T.Q.I.A.+ icon. If you think of the most popular artists at the moment, we can not see too many examples. Are there still restrictions about artists’ sexuality and the type of songs played. Even if radio stations play gay anthems and tracks from L.G.B.T.Q.I.A.+ artists, most of these acts are not as celebrated as others. I do think that things need to improve in that sense.

Even if there are many negatives about music and how we digest it, the fact we have access to so many tracks with no wait means we can discover so many great artists. There are playlists like this that feature an array of queer artists. There are articles highlighting L.G.B.T.Q.I.A.+ artists to watch out for. It is wonderful that there is this exposure and celebration. Still, at the highest level of music, we do not have a Pride icon and mainstream star that can inspire and give strength to the next generation. Big artists who are near the top who do this already – Billie Eilish is one example -, though I feel even the playing of L.G.B.T.Q.I.A.+ songs is not as widespread as it should be. Even so, there are fewer restrictions. Artists like Reneé Rapp coming through and showing one day she will be an icon held in the same esteem of some of the biggest artists around. Things are changing. As Billboard wrote, this year’s GRAMMYs saw some historic wins for L.G.B.T.Q.I.A.+ artists:

“But one such historic moment went quietly overlooked on Sunday night — three of the winners in the Big Four categories were queer women. Cyrus’s record of the year win with “Flowers,” Billie Eilish’s song of the year win for “What Was I Made For?” and Victoria Monét’s best new artist win mark the first time in recent memory that three different LGBTQ artists took home trophies in the evening’s main categories.

“It’s huge,” says Anthony Allen Ramos, vice president of communications and talent at LGBTQ advocacy organization GLAAD. “Seeing LGBTQ women dominate three of the biggest categories is something to be really excited about and proud of, especially today.”

Wins for queer artists weren’t confined to the evening’s big categories, either — LGBTQ artists earned wins across a multitude of genres. Boygenius, the supergroup made up of queer superstars Julien Baker, Phoebe Bridgers and Lucy Dacus, took home three trophies for best rock performance, best rock song and best alternative music album; Bridgers, meanwhile, walked away as the most awarded artist of the night with her four wins. Monét nabbed a win for best R&B album with Jaguar II. Americana categories awarded trophies to LGBTQ stars like Allison Russell (best American roots performance for “Eve Was Black”), Brandy Clark and Brandi Carlile (both in best Americana performance for “Dear Insecurity”).

Ramos points out that even in oft-undiscussed categories, LGBTQ artists saw huge wins. “We had Carla Patullo winning for best new age, ambient or chant album,” he tells Billboard. “It felt like we finally had wonderful representation in all genres, and I think that’s really important, because it’s not just about [queer artists] being in pop or dance. I never even thought about having LGBTQ inclusion in the best new age category!”

Representation for LGBTQ talent at the Grammys has steadily risen over the last few years, with the Recording Academy even debuting their new Academy Proud initiative this year to help “support and amplify LGBTQIA+ voices and drive queer representation at the Recording Academy and the music industry at-large.”

These major successes for queer folks at the 2024 Grammys come at a time of upheaval for the LGBTQ+ community at large — nearly 400 bills targeting the community have already been proposed this year in state legislatures around the United States, with more no doubt still to come. While LGBTQ+ artists earning record-high honors at an awards show might seem trivial in the face of direct attacks against queer and trans people around the world, the facts actually show otherwise.

According to data collected by The Trevor Project, 79% of LGBTQ+ youth reported that seeing musicians come out as members of the LGBTQ+ community made them feel better about their own identity. Meanwhile, 71% of respondents said that seeing straight, cisgender celebrities advocate for the LGBTQ+ community improved their own feelings on gender and sexuality”.

Despite there still being a bit of a barrier or hesitation about giving L.G.B.T.Q.I.A.+ artists the same platform and spotlight as others, things have come a long way. We still need to do more work to ensure that the industry is a safe and accepting space. So that artists no longer feel the need to hide who they are through fear of discrimination, abuse and a lack of airplay and contract opportunities. Everyone from The Last Dinner Party and Chappell Roan are helping to open doors. There is a revolution occurring. Real change. Now is an especially prosperous and successful time for queer women:

“Perhaps there’s no better image of lesbian visibility than the cast of “The L Word” introducing pop star Reneé Rapp in front of two giant pairs of scissors last week on the Coachella stage.

Rapp, 24, has been on a steady rise after starring in “Mean Girls: The Musical” and hitting the Billboard charts with her Megan Thee Stallion collaboration, “It’s Not My Fault” (choice lyrics include “Kiss a blonde/kiss a friend/can a gay girl get an amen?”). For her Coachella debut on April 14, Rapp didn’t skimp on the Sapphism: She brought her guitarist girlfriend, Towa Bird, on stage for a duet and a kiss, and she had her self-proclaimed idol, bisexual sensation Kesha, join her for a feminist update of Kesha’s hit song “TikTok.”

In addition to Rapp, the music festival — which brings hundreds of thousands of fans to Southern California every year — featured queer artists Chappell Roan, Brazilian artist Ludmilla, Brittany Howard, Victoria Monét and Billie Eilish, the latter two fresh off Grammy wins.

Like Coachella, the Grammy Awards in February were another blockbuster music event where women — and queer women in particular — reigned supreme: Bisexual musician Phoebe Bridgers of boygenius was the night’s biggest winner;  pansexual Miley Cyrus earned both best pop solo performance and record of the year; and, of the performances, none was hailed more than singer-songwriter Tracy Chapman’s return to the stage for the first time in two decades.

Having lesbians and other openly queer women center stage at major music events, however, has certainly not been the historical norm. For more than half a century, the impact LGBTQ women have had on the modern music industry has gone largely unsung. That, however, is starting to change, with artists no longer having to be coy about their personal identities or keep them separate from their public persona to be offered opportunities in the industry.

“I think we’re only now becoming more aware of that, or being able to publicly discuss it,” said music historian and author Evelyn McDonnell. The closet, she said, has been a hindrance to the championing of and acknowledgment that queer women have been long deserving in shaping rock and popular music of all genres, from hip-hop to country”.

As we mark Pride Month, many will look at the music industry now and see how much things have changed through the years. How, until not that long ago, many L.G.B.T.Q.I.A.+ artists were not able to be their true self. As I said earlier, things are not perfect now. I do hope that we see an artist as big as Taylor Swift from the L.G.B.T.Q.I.A.+ community. A modern idol who will give so much strength to fans who might feel they struggle in life because of their sexual identity. There is still a lot of discrimination and ignorance around gender and sexuality today. This does not feed into music that much, though there are still issues and restrictions. An age-old attitude and preference that has not completely disappeared. Even so, the climate and tide is turning. The more L.G.B.T.Q.I.A.+ artists are spotlighted and embraced, the more it will become a normal part of music discourse. A narrative that takes us away from the heteronormative. Pride Month is a perfect opportunity to celebrate L.G.B.T.Q.I.A.+ artists new and established. Loud and proud, there are incredible queer artists slaying. Maybe not as much focus on and visibility of trans artists. With every reason to cheer, we still have to ask how long it will take before there is this stigma and judgment-free environment. Where we will have the full sexual spectrum fully represented and integrated. It can’t be too far away. Big steps have happened and progress is going on. The prejudice and fear L.G.B.T.Q.I.A.+ artists faced when I was young will no longer have to hide or write inauthentically. Let’s hope that this dream becomes a true reality…

IN years to come.

FEATURE: Mother’s Instinct: Looking at the Overlooked, Underdiscussed and More Problematic Kate Bush Songs

FEATURE:

 

 

Mother’s Instinct

IN THIS PHOTO: Kate Bush in 1980

Looking at the Overlooked, Underdiscussed and More Problematic Kate Bush Songs

_________

THIS sort of follows on…

IN THIS PHOTO: Kate Bush in 1985/PHOTO CREDIT: Guido Harari

from a recent post I published about Kate Bush. When discussing how she is misunderstood and there is this problem across radio, in the sense that some of her songs are seen as too out-there or inaccessible. I think that Kate Bush is one of the finest and most original songwriters ever. You cannot deny that she creates her own worlds. With every studio album, you get a wealth of songs that are so distinct and memorable. I will admit that a few of her album tracks might seem a little inappropriate for radio. 50 Words for Snow has long songs. There are one or two others that might seem a little strange. I did argue, when writing about whether Kate Bush is seen as radio-friendly and whether that is actually a thing, that her music is needlessly underexplored. Nothing in her catalogue is so strange or off-putting that it should avoid radio schedules. I am thinking about songs that might not be played because they are perhaps either not known or are problematic. Not to dwell on too many negatives. Maybe it is a case of reframing certain songs and highlighting ones that maybe have not dated well. I am not going to focus on all of them, though there are some clear examples from Kate Bush’s back catalogue that have been misunderstood or do not rank alongside her best. The first example of Room for the Life on The Kick Inside. Her 1978’s debut album’s penultimate track, many have written it off as the weakest number. I don’t think I have heard anyone really discuss this song. It featured on the setlist for 1979’s The Tour of Life, yet it is never played or investigated. In terms of interpretation, Bush was coming from the perspective that women have a much stronger survival unit then men since as they bear children, and thus should use their advantage to help men rather than play games with them. It is a dialogue between two women. Something Kate Bush rarely did. The Kick Inside has a very positive attitude towards men. In fact, many of Bush’s songs do. That need for understanding. One of the reasons I never listened to the song the whole way through, despite the fact The Kick Inside is my favourite album ever, is because the thought that, inside a woman is room for life, was hammered to death. The song seemed too simple. Compared to other tracks on the album, Room for the Life seemed pale. An article worth reading, the gender politics and naivety of the lyrics might be a reason why we do not hear Room for the Life played and explored:

“In addition to its musical tastelessness, “Room for the Life” is out of touch. Bush has identified herself with male artists, admitting that a lack of interesting female songwriters was the reason (she cites Joni Mitchell, Billie Holliday, and Joan Armatrading as exceptions). When she writes about two female characters in “Room,” things fall apart (this isn’t always the case — my favorite Kate Bush song is a woman-centered dialogue, as we’ll see). The song is addressed from one woman to another, telling of the magical power of women, expressed as a singularity with the oddly agrammatical phrase “because we’re woman.” It’s an oddly naïve little song, and one with strange conclusions on how to be a woman. “Lost in your men and the games you play/trying to prove that you’re better woman,” Bush chides her friend. How dare she try to get ahead of men. The audacity of it”.

Even so, I have seen magazine polls rank Room for the Life high. In terms of Kate Bush’s best songs. Is it a case, over forty-five years since the song first came out, it should be re-examined? One could write it off as a bit of teenage naivety. I wonder whether the messages and intent of the song was ever really understood. Is it a case of Kate Bush reaching too far or maybe missing the mark?! I think every Kate Bush song is interesting and has validity. I feel Room for the Life is one that requires some discussion and reappraisal now. There are songs on 1980’s Never for Ever that are dismissed because they are seen as a bit weak. Violin and Egypt have often been spotlighted for this reason. Night Scented Stock is a short passage and segue; Blow Away (For Bill) maybe not an album highlight. Regardless, her third studio album is wonderful. An underrated work. One of the most ‘problematic’ or misunderstood songs on Bush’s 1980 gem is The Infant Kiss. So many people avoid it because of the title. Maybe radio stations do not want to play it. A case of many thinking the song is referring to a grown adult kissing a child. Kate Bush has explained the meaning behind the track:

“It was based on the film, The Innocents. I saw it years ago, when I was very young, and it scared me, and when films scare you as a kid, I think they really hang there. It’s a beautiful film, quite extraordinary. This governess is supposed to look after these children, a little boy and a girl, and they are actually possessed by the spirits of the people who were in the house before. And they keep appearing to the children. It’s really scary – as scary on some levels as the idea of The Exorcist, and that terrified me. The idea of this young girl, speaking and behaving like she did was very disturbing, very distorted. But I quite like that song.

RADIO PROGRAMME, PAUL GAMBACCINI, 30 DECEMBER 1980

The thing that worries me is the way people have started interpreting that song. They love the long word–paedophilia. It’s not about that at all. It’s not the woman actually fancying the young kid. It’s the woman being attracted by a man inside the child. It just worries me that there were some people catching on to the idea of there being paedophilia, rather than just a distortion of a situation where there’s a perfectly normal, innocent boy with the spirit of a man inside, who’s extremely experienced and lusty. The woman can’t cope with the distortion. She can see that there’s some energy in the child that is not normal, but she can’t place it. Yet she has a very pure maternal love for the child, and it’s onlyy little things like when she goes to give him a kiss at night, that she realizes there is a distortion, and it’s really freaking her out. She doesn’t fancy little boys, she’s got a normal, straight sexual life, yet this thing is happening to her. I really like the distortedness of the situation.

KRIS NEEDS, ‘FIRE IN THE BUSH’. ZIGZAG (UK), 1980”.

I am not sure whether an artist today could write a song like The Infant Kiss. People jumping to conclusion. Kate Bush, always inspired by films and literature, was taking from another source rather than her own imagination. Is this why The Infant Kiss could not get played today? Again, this is a song that many fans hold in high esteem. I am working to a song that has an anniversary coming but might be among Kate Bush’s more problematic tracks. This feature is about looking at the misunderstood or maligned songs. Maybe some where the lyrics and themes might not have dated or had best intentions. The Dreaming’s title track is a classic example. Perhaps one of the biggest problems is the involvement of Rolf Harris. Maybe the Australian twang from Kate Bush some see as cultural appropriation. Is her cause and point of view a bit naïve or problematic? It is a big question. I actually love the song, though many people feel that it was not the right move. In terms of what she wrote about. Again, Kate Bush discussed the song and where she was coming from:

“Well, years ago my brother bought ‘Sun Arise’ [by Rolf Harris] and I loved it, it was such a beautiful song. And ever since then I’ve wanted to create something which had that feel of Australia within it. I loved the sound of the traditional aboriginal instruments, and as I grew older, I became much more aware of the actual situation which existed in Australia between the white Australian and the aborigines, who were being wiped out by man’s greed for uranium. Digging up their sacred grounds, just to get plutonium, and eventually make weapons out of it. And I just feel that it’s so wrong: this beautiful culture being destroyed just so that we can build weapons which maybe one day will destroy everything, including us. We should be learning from the aborigines, they’re such a fascinating race. And Australia – there’s something very beautiful about that country.

‘THE DREAMING’. POPPIX (UK), SUMMER 1982

The Aboriginals are not alone in being pushed out of their land by modern man, by their diseases, or for ther own strange reasons. It is very sad to think they might all die. ‘The Dreaming’ is the time for Aboriginals when humans took the form of animals, when spirits were free to roam and in this song as the civilized begin to dominate, the ‘original ones’ dream of the dreamtime.

PRESS STATEMENT BY KATE BUSH, 1982”.

I do feel that The Dreaming has a point to make. The song seems relevant today. Maybe more relevant than back in 1982. A low chart position and not a lot of radio play meant The Dreaming wasn’t a success. It doesn’t really get played now. Kate Bush is often misunderstood as a writer. Maybe judged. I can appreciate that she wanted to write more political and socially conscious songs for her fourth studio album. Perhaps many saw it a step too far. A song that had good intentions but never really did justice to what it was trying to say. I think that a song that is perfectly fine but is never played is Mother Stands for Comfort. The only song from Hounds of Love’s first side not released as a single, it is one of the most under-discussed Kate Bush songs. Considering it is from her most successful and loved albums, it seems like an outsider. It is icier and more skeletal than other songs on that album. Its subject, about a mother covering for her murderous child, is a fascinating and original angle. You could get songs like that today from a Pop artist and they would be played more. Never performed live, this is a song that has practically languished in obscurity. This is what Kate Bush said about Mother Stands for Comfort:

“Well, the personality that sings this track is very unfeeling in a way. And the cold qualities of synths and machines were appropriate here. There are many different kinds of love and the track’s really talking about the love of a mother, and in this case she’s the mother of a murderer, in that she’s basically prepared to protect her son against anything. ‘Cause in a way it’s also suggesting that the son is using the mother, as much as the mother is protecting him. It’s a bit of a strange matter, isn’t it really? [laughs] (Richard Skinner, ‘Classic Albums Interview: Hounds Of Love’. BBC Radio 1 (UK), 26 January 1992)”.

It seems like every Kate Bush album has that one song that stands out for various complex reasons. Perhaps people not understanding her words or jumping to conclusions. In terms of 1989’s The Sensual World, Heads We're Dancing is that one. Its that idea of the charm of evil people. How many can be fooled by them. Maybe it did alienate some in 1989, though this subject seems very relevant today. I have not heard many people discuss Heads We’re Dancing. I like the song a lot. I feel, even if Kate Bush discusses a song and gives her reasons for writing it, many are still put off. Maybe there are these tracks that are cast aside and not really given a fair chance. In any case, here is what Kate Bush said about one of The Sensual World’s standouts:

“That’s a very dark song, not funny at all! (…) I wrote the song two years ago, and in lots of ways I wouldn’t write a song like it now. I’d really hate it if people were offended by this…But it was all started by a family friend, years ago, who’d been to dinner and sat next to this guy who was really fascinating, so charming. They sat all night chatting and joking. And next day he found out it was Oppenheimer. And this friend was horrified because he really despised what the guy stood for. I understood the reaction, but I felt a bit sorry for Oppenheimer. He tried to live with what he’d done, and actually, I think, committed suicide. But I was so intrigued by this idea of my friend being so taken by this person until they knew who they were, and then it completely changing their attitude. So I was thinking, what if you met the Devil? The Ultimate One: charming, elegant, well spoken. Then it turned into this whole idea of a girl being at a dance and this guy coming up, cocky and charming, and she dances with him. Then a couple of days later she sees in the paper that it was Hitler. Complete horror: she was that close, perhaps could’ve changed history. Hitler was very attractive to women because he was such a powerful figure, yet such an evil guy. I’d hate to feel I was glorifying the situation, but I do know that whereas in a piece of film it would be quite acceptable, in a song it’s a little bit sensitive.

LEN BROWN, ‘IN THE REALM OF THE SENSES’. NME (UK), 7 OCTOBER 1989”.

I am going to end with a few songs that, for different reasons, are either not discussed, are underrated or misunderstood. I am going to move to Aerial and 50 Words for Snow. One track from The Red Shoes that has been maligned and not played a lot is Why Should I Love You? It is not problematic or misunderstood. One reason why I highlight it is because it features Prince. Even if it is overloaded with layers and quite busy, I think it deserves more now. It is a randomly odd little cut. The fact Lenny Henry features. Not sure why! I think it is important because it features Prince. Not many opportunities where you get Kate Bush appearing on the same song as another music legend. She sang with Peter Gabriel a few times. Apart from that, there are not many examples of Kate Bush being on the same track as a genuinely huge artist. Bush did appear on a Prince album too. She sang on 1996’s Emancipation. Prince only appeared on one Kate Bush song. I am surprised Kate Bush did not reversion and strip back Why Should I Love You? for 2011’s Director’s Cut. An example of two very strong-willed and passionate producers – Kate Bush and Prince – having different visions of the song:

“Bush asked Prince to contribute background vocals to ‘Why Should I Love You’ in 1991. She sent him the track, which she had recorded at Abbey Road Studios (Studio Number One), London, England, and Prince added vocals, but also added many instrumental parts to the song, at his Paisley Park Studios. When Kate Bush and Del Palmer listened to Prince’s returned track, they weren’t sure what to do with it. They worked on it on and off for two years to try to “turn it back into a Kate Bush song”. The track also features background vocals by British comedian Lenny Henry, a good friend of Kate’s”.

In terms of songs that people never really talk about and you will not hear played. Bertie is one of them. It is on the first disc of Aerial. On A Sea of Honey, this is another track never performed live. It is deeply personal. It is very open and honest. For years, people bemoaned the fact Kate Bush’s songs were oblique or not personal. That she was hiding behind characters and personas. When she did record a song with her heart out there, I saw people mock it. Is it the case that Bertie is too personal?! When reviewing Aerial in 2005, The Daily Telegraph said that this song, alongside Mrs. Bartolozzi, was one people will snigger at. An artist always mocked and insulted, have people truly heard Bertie and appreciated its importance?! Aerial is infused with home and Bush’s love for her new-born son. Even when not explicitly singing about him, he has inspired her thoughts of family and contentment. Someone who was also pivotal in her returning to the stage for 2014’s Before the Dawn. Kate Bush explained what Bertie means to her:

“He’s such a big part of my life so, you know, he’s a very big part of my work. It’s such a great thing, being able to spend as much time with him as I can. And, you know, he won’t be young for very long. And already he’s starting to grow up and I wanted to make sure I didn’t miss out on that, that I spent as much time with his as I could.

So, the idea was that he would come first, and then the record would come next, which is also one reasons why it’s taken a long time (laughs). It always takes me a long time anyway, but trying to fit that in around the edges that were left over from the time that I wanted to spend with him.

It’s a wonderful thing, having such a lovely son. Really, you know with a song like that, you could never be special enough from my point of view, and I wanted to try and give it an arrangement that wasn’t terribly obvious, so I went for the sort of early music… (Ken Bruce show, BBC Radio 2, 3 November 2005)”.

The last song I want to spotlight comes from 50 Words for Snow. In terms of a song being misunderstood. Misty is a song that has been celebrated and given huge praise by critics. Those who get the track and understand it see it as hugely emotionally resonant. Even if critics have applauded it, there are others who have mocked it. Maybe compared it to The Snowman. Some have mocked it because it involves a snowman in a passionate tryst with a woman. Maybe judging it on its surface and a simple interpretation. Misty goes deeper and should be given more love and exploration. It won’t be played on radio because it is a long track. Regardless, Misty is a symbol of Kate Bush’s restless imagination, originality and undiminished genius. She talked about with BBC Radio 4’s John Wilson in 2011:

“It’s a silly idea. But I hope that what has happened is that there’s almost a sense of tenderness. I think it’s quite a dark song. And so I hope that I’ve made it work. But in a lot of ways it shouldn’t because… It’s ridiculous, isn’t it, the idea of the snowman visiting this woman and climbing into bed with her.

But I took him as a purely symbolic snowman, it was about…

No John, he’s REAL (laughs).

BBC4 RADIO, FRONT ROW, 2011”.

I want to write this feature to examine certain songs that have either been overlooked, misinterpreted or have not aged well. Some that were seen as inappropriate when they were released but seem relevant now. I am sure people can give me plenty of other examples. Not only underrated songs, these are ones that standout because they are either underplayed or have been misunderstood. It is fascinating dipping into her catalogue and thinking about songs that deserve more or perhaps, in rare occasions, were missteps. Some are examples of people misinterpretation Kate Bush’s intentions. People never really understanding her, they never…

REALLY tried.

INTERVIEW: Graeme Thomson (Author of Under The Ivy: The Life and Music of Kate Bush)

INTERVIEW:

Graeme Thomson (Author of Under The Ivy: The Life and Music of Kate Bush)

_________

IT has been amazing…

interviewing author and journalist Graeme Thomson about the revised and updated version of his authoritative and magnificent Kate Bush book. The superb Under The Ivy: The Life and Music of Kate Bush is released on 27th June through Omnibus Press. Originally published in 2010, I have learned so much about Kate Bush through his writing and passionate, detailed research. An accessible and beautifully written biography, every Kate Bush fan, whether diehard or casual, needs to order a copy:

“The critically acclaimed definitive biography of Kate Bush, revised and updated for 2024, with a new foreword by Sinéad Gleeson.

Detailing everything from Bush’s upbringing to her early exposition of talent, to her subsequent evolution into a stunningly creative and endlessly fascinating visual and musical artist, Under The Ivy is the story of one woman's life in music. Written with great detail, accuracy and admiration for her work, this is in equal parts an in-depth biography and an immersive analysis of Kate Bush's art.

Focusing on her unique working methods, her studio techniques, her timeless albums and inescapable influence, Under The Ivy is an eminently readable and insightful exploration of one of the world's most unique and gifted artists. The text has been updated to include coverage of Bush’s return to the top of the charts in 2022 following the extraordinary resurgence of ‘Running Up That Hill.’ An eye-opening journey of discovery for anyone unfamiliar with the breadth of Bush’s work, Under The Ivy also rewards the long-term fan with new insights and fresh analysis”.

Given the unexpectedly busy past few years for Kate Bush and her music legacy, it is very apt that Under The Ivy: The Life and Music of Kate Bush has been revised. I have been speaking with Graeme Thomson about why he first decided the write the book, what we might expect from the 2024 edition, when he discovered Kate Bush, how Sinéad Gleeson was selected for the foreword, and which Kate Bush track means the most to him. It has been exciting and informative hearing from Graeme Thomson about a tremendous and endlessly fascinating book that…

EVERY Kate Bush fan should own.

__________

Hi Graeme. Before talking about Under The Ivy: The Life and Music of Kate Bush, I am interested knowing when Kate Bush came into your life. Do you recall the first time you heard her music and how it made you feel?

I don’t recall a particular lightbulb moment for me regarding Kate Bush. I certainly was aware of Wuthering Heights just being in the cultural DNA for as long as I can remember. I remember Running Up That Hill and Hounds of Love coming out as singles; I would have been 12 when they were released in 1985 and I remember seeing her on TOTP. I was a fan of those songs and, later, The Sensual World. Later still, I bought Hounds of Love on vinyl and The Sensual World and The Whole Story on CD, but otherwise didn’t investigate too deeply. I knew the singles, and odd songs engaged with me through the late '80s and into the '90s. Then, of course, she more or less vanished and I wasn’t really keeping up. My ears were elsewhere – in Athens, Georgia and San Francisco and Minneapolis. I probably laughed along with the Alan Partridge stuff.

I would say that it was Aerial that led me to really delve properly into her back catalogue and to explore the full reach of her work. I was drawn initially, I think, to the otherworldly, occult energy in her music. Now, I oscillate between the harder, more rhythmically driven tracks and the very stark piano-based material. There is a sense of tapping into ancient forces in her music which I still find very attractive. It has always been present. The title track of The Kick Inside has it, and so does Lake Tahoe.

“Ultimately, it’s testament to the fact that Kate Bush’s work is endlessly interesting. There’s so much nourishment to be had from digging into it”

I have more than one copy of the book in the form of previous issues. I am excited for this 2024 edition. Did you think, when Under The Ivy: The Life and Music of Kate Bush initially came out, that we would still be talking about it now? How does it feel knowing it has already reached and connected with so many people?

Well, firstly, thank you! I’m obviously very happy that the book has enjoyed such a long shelf life – literally. All you want as a writer is for your books to reach people and to continue to be available to those who might want to read them. For Under The Ivy to be widely appreciated on top of that is very gratifying, but you can’t really dictate that happening: you just have to write the book you want to write and, afterwards, hope it finds its place and its readers. When I first pitched it back in 2008, I really did feel there was a need for a serious, comprehensive and analytical biography of Kate Bush. I thought that had been lacking – and I understood why it had been lacking: because it’s not an easy thing to do. So I am pleased that my hunch paid off and that the book has been generally well regarded and has proved to have staying power, for which I must thank Omnibus Press for keeping it continually in print. I’ve also been lucky.

In the handful of years after Under The Ivy was first published in 2010, Kate Bush was so incredibly productive: two albums and a live show. That helped. Thank you, Kate! There is also the fact that – and we’ve seen this very much to be the case in recent years – her work is still being discovered anew by different demographics and different audiences in different parts of the world. I think that has helped keep the book ticking over, as well. Ultimately, it’s testament to the fact that Kate Bush’s work is endlessly interesting. There’s so much nourishment to be had from digging into it.

Can you recall why you decided to write Under The Ivy: The Life and Music of Kate Bush to start? How did you approach writing the book, and what was it like interviewing people from her world and diving deep?

When you first entertain the idea of writing a book, it’s a conflation of practical, personal and creative reasons, of timing, and luck, and so many other factors. I said in the last answer that I felt there was a gap in the market, to put it bluntly. That helped solidify the idea, in practical terms. Also, the idea of writing a Kate Bush biography was a challenge, and I like a challenge. I just thought there was so much still to say, so much that would be interesting, so much to get involved in.

My approach initially was, first and foremost, to let her know I was doing it – which I did. I sent a letter explaining what I was up to. Then it was a process of working on a wish list of people I wanted to interview, knowing that it was not always going to be possible for various reasons to speak to them all. You start to contact people and explain what you are doing. Sometimes it’s a straight no; sometimes it’s a maybe; sometimes it’s an enthusiastic yes; sometimes silence. As you might imagine, there are various complications when you’re writing about someone like Kate Bush. I was expecting that. I was expecting more complications, in many ways. I was surprised how many people did talk in the end.

“I’m just delighted that she was able to do it, and she did a great job capturing her very personal relationship with the music of Kate Bush” 

At the same time, I started reading around the subject. I tend not to read everything at the start of a project. I’ll read enough to get a sense of the shape of a life and the important people in it, but you don’t want to be too fixed on your idea of who this person is before you start; you have to allow room for being surprised and for people telling you unexpected information or leading you down different and sometimes contradictory pathways. To not overreach for definitives is an important part of writing biography. In many ways, this part is the most enjoyable part of the process: the process of discovery, of seeing the life open up in front of you and learning new things as you’re listening to the music. I find the music becomes increasingly enriched as I learn more. Ultimately, that’s really what you are trying to pass on to the reader when you end up writing a book like this: you want to enrich their experience of listening to the music.

The wonderful Sinéad Gleeson provides a foreword to this new edition. How did you two meet and what was it about her writing and love of Kate Bush that meant she was the person to write that foreword?

Actually, I only met Sinéad in person very recently, right after she had written and submitted her foreword. We finally caught up briefly at her event in Edinburgh, where I live. We’ve been in contact sporadically for many years. She was a fan of the original edition of Under The Ivy. She wrote some nice things about it, and we’d been in touch about that. We’ve been in contact on social media and via email about various things since then. She lives in Dublin and we had some communication around my Philip Lynott biography, Cowboy Song. I knew she loved Kate Bush. I had read her journalism and I’d read This Woman’s Work, the collection of essays by woman writers that she edited a couple of years ago with Kim Gordon, which obviously takes its name from the Kate Bush song. I knew she had interviewed Kate Bush – lucky her! She had seen Before the Dawn. So I was aware that she really knew her stuff – over and above the fact that she is a fantastic writer who shares with Kate Bush an innate understanding of folklore, of elemental forces and the power of unseen worlds. So she was top of my list. One of the lovely things was that just after she delivered the foreword – during a very, very busy time for her – I was reading Hagstone, her beautiful new novel. That felt like a nice piece of serendipity. I’m just delighted that she was able to do it, and she did a great job capturing her very personal relationship with the music of Kate Bush.

PHOTO CREDIT: Guido Harari

For those who have not already bought Under The Ivy: The Life and Music of Kate Bush, can you give any insight into new additions and what we might expect?

I wouldn’t want to overstate the extent of the revised edition. The Omnibus Remastered series, of which this is a part, is essentially about reissuing books from the publisher’s back-list with new designs and new forewords. That was the impetus behind Under The Ivy coming out again. When Omnibus said they would like Under The Ivy to be one of the first books in the series, I was delighted and flattered, and I asked whether there might be an opportunity to bring it up to date. They said yes, so I did that. But given that Kate Bush hasn’t released any new music, or appeared anywhere in public, or played any shows since I wrote the 2015 edition, I want to manage people’s expectations! The update covers the obvious things: the Stranger Things/Running Up That Hill phenomenon, which has again shifted her place in our culture, the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame, the curation of her back catalogue; there are some new quotes from collaborators. To use a music analogy, it’s essentially a stylish new reissue of a well-thumbed album that has been remastered, polished up and had a couple of bonus tracks added to the tracklisting.

In this case, the ‘bonus tracks’ take the form of a gorgeous new design; a short new preface by me; a beautiful foreword by Sinéad; and then in the final section of the book, the story being brought up to the present. It feels quite satisfying, and gives any new readers or recently engaged Kate Bush fans a pretty complete picture of her career thus far. It is also the first time Under The Ivy has been available in A Format (or mass-market paperback) size, which I’m really delighted about.

PHOTO CREDIT: Brian Aris

There are great quotes in the book from wonderful people like Paddy McAloon and Jude Rogers. How much of a thrill is it knowing that your words have connected with fellow writers and legendary musicians?

It’s hugely flattering. I think it is a testament to Kate Bush as much as anything, people respond to her work in a way that is very generous, and that has perhaps been reflected in how they have responded to my book. With Paddy McAloon, I interviewed him some years ago in a hotel in Durham and he produced two copies of Under The Ivy for me to sign – one to his wife, and one to Wendy Smith – and was very complimentary about it. He’s a lovely man and one of our greatest songwriters, so that meant a lot. So I thought I’d tap him up for a quote! Jude and I both wrote for the much missed Word magazine back in the day. She writes with so much soul; there’s never a false note. Her book, The Sound of Being Human, is original and tremendous, and she’s another writer who really knows her Bushcraft. To receive such lovely words from her, and from Kathryn Williams, Emma Pollock, Rob Young, Laura Barnett and Jim Kerr, all of whom were kind enough to also provide endorsements, is incredibly gratifying.

One of the joys of writing Under The Ivy has been hearing from fellow writers, musicians, artists, whole swathes of people, who have enjoyed it. I was speaking with Chris Bryant, the Labour MP, quite recently, and he told me that his husband loved Kate Bush and that Under The Ivy was a favourite book of his. Little things like that can be very consequential for a writer, whoever it comes from. I get a kick out of any and every person telling me they have enjoyed something I have written.

“East Wickham Farm was a very seductive place to visit in my head – or at least my idea of it was” 

I think you have possibly written more words about Kate Bush than anyone alive now (a guess…but I am pretty sure). Did you learn a lot of new things about Kate Bush when writing the book, and do you have a favourite fact/section of the book that was a particular joy to write?

I’m not sure the first part of that statement is true! It can’t be. I learned innumerable things about Kate Bush while writing the book, because I didn’t start with a deep, fan-level knowledge of her at all. I had pretty limited knowledge at the beginning of the process. The book was really an active journey of discovery. Oftentimes my favourite parts of my books cover the early years, pre-fame: with Under The Ivy, it was about establishing the family dynamic, the family background, the musical, artistic, creative and literary touchstones of her work, and a physical sense of place. That’s always really illuminating, but particularly so for Kate Bush, because I think those elements are very, very instructive in terms of understanding not just elements of her work, but also how she operates, how she lives her life and her values system. I wanted to call these things back regularly throughout the book. I thought if I could establish who she is, and where she comes from, at a fairly early stage, then that would pay off all the way through the book. And I loved living in that world! East Wickham Farm was a very seductive place to visit in my head – or at least my idea of it was. It felt like a very safe and magical and creatively stimulating microworld. I really loved being there and going back there when I was writing.

PHOTO CREDIT: John Carder Bush

Do you have a personal favourite Kate Bush album? Mine is The Kick Inside. Is there one that has a very special meaning to you?

The obvious answer would be Hounds of Love. Sometimes it is just a fact that the most popular album, the bestselling album, the album with the big singles on it, might just be the best album, too. I think it is a monumental and pretty much perfect piece of work encompassing so many aspects of her artistry. I love Aerial. As I said earlier, it kickstarted my deeper interest in Kate Bush and I find that album more and more personally resonant as time goes on. I wrote a piece quite recently for Disco Pogo magazine, and I concluded with the idea that Aerial is a song for a life, not just a song of a day. As we get older we accrue experience and loss, our children grow up, we ache more deeply, and yet we still strive to access joy and find ways to escape our quotidian lives. Aerial seems to me to speak to those struggles and rewards so beautifully. The other album I would mention is The Dreaming. I was putting a playlist together recently and I listened to Suspended in Gaffa for the first time in quite a long time – and I really listened to it; sometimes you just let songs drift by – and I thought, Goodness, what a wonderful song that is. The Dreaming has some amazing work on it. It is such a brave and bold and sometimes silly record, and very significant in her development. I love many things about all her albums, but those three are probably my favourites.

It is a question many Kate Bush fans would ask themselves but, if you were to interview her today, what would be your opening question?

(When) Are you going to release a new album, Kate?

If you found yourself in a Desert Island Discs-style scenario and you could only rescue one of Kate Bush’s tracks - the one that is most special to you -, then which would you save?

Hello Earth. There is something about that song that moves me profoundly. The way it evolves from this very personal, intimate, close-up perspective into a vast macro overview of our world and our tiny place in it and on it. It almost feels as though it contains the whole of Hounds of Love in microcosm: it has got very experimental elements; a choral section which is like the moon being obscured by clouds, so darkly, beautifully atmospheric. But it also has lovely, flowing melody, incredible harmonies, wonderful words. It is the ultimate Kate Bush piece for me. Huge in scale and ambition, and I find it very moving.

Finally, we can end with any Kate Bush song that you like. Which one shall we go with? Thank you, Graeme!

Under the Ivy. What else?! It’s such a beautiful little song and it’s great that it seems to have grown into a real fans’ favourite; a treasured deep cut. People complain that it is not on Spotify or other streaming services, but I kind of love that. You need to dig it out a little bit. It is such a special song, so sad and mysterious, with a touch of the occult in there. I’m very pleased I chose it as my title track…

FEATURE: The Dial, Retuned: Inside the Gender & Racial Disparity Data Report on UK Radio 2023-2024

FEATURE:

 

 

The Dial, Retuned

ILLUSTRATION CREDIT: depositphotos

Inside the Gender & Racial Disparity Data Report on UK Radio 2023-2024

_________

LAST year…

when reports came out about the gender and racial breakdown across U.K. radio, there was some troubling statistics and realisation. Women were vastly underrepresented when it came to airplay across U.K. stations. It was even more grim for artists of colour. There needed to be changes. U.K. stations could not just sit by and have this sexism and racism continue. A complete ignorance of incredible artists. This year, the findings are far more positive. As I will explore, though it is brilliant that BBC Radio has really retuned the dial and stroke gender equality across a few of its stations, there is little move from some. Bauer Media radio stations are especially lacking, though some have improved from last year. A huge thanks to Why Not Her? for their hard work and passion. They have provided the breakdown – gender and ethnicity – of the artists who appear on the Top 100 and Top 20 song playlists. A thanks too to Linda Coogan Byrne of Why Not Her? She is an equality campaigner who has poured so much of herself into it. I am going to bring in the press release that showcases some of the key findings. There are also comments from Linda Coogan Byrne and Winnie Ama. You can see the Gender & Racial Disparity Data Report on UK Radio 2023-2024 here. It is a year for cheer and optimism:

“Why Not Her? Annual Radio Data Report on UK Radio 2023/2024:

In a landmark year for gender equality in music, women have taken the lead in the Top 100 songs on UK Radio, making 2024 a historic year for female artists on the airwaves. This significant achievement is not only a triumph for the artists themselves but a testament to the cultural shift driven by the UK radio industry towards greater gender parity.

For the first time, female artists have outpaced their male counterparts, with women representing 41% of the Top 100 songs, compared to 39% for male artists and 20% for gender collaborations. This progress is a clear indicator that intentional efforts to promote gender equality in the music industry are yielding remarkable results.

The progress we celebrate today is a testament to the power of collective action and the unwavering commitment to gender equality. As we continue to support and uplift female artists, we move closer to a future where the music industry reflects the rich diversity and talent that exists within it.

Let us continue to champion inclusivity and celebrate the voices of all artists, ensuring that the airwaves remain a platform for diverse and equitable representation.

Gender Breakdown in Top 100 Airplay Chart (Jan-Jun 2024)

·        Female artists: 41%

·        Male artists: 39%

·        Collaborations: 20% 

Ethnicity Breakdown in Top 100 Airplay Chart (Jan-Jun 2024)

·        White artists: 71%

·        People of Colour (POC): 17%

·        Ethnicity collaborations: 12% 

Top UK Radio Stations' Gender Disparity (June 2023 - June 2024)

·        BBC Radio 2: Achieved 50% gender parity.

·        BBC Radio 6 Music: 50% female artists.

·        BBC Radio 1: Increased support for female artists, achieving higher female representation in their Top 20. 

Top Played Songs and Artists

- Most played song overall: "Lose Control" by Teddy Swims

- Most played UK artist song: "Lovers in a Past Life" by Calvin Harris x Rag 'n' Bone Man

- Most played artist: Dua Lipa, with 5% of songs in the Top 100

Top Repeated/Impacting Artists in the Top 100 Songs across UK radio (so far) in 2024

- Dua Lipa is the most repeated artist with five songs.

- Taylor Swift and Lewis Capaldi follow closely with four songs each.

- Ed Sheeran and Miley Cyrus each have three songs.

- Becky Hill also has three songs. 

These artists dominate the UK radio airwaves with multiple hits, reflecting their popularity and influence in the current music scene. 

Label Impact Analysis

Record Label Dominance: 

- WMG (Warner Music Group): 40%

- Atlantic, Warner Records, Parlophone, Curb Records, Champion Records 

- UMG (Universal Music Group): 32%

- Island, Virgin Records, EMI, Polydor, Universal Music, Republic Records, Mercury, Motown EMI, Def Jam, Positiva 

- SME (Sony Music Entertainment): 20%

- RCA, Columbia, Black Butter, Ministry Of Sound, Sony Music, Insanity Records, AWAL, Relentless 

- Independent: 8%

- gamma., Human Re Sources, Bmg Rights Management, XL Recordings, Champion Records

Songwriter/Producer Analysis

Songwriter definition, defined by PRS: Composer (includes composing producers); Author (including lyricists); Composer/Author; Arranger; Translator

Data source: PRS 

The Top 100 songs had 463 songwriters.
Average of 4.6 songwriters per song 

Gender Split

23% Female songwriters

76.8% Male songwriters

0.2% Non-Binary songwriters

Ethnicity Split

78% White songwriters

20% POC/Mixed songwriters

2% Latin songwriters

Insights

·        98% of songs by female artists had at least 1 female writer.

·        33% of songs by male artists had at least 1 female writer

·        95% of of songs by female artists had at least 1 male writer

·        100% of songs by male artists had at least 1 male writer

·        77% of songs by male artists were written only by men, with 0 female writers

·        Male artists are more likely to write alone/with their own gender 77% vs female artists who only wrote alone/with their own gender 5% of the time

·        19% of songs by gender collaborating artists had 0 female writers

·        100% of songs by POC artists had POC writers

·        47% of songs by POC artists had 0 female writers

·        33% of songs by White artists had 0 female writers

·        The song with the most songwriters is ‘Lighter’ by Galantis x David Guetta x 5 Seconds Of Summer. It has 13 songwriters.·       

Celebrating a Historic Year for Women in UK Radio

London, UK - June 2024

In a landmark year for gender equality in music, women have taken the lead in the Top 100 songs on UK Radio, making 2024 a historic year for female artists on the airwaves. This significant achievement is not only a triumph for the artists themselves but a testament to the cultural shift driven by the UK radio industry towards greater gender parity.

For the first time, female artists have outpaced their male counterparts, with women representing 41% of the Top 100 songs, compared to 39% for male artists and 20% for gender collaborations. This progress is a clear indicator that intentional efforts to promote gender equality in the music industry are yielding remarkable results.

Commendations are due to the UK radio stations, especially the trailblazers in gender equality who played more than 25% women in their top 20 radio annual playlists. Leading the charge are BBC Radio 1, BBC Radio 2, BBC Radio 6 Music, Capital FM, KISS, Heat Radio, Channel 103 FM, and Island FM. Their dedication to inclusivity has paved the way for this momentous cultural change.

Equally noteworthy are the stations that have room for growth, including Absolute Radio, Smooth Radio, Magic Radio, Heart FM, 3FM, KISS Fresh, Lincs FM, Northsound 1, and Tay FM. We look forward to seeing these stations make strides towards greater gender balance in the coming years.

This year's BRIT Awards further highlight the strides made, with Raye making history by winning six awards, including Album of the Year and Artist of the Year. Raye's journey from overcoming industry obstacles to reclaiming her power and inspiring countless others showcases the transformative power of perseverance and talent.

The most played artists of 2024 further emphasise this shift. Dua Lipa stands as the most played UK artist, while Taylor Swift leads as the most played international artist. The most played song overall is "Lose Control" by Teddy Swims, with "Lovers In A Past Life" by Calvin Harris x Rag'n'Bone Man being the most played UK song.

The progress we celebrate today is a testament to the power of collective action and the unwavering commitment to gender equality. As we continue to support and uplift female artists, we move closer to a future where the music industry reflects the rich diversity and talent that exists within it.

Let us continue to champion inclusivity and celebrate the voices of all artists, ensuring that the airwaves remain a platform for diverse and equitable representation.

Comment from Linda Coogan Byrne on the Outstanding Culture Change on UK Radio 

“In a historic year for gender equality in music, the UK radio industry has achieved remarkable progress by leading the charge towards greater representation of female artists. Women now represent 41% of the top 100 songs on UK Radio, outpacing their male counterparts and highlighting a significant cultural shift towards inclusivity and diversity. This achievement underscores the power of collective action and the unwavering commitment of UK radio stations to promote gender parity.

The efforts of trailblazing stations like BBC Radio 1, BBC Radio 2, BBC Radio 6 Music, Capital FM, KISS, Heat Radio, Channel 103 FM, and Island FM have paved the way for this momentous change. Their dedication to playing more than 25% women in their top 20 annual playlists demonstrates a commendable commitment to inclusivity.

However, it is with a heavy heart that we must contrast this progress with the situation in Ireland. Despite our campaigns and calls for action, meeting with political parties and the new media commision numerous times over the last 5 years - we continue to be met with empty promises, Irish radio stations and the media regulators have largely failed to shift towards gender parity. We asked, "Why not her?" and the UK radio stations responded with action and results. In Ireland, our pleas were met with silence and inaction.

It is essential that we continue to push for change and hold media outlets accountable for their role in shaping a fair and equitable industry. The success in the UK shows that with determination and commitment, meaningful change is possible. It is time for Irish radio and its broadcasting authorities in the Coimisiún na Meán, to take note and follow suit, ensuring that female artists receive the recognition and airtime they deserve.

Let us celebrate the progress made and continue to advocate for a future where gender equality is the norm across all airwaves”

Winnie Ama also comments: 

“It is amazing to see that the Top 100 UK chart includes lots of females, ethnic minorities, and local UK artists this year. For the first time in 35 years of chart data, music in the charts finally reflects the modern society that we live in. 

This year, the UK music industry should be held up as an example of how it is possible for organisations (radio stations) and individuals (radio presenters) to create inclusion consciously at each level, with real impact on culture as a whole. 

A lot of people discover new music through the radio, the impact of having a diverse range of artists on radio will inevitably have a ripple effect throughout culture and artist careers.

Long may this continue”.

There is a lot to be happy about! I did not think that BBC Radio 2 especially would affect gender equality in the Top 20 songs department. I listen to shows now and they are full of male artists. It goes to show that, across the board, they have made efforts to redress a serious problem. In terms of gender breakdown of all artists in the Top 100 UK Radio Airplay Chart, women were ahead. The ethnicity breakdown is a little less optimism. Still a way to go in terms of representation. BBC Radio 1 and BBC Radio 6 Music have struck a great balance. So too have BBC Radio 1. Even if 1Xtra is heading in the wrong direction, three huge BBC stations have committed themselves to gender equality. Bauer and Global radio stations have to learn from the BBC. There are some improvements that give encouragement, though Kerrang! Radio, Absolute Radio, Smooth Radio and Radio X need to learn lessons and improve for 2025. Capital FM has made strides.

In all, it means BBC stations have taken to heart findings from last year’s report. I do think that this should be the biggest takeaway in terms of gender. Bauer and Global still need to do a lot of work. Even so, there are some improvements here. Potential for bigger steps next year. The Gender & Racial Disparity Data Report on UK Radio shows how the radio stations have changed over the past five years. You can see how they have improved/fallen behind. There is a lot of brightness. Apart from some worrying findings – 100% of artists on the Top 20 playlist at Absolute Radio are white! -, there is cause for celebration. It is clear that Absolute Radio, Radio X, Kerrang! Radio and Kiss Fresh need to make steps. BBC stations very much leading the way. Let us not forget that this report is about the gender and ethnicity of artists in the Top 20 playlists, rather than right across the board. If you look at schedules for most stations (apart from BBC Radio 6 Music), things might look more skewed towards male artists. Despite this, what has been put together by Why Not Her? proves that, for many stations, it is important that female artists are very much included in the Top 20 playlists. This is very good indeed! Three very clear sections. The first section of the report is an analysis of the Top 100 Radio Airplay songs in 2024 from both UK and International artists, from Jan 2024 to June 2024 in all radio stations combined across the UK, looking at the gender and ethnicity across the Top 100 Airplay songs. The second section takes a look at the songwriters behind the Top 100 songs on UK Radio in 2024. The third section is an analysis of 27 individual radio stations, looking at the gender disparity present in the Top 20 most played songs by British artists, in Britain, over the period of JUNE 1st 2023 to JUNE 1st 2024. The collective data clearly and brilliantly shows how things have changed and (mostly) improved from last year. Let’s hope that this trend continues. A huge thanks and salute once more to Why Not Her? for their amazing research and dedication putting together the Gender & Racial Disparity Data Report on UK Radio. It is incredible that things have improved for female artists and artists of colour. Especially for women. Some important steps. Let’s hope that this evolution occurs…

YEAR after year.

FEATURE: Waking the Witch: Has the Media and Public Perception of Kate Bush Truly and Fully Changed?

FEATURE:

 

 

Waking the Witch

IN THIS PHOTO: Kate Bush in 1993/PHOTO CREDIT: John Stoddart

Has the Media and Public Perception of Kate Bush Truly and Fully Changed?

_________

MAYBE the answer seems obvious…

though I don’t think it is unreasonable of me to say that, about a month until Kate Bush’s sixty-sixth birthday, there does seem to be this perception of her that has not entirely shifted since 1978. I can draw in what songs are played on radio and the relative lack of Kate Bush features. I still think that, for the most part, when we see articles written about Kate Bush, many of them are from news sites. Reactions to various bits of news. The same words keep coming up when discussing Bush. They either limit her to one song – usually Wuthering Heights or Running Up That Hill (A Deal with God) -, or they use words like ‘recluse’, ‘private’ or even ‘weird’. That sense that, decades after her debut album, Kate Bush is still this witch-like figure. Maybe someone who shuts herself away and does not engage in public. This perception that an artist like Kate Bush needs to go to events and is out and about. There has been some change and more positivity towards her yet, again and again, you get the same sort of perception about her. I think that there really is a lack of Kate Bush features. Various sites do run some, yet there most features are tied to news or anniversaries. I do like how there is more attention her way now. How the U.S. has embraced her in a way they have never done. I still find it a little dismaying more is not written about Kate Bush. Why do we need to wait until some news breaks?! I write about Kate Bush all of the time. I can appreciate how magazines do features and articles. Look at news relating to Kate Bush and articles written about her. You will find there are weird and annoying clickbait and tabloid things – one recent one where Simon Cowell was amazed at how much Kate Bush was worth when he found a cheque for her; other ones talking about Kate Bush’s wealth -, plus people reaction to news items. Very little that goes deeper and looks at her music and various aspects of her personality. I am actually going to quote from a feature that was published quite recently. There is a website, Far Out Magazine, that publishes a Kate Bush feature every week or so. Most of it consists of short features that are not really original features but they are more to do with Kate Bush’s influence, the album that meant the most to her, her connection to David Bowie. Basic stuff that does not really go beyond a single fact or thought. I think that, the more we write about Kate Bush and the more we explore, the better understanding we have. That perception will change.

Having recently interviewed Graeme Thomson about the reissue of his book, Under the Ivy: The Life and Music of Kate Bush, I would urge people to read this. Journalists. Get a real feel for the real Kate Bush. Even though she is in her sixties, the same sort of words and attitudes are applied to her. A preconception that is based on nothing but misinformation and cliches. She is a complex and remarkable artist that deserves more words written about her. Features that go beyond talking about her wealth, things to do with Stranger Things. News items are great, as we are aware of what is happening in relation to Kate Bush and her world. Kate Bush has always faced this. In the 1970s onwards, the media often focused on sexuality. An over-sexualisation of her. Louder wrote about Kate Bush’s early years for a feature. They make some interesting points:

“The tour triumphed, though reviews ranged from “her unabashed obsession with sex” to “you’re distracted by Katy being wheeled around in a giant satin-lined chocolate box.” Others praised “a dazzling testimony to a remarkable talent” and “the best welding of rock and theatrical presentation that we’re ever likely to see.”

We need more people like her, especially as so much music amounts to little more than formulaic copying of genres

She baulked again at the over-emphasis on her sexuality, and began to loathe anything that fell under the banner of promotion. With her family, she took control of her business affairs, producing her next EP (Live On Stage) alone, and then the 1980 album Never For Ever. This, yielding the hit singles Babooshka and Army Dreamers, was to be her first Number One album, and the first by any British female artist.

A durable paradox emerged: the more she distanced herself from public life, the more the public were intrigued by this individual, idiosyncratic, influential talent. As David Gilmour has proclaimed: “We need more people like her, especially as so much music amounts to little more than formulaic copying of genres. Those who have followed in her shadow are but pale imitations”.

There are a combination of factors that mean we have not really transitioned from an old perception of Kate Bush. I will talk about it in another feature but, speaking to so many people in their twenties and thirties, it is shocking how few know about her. Maybe know her for one song. The words they use to describe her often relate to her being odd, reclusive or weird – none of which is true! It is frustrating that there is still a lot of people who do not really know about Kate Bush. Maybe one can say because she has not released an album in over a decade, that is fair enough. There are plenty of artists who have not released an album for longer – or have died – that are better known and understood. I think the media does not help when it comes to a certain ignorance and perception. Bush, in the 1970s and 1980s, had to face a lot of misconception, sexism and judgement. It did not really stop. Even up through the 2000s and 2010s, whenever she released an album, there would be articles discussing how eccentric she was. How this supposed reclusive artist was back. Discussing how she was mysterious or odd. Things have improved a bit. I still feel that there is such a narrow focus and idea of who Kate Bush is. When her songs are played on radio, a relatively small number are selected. Media coverage is quite sparse. You get some interesting deep dives, yet most articles are not really going beyond the surface. Even if she has not released an album since 2011, that does not mean we should stop digging and exploring. Artists like her are inspiring so many others. Because of that, we need to write more about Kate Bush. Even if more generations know her work and she is not being portrayed the same way as she was at the start of her career, there is still so little beyond the stereotypical and incorrect. Radio stations need to embrace her. Words need to be written. More love and understanding. Uncovering her full body of work. Get rid of those words and phrases always associated with Kate Bush. This hugely important and legendary artist is worthy of…

THAT at the very least!

FEATURE: Groovelines: Elvis Presley – That’s All Right (Mama)

FEATURE:

 

 

Groovelines

Elvis Presley – That’s All Right (Mama)

_________

IT almost slipped me by…

IN THIS PHOTO: Elvis Presley in 1954/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

but, on 5th July, 1954, Elvis Presley recorded his debut single, That’s All Right (Mama). It is hard to say how the song should be written out, as I have seen it like that, That’s All Right, and That’s All Right, Mama. I am going to stick with the spelling and version in the header. In any case, this song is a cover version. That's All Right is a song written and originally performed by the American Blues singer Arthur Crudup. Elvis Presley’s version, That’s All Right (Mama), was recorded in 1954. The original was recorded in 1946 but not released until 1949. I think it is a seismic moment seeing the young Elvis Presley – he was just nineteen! – head into the studio. Perhaps a little nervous. Even though his debut single was recorded in 1954, his eponymous debut album did not arrive until 1956. That album changed Rock ‘n’ Roll. One of the most seismic album releases in history. I wanted to focus on his debut single and the story behind it. I am going to use a few features to help do that. I want to start with History and their study of That’s All Right (Mama). Recorded on 5th July, 1954, it is almost seventy years since a slice of history was laid down:

“History credits Sam Phillips, the owner and operator of Sun Records in Memphis, Tennessee, with the discovery of Elvis Presley, which is perfectly fair, though it fails to account for the roles of four others in making that discovery possible: The business partner who first spotted something special in Elvis, the two session men who vouched for his musical talent and the blues figure who wrote the song he was playing when Sam Phillips realized what he had on his hands. The song in question was “That’s All Right” by Arthur “Big Boy” Crudup, and Elvis’ unrehearsed performance of it—recorded by Sam Phillips on July 5, 1954—is a moment some regard as the true beginning of the rock-and-roll revolution.

The sequence of events that led to this moment began when a young truck driver walked into the offices of Sun Records and the Memphis Recording Service on a Saturday night in the summer of 1953 and paid $3.98 plus tax to make an acetate record as a birthday present to his mother. Sam Phillips recorded Elvis singing “My Happiness” and “That’s When Your Heartaches Begin,” and he told his business partner Marion Keisker something that made her write down “Good ballad singer. Hold” in her notes. It was Kreisler who was impressed enough by the incredibly shy young singer that she repeatedly brought his name up to Phillips over the next year and mentioned that he seemed worth following up with. In early July 1954, Phillips finally sent two of his favorite session musicians, guitarist Scotty Moore and bassist Bill Black, to go meet with Elvis and report back to him with their assessment. After talking and jamming a bit with Presley, Moore and Black gave Phillips a report that was hardly enthusiastic. “He didn’t knock me out,” Moore told Phillips, “[but] the boy’s got a good voice.” Phillips decided to take a flyer and schedule a recording session with Presley for July 5.

Phillips knew that something was brewing in the music world of 1954, and he had a pretty good idea what it would take to make the pot boil: A white singer who could sing “black” rhythm and blues. However, the first several hours of the July 5 session did nothing to convince Sam Phillips that Elvis was the one he’d been looking for. Elvis’s renditions of “Harbor Lights” and “I Love You Because” were stiff and uninspired, and after numerous takes and re-takes, Phillips called for a break. Rather than shoot the breeze with his fellow musicians or step outside for a breath of fresh air, Elvis began to mess around on the guitar, playing and singing “That’s All Right,” but at least twice as fast as the original.

Through an open door in the control room, Sam Phillips heard this unfamiliar rendition of a familiar blues number and knew he’d found the sound he’d been looking for. “[Phillips] stuck his head out and said ‘What are you doing?'” Scotty Moore later recalled. “And we said, ‘We don’t know.’ ‘Well, back up,’ Sam said, ‘try to find a place to start, and do it again.'”

Phillips continued recording with Elvis over the next two evenings, but he never captured anything as thrilling as he did that first night. Released to Memphis radio station WHBQ just two days after it was recorded, and then as a single two weeks later, Elvis Presley’s “That’s All Right (Mama)” became an instant regional hit and set him on his path toward stardom”.

I will move to this feature that offers even more details and revelations about an iconic single release. The start of something huge. It is wonderful that interest in the song was so intense that D.J. Dewey Phillips played the acetate fourteen times. The switchboards lit up. Elvis Presley went to the radio station, WHBQ, for an interview. Presley did not realise the microphones were live, so he revealed details about himself that made people aware of the fact he was a white artist. A song from a Black artist, maybe people felt Elvis Presley was Black. That’s All Right (Mama) sold about 20,000 copies. Even if it did not get a U.S. national chart position, it made the local Memphis chart:

“The first side might be seen as something of an accident. An inspired accident, to be sure, but one that was prompted more by desperation than by intent. It was the outgrowth of an audition session at Sun Records set up by Sun owner Sam Phillips nearly a year after Elvis had first come into Phillips’ studio to make a “personal” record at the singer’s own expense. Elvis was backed at the session by guitarist Scotty Moore and bass player Bill Black, who at Phillips’ direction had listened to Elvis run through his repertoire of ballads, country, and pop material at Scotty’s house the day before. Both were in a hillbilly group called the Starlite Wranglers that had recently recorded for Sun, and Phillips judged them to be well suited, both musically and temperamentally, to bring out the best in the insecure nineteen-year-old who seemed unable to settle on a style. It didn’t work quite the way that anyone planned. The audition session was no more focused than the pre-audition, or, for that matter, the informal tryout Phillips had given Elvis just ten days earlier on a song he thought might be good for the boy. Elvis was all over the place on the evening of July 5-6, nervously stopping and starting songs, mostly sentimental ballads, and it was only when he sensed the moment slipping away that he picked up his guitar during a break and started flailing away on a blues that nobody could even have guessed was within his scope.

It was at that precise moment that Sam Phillips knew they had arrived at the destination they had unknowingly been seeking all along. “That’s All Right” was in its way a faithful homage to the 1946 Arthur “Big Boy” Crudup blues from which it derived, an homage intended neither to imitate nor to displace the original. And yet it was in its own way utterly, strikingly different. Probably what made it most different was its youthful purity, its unchecked sense of joyous release and exuberant lack of restraint. What set it apart in a more formal way was its combination of rhythm and melody (Crudup’s original, while unquestionably driving, retained the amelodic modal feel of much Mississippi blues), its deliberate blurring of genres, and the use to which its simple instrumentation was put. Scotty’s lead guitar featured some of the lyrical elements of Nashville stylist Chet Atkins in combination with the power-driven blues of some of Phillips’ earlier discoveries while Bill Black’s slap bass added a different, more eccentric form of propulsiveness and Elvis’ acoustic rhythm anchored the whole in an unshakably soaring groove. “To be honest, we just stumbled on it,” Elvis said in response to a question about the derivation of his style from announcer Frank Page in his Louisiana Hayride debut. That was unquestionably true of “That’s All Right,” which Sam Phillips circulated as a single-sided acetate. When it immediately became a radio hit in Memphis, due almost entirely to the enthusiasm of local DJ Dewey Phillips, Elvis, Scotty, and Bill (the trio’s initial name) were faced with the challenge of coming up with a B-side. “We spent three or four nights,” said Scotty, “trying to get something that would be in the same kind of vein. Then Bill jumped up and started clowning and singing ‘Blue Moon Of Kentucky’ in a high falsetto voice, and Elvis started banging on the guitar, and I joined in, and it just gelled.” With the Bill Monroe bluegrass classic, in other words, they set out to recapitulate the formula they had stumbled upon that first night, but in the opposite direction – in this case taking a hillbilly waltz toward a 4/4 blues. The result was an instant city-wide hit, with six thousand orders in something like two weeks, and regional success slowly radiating out from there. Sam Phillips had to fight a great deal of resistance from both country and r&b DJs, with some of the r&b jocks telling him the record was so country it shouldn’t be played after sun-up and the country jocks telling him they would be run out of town if they aired it. Nonetheless, Phillips persisted, Elvis persisted, and the record persisted, eventually posting sales of more than 100,000 copies, almost entirely in the mid-South, Texas, and Louisiana, in the year-and-a-half before Elvis’ contract was sold to RCA”.

Even if it is clear that Black artists like Little Richard were Rock ‘n’ Roll pioneers before Elvis Presley, it is obvious that Presley introduced something new. It is perhaps problematic that Presley, as a white man, was seen as more appropriate to promote. Rather than salute the pioneers he took inspiration from, there was still a real sense of racism through the media and beyond. Even so, That’s All Right (Mama) was a pivotal and enormous moment in music history. The introduction of an artist who would soon become a world-wide sensation. Far Out Magazine revisited Elvis Presley’s first single for their feature:

“Presley wasn’t the first rock and roll singer, nor was he even the first white rock and roll singer. Just a few months prior, Bill Haley released his version of ‘Rock Around the Clock’, which still treated rock and roll as a dance fad much in the same way that Big Joe Turner’s ‘Shake, Rattle, and Roll’ did. Little Richard and Chuck Berry had already released records that blues into new, high-energy territory. But what Presley was doing was completely unique and at the forefront of a new cultural movement.

The story of where rock and roll actually starts begins before Elvis was even old enough to enter a bar. Pioneers like Sister Rosetta Tharpe, Fats Domino, and Bo Diddley were all making souped-up blues music that sounded completely different from the pure blues of Howlin’ Wolf and Muddy Waters. Presley was simply an avatar for these influences – the man with the sound, the looks, and the acceptable race to be embraced by the general public and propelled into the mainstream.

Phillips wasn’t shy about his intentions: he wanted a white singer who could play black music. Presley was that man. A few days after the impromptu recording of ‘That’s All Right’, Presley, Moore, and Black returned to Sun Studios to cut a transformed version of Bill Monroe’s bluegrass classic ‘Blue Moon of Kentucky’. With more of an emphasis on rhythm, Presley showed that he could cull from both blues and country in own music. Both songs would quickly be compiled onto a single and released only a week later.

‘That’s All Right’ began to gain traction around Memphis and soon migrated down south to the Louisiana Hayride, a country music radio programme that was open to playing blues and R&B. The house drummer at the Hayride was D.J. Fontana, who provided Presley with his first backup of percussion. The pieces of Presley’s initial rock and roll takeover were starting to land in place. Soon, Presley would move beyond Sun Studios and its signature sound, but ‘That’s All Right’ never strayed far from Presley’s life as he continued to refine and redefine rock music over the next 23 years”.

For this Groovelines, I wanted to spend time with a song that, in a way, changed music history. The start of Elvis Presley. He, in turn, inspired so many other artists who followed. One of the most famous and adored artists ever. Released on 19th July, 1954, That’s All Right (Mama) was recorded a fortnight earlier. The debut single from a then-teenage Elvis Presley truly is…

A landmark recording.

FEATURE: I think about it all the time: Are We Slowly Seeing a Return to the More Fun and Free Style of Pop Music?

FEATURE:

 

 

I think about it all the time

PHOTO CREDIT: Nadin Sh/Pexels

Are We Slowly Seeing a Return to the More Fun and Free Style of Pop Music?

_________

I have featured Charli XCX…

 IN THIS PHOTO: Charli XCX/PHOTO CREDIT: Harley Weir

a couple of times in recent features. It is relevant and apt. Recently, she released her critically acclaimed album, BRAT. It is one of the most popular albums of the year so far. Signalling a fun and fresh brand of Pop with vulnerability and sensitivity, it bursts with colour, energy and innovation. It seems like almost every year where we ask whether Pop music is dead. Whether it is as good as it used to be. I guess, subjectively, there were peaks in the 1980s, 1990s and even early-2000s where we had some of the best Pop music ever made. That consistency and choice. Now, in such a crowded landscape, how easy is it to identify and spotlight those really standout Pop moments?! It is a fantastically broad scene, yet it is clear that there is a lot of quite routine, tired or manufactured Pop. In the sense that it seems made for TikTok videos and something digestible and simple. Even a lot of the catchier Pop lacks any real depth or fun. I would disagree that Pop music completely lacks fun and real spark. There are plenty of more infused and colourful artists injecting personality into the mix. The thing is, how much of this Pop music seems genuinely free and abandoned?! I think that a lot of it I still quite polished and similar to everything around it. I am reminded of Charli XCX because, in a recent feature from The Guardian, they argued how Charli XCX was offering something refreshingly brash, direct, open and rebellious. At a time when many artists have lyrics that need to be decoded and there is this strictness and restraint to their music, that is not the case with BRAT. It is an album that, aside from being the most acclaimed of the year, is also being met with huge fan love. Artists around Charli XCX are inspired and adapting her sound for their own purpose. An artist who is leading a charge against the more stifled and commercial Pop that doesn’t feel as fun and direct as it could be:

“That coolness feels like a direct rejection of a sanitized, often tedious pop landscape of late; along with upstarts Chappell Roan and Sabrina Carpenter, Charli XCX is bringing playful personality back to pop music. While the big pop stars go on stadium tours and tightly guard their image, Charli is hosting highly sought-after raves, harkening back to the messy, scuzzy, paparazzi-flash days of the mid-aughts and indie sleaze. Her lyricism on Brat, by her own description, mimics the type of drunk, unguarded texts you’d send to friends. Where the other pop girls attempt to look perfect, or chafe against spotlight or bleed onto the page, Charli embodies simply having a good time. “You’re all about writing poems / But I’m about throwing parties,” she sings on Girl, so confusing – a kiss-off to a friendship in which rooting for one’s success and demise are indistinct.

Which is not to say that the album isn’t vulnerable; for every track expressing straight hedonism – “365, party girl, bumpin’ that / should we do a little key, should we have a little line?” she says on album highlight 365 – there’s a song teasing out something deeper, harder, over an undeniable beat. Sympathy is a Knife is a banger on cutting insecurity in the face of a bigger pop star; So I is a moving tribute to mentor and collaborator Sophie, who died at 34 in 2021, which laments allowing genius to stand in the way of human connection. For an artist who balks at the mandate for authenticity from celebrities, the juxtaposition hits something universal; few artists are going to follow up a song about pondering the possibility of motherhood with one about doing coke and loving it.

All of the tracks invite participation, but not overanalysis; the point is to get lost in it. I’ve tended to think of her music as the sonic equivalent of what cultural critic Max Read once called social media’s Freudian death drive: “our latent instinct toward inorganic oblivion, destruction, self-obliteration”. Total encompassing of song, obliteration by sound – the lyrics, always delivered in autotune, important but not critical, secondary to the power of beautiful cacophony. Pop at its most playful, cutting, and uncomplicatedly fun. As the music critic and pre-eminent Charli scholar Lindsay Zoladz put it: “I believe that most great pop music strikes a precise equilibrium between the smart and the stupid, and few artists working today understand that balance more intuitively than [Charli XCX].” With Brat, she’s everyone’s favorite reference, baby”.

PHOTO CREDIT: Helena Lopes/Pexels

The feature got me thinking more widely about Pop. It has been over twenty years since we had the last real burst of this kind of raw and exciting Pop. Not to say the years since have not produced some magnificent Pop. Whether it is artists blending in Disco and Dance or this giddy and 1980s-inspired brand, Pop is in no danger of dying or being irrelevant. It is true that, with more and more Pop on the market, there is more of the safer and less exciting Pop that drops any guards and protective layers and seems very genuine and unabashed. Not to say that Charli XCX is crude or vulgar. Instead, you tend to get more of the core of who she is. Not wanting to compete with her peers or create an album that is designed to slot into radio station’s playlists or get a chart position. This more genuine and loose Pop. It sort of takes you back to the past. A bit of the 1990s. Some Rave culture and underground sounds. It is almost hard to describe. I do think that BRAT and Charli XCX, given this huge respect and acclaim, will spark many more Pop music of that sort. It will not completely override and replace some of the more commercial and safe Pop. Four years ago, this article from The Atlantic noted how a more cartoonish and American teen-dream style of Pop had faded away. How it was replaced by something less fantastical and multicoloured. I would disagree that Pop completely lost its colour, juvenile edge and reckless. I would say that the genre has gone a little stiff. Maybe TikTok and other platforms have had an impact. If you get major mainstream artists putting out a particular sound, then it is inevitable that a score of upcoming artists will mine that sound for themselves. I do hope that the incredible success of artists like Charli XCX does integrate heavily into a new Pop wave. Not necessarily something nostalgic that takes us back to a different time. Just a new dynamic and preference. Pop with no real walls or mystery. Unguarded and brash, but also music that has real emotion and deeper moments. In a Pop landscape that has lost a bit of its verve and fun, I do think we will see soon it…

KICK back into life.

FEATURE: Soon It Will Be Gone Forever: The Importance of the Documentary, blur: To the End

FEATURE:

 

 

Soon It Will Be Gone Forever

PHOTO CREDIT: Reuben Bastienne-Lewis

The Importance of the Documentary, blur: To the End

_________

WE get music documentaries…

all of the time, yet most of them are on streaming services. It is not often the case that a documentary makes its way to the big screen. In the case of blur: To the End, you can order your ticket. It is released on 19th July. I am going to come to a few reviews for this documentary. There is something epic and romantic about this documentary. Considering the band released their first single, She’s So High, in October 1990, the fact they are still together and strong is testament to their bond and brotherhood. That has not always been so. In the period between the release of 13 in 1999 and Think Tank in 2003, there was this tension and breakdown. Graham Coxon dealing with substance issues. Maybe a sense that Damon Albarn was going solo or exerting too much control. Dave Rowntree and Alex James having to carry on. There was no telling whether, after Think Tank, Blur would find their way back to one another. I was very fearful that they would call it quits. Even though they did go on hiatus, they came back in 2015 with The Magic Whip. Last year, they released one of their very best albums. The Ballad of Darren could well be a farewell. I think Damon Albarn has said how there are no immediate plans to record anyway. You can never say never, yet I feel like there is something final about this album and recent gigs they have been involved in. Perhaps their 8th July show at Wembley Stadium will be the bowing out. A chance to say goodbye and thanks to fans. It means that this new documentary holds extra weight and emotion:

"A new feature-length documentary depicting the extraordinary and emotional return of blur, captured during the year in which they made a surprise return with their first record in 8 years, the critically acclaimed #1 album ‘The Ballad of Darren’.

blur: To The End follows the unique relationship of four friends - and band mates of three decades - Damon Albarn, Graham Coxon, Alex James and Dave Rowntree as they come together to record new songs ahead of their sold-out, first ever shows at London’s Wembley Stadium in 2023. Featuring performances of their most iconic, much-loved songs, footage of the band in the studio and life on the road, this film is an intimate moment in time with this most enduring of English bands, who have been at the heart of British cultural life and influence for over three decades”.

You can find more details and insight about the documentary. Not only will it celebrate the way Blur have riden through the highs and lows and still stayed together. It is also an emotional look at these friendships that broke down for a decade. How they were in the wilderness and there was very little chance of them being a band anymore. It is inspiring that, on their latest album, they are as together and strong as ever! This is a documentary for casual and diehard Blur fans alike:

“Tickets are on sale now with more cinemas being added through to release. Find your local cinema at blur.co.uk. Details of international cinema release coming soon.

Speaking in the film, Alex James said – “We’ve barely communicated for the last 10 years… I mean even when we really split up, it didn’t take this long to make a record, but what’s wonderful is as soon as the four of us get in a room together, it’s just exactly the same as it was when we were all 19….”

With Graham Coxon adding – “With each other… In the nineties, it was a very intense time. On the same sort of level as a relationship, or marriages and things like that. I think it’s okay to say that time apart was taken up with other friendships and just sort of recuperating or doing other things.”

Dave Rowntree said – “The fact that we haven’t always got on, that is one of the chemistry points that has led to us being able to make the music we do. I’m absolutely convinced of it.”

Damon Albarn said – “I don’t think any of us thought we’d make another record, especially not a record like this. I suppose that’s why I wanted to try and make it as good as possible.” Speaking later in the film, he added – “We all have hugely involving and complicated lives and we’re so lucky that we get to spend this time together, just the four of us. And that’s the beauty of it…”

blur: To The End is directed by Toby L and produced by Josh Connolly, via production house Up The Game.

Toby L said – “To The End is an intimate glimpse into relationships, motivation and mortality, the sights and sounds of longterm friendship unearthing a fresh new conquest to overcome together. On the subject of capturing a band that has been so well documented, we sat down at the start of the project and agreed that the film had to tell a new story, be shot entirely on location, and crucially, be honest. In To The End, that’s what I hope people can see, and most importantly, feel.

Working with blur on this documentary, over the past year has been the honour of a lifetime. They were the first band I ever saw – when I was 10 – at Wembley Arena. To consider that a little over 25 years later, I’d be making a film with the band that changed my entire world view on art, culture and music, remains utterly surreal. I hope that through watching it people feel a little closer to this incredible group of artists and friends, and have a richer insight for a life spent being in a band”.

I am going to come to some reviews for blur: To the End. That intense time during the 1990s. I can only imagine how tough it was to survive as a band. When they released their debut album, Leisure, in 1991, it did not get huge reviews. After a particularly disastrous U.S. tour, few felt Blur would continue. 1993’s Modern Life Is Rubbish was a step up but, again, they faced cynics and critics. 1994’s Parklife established them as a band here to say. By 1997’s Blur, they were very much survivors of that 1990s scene and the Britpop battle with Oasis – who, in 1997, were on the way down. With the excess, demands and burn-out many experienced in the decade, Blur (mostly) kept it together. I guess there was a natural sense of tension and reaching an end by the time of Think Tank. By that point, Blur has been together anamazing twenty-five years. I think it is that thing of the guys not getting on but being used to it. It is what happens in bands. They have survived their most testing days and come out the other end. Whether their Wembley gig is the final time they are on stage together, and whether or not another album comes, we can look forward to the documentary. Hearing the four members talk about their career and relationships. I want to get to some reviews for blur: To the End. This is what The Guardian wrote:

“The Blur fan does not want for documentaries. From the ramshackle Starshaped in 1993, which captured these Britpop Monkees pre-megastardom, to the slick New World Towers in 2015, this is a band that knows what the camera wants: deadpan daftness and onstage hijinks interspersed with melancholic reflections on age and Englishness. The 2010 doc No Distance Left to Run showed the quartet reuniting after a prolonged estrangement: “Let’s get the band back together one more time!” growled singer Damon Albarn. This latest look-back-in-languor can’t do much more than give the concept another run around the block, with added early archive footage. Now the band are back together again after a second prolonged estrangement, and they have a new dragon to slay: Wembley stadium. “The less we do, the bigger we get,” observes drummer and current Mid Sussex Labour candidate Dave Rowntree.

Armed with a new album (The Ballad of Darren), they play assorted warm-up shows – Wolverhampton! Eastbourne! – as well as a homecoming gig in Colchester, Essex. Here, Damon (looking like Albert Steptoe) and guitarist Graham Coxon (sounding like Dudley Moore) find that the music room at their former comprehensive has been named in their honour. Their suggestion that its ambience might benefit from some paisley wallpaper and a bowl of weed is met with muted horror by the head teacher.

Then it’s off to Wembley for two nights and a combined crowd of 180,000 fans. If that all sounds like a walk in the Parklife, the film is not without suspense. Will the gigs go ahead now that three of the four band members have dodgy knees? Will the prolific Damon find himself sufficiently stimulated? (“If you don’t keep him focused on the job in hand, he’ll literally write another opera,” marvels chain-smoking bassist and cheese-maker Alex James.) Will Alex’s punnet of farm-grown tomatoes meet with his bandmates’ approval?

In place of the long-gone messiness that made Starshaped so compelling is a geezerish sentimental sheen, a look-how-far-we’ve-come self-regarding awe, which chimes with the title song but wears thin over 105 minutes rather than three. The lack of any interesting structural or film-making choices doesn’t help, though the director Toby L wisely knows to hold the camera on Alex’s forlorn expression after he laments, of a recent night on the lash, that “there’s always a really good reason not to go to bed”. The decision to fillet or truncate every song, though, proves to be depressingly business-minded: complete numbers are being held back for a full-length concert movie later this year.

Throughout the film, the band remain affable company. Like Pet Shop Boys, they are relics of an age when pop stars were capable of droll copy, rather than just the controversial kind, even if there is a lot of waffle to wade through. “Ours is a brotherhood that has been sustained by a musical relationship … Music is a complete abandonment of the ego, and you’re just one of billions of atoms in that space.”

The one exemplary moment belongs to someone other than these four wealthy white blokes. Pauline Black, singer with 2 Tone stalwarts the Selecter, prepares for her support slot at Wembley by reflecting on why she’s still plugging away after all these years; she says that the racism, sexism and various other isms that seemed to have been vanquished are now back again, and as pernicious as ever. It’s a reminder that not everyone has had it as easy as the likely lads of Blur, and a salutary wake-up call amid the film’s popscene daydream”.

There are two other reviews I am keen to explore. Although there have been a fair few Blur documentaries, it seems that blur: To the End is among the most important and revealing. I had never considered it but, as Big Issue note in their review, the documentary explores the complexities of male friendships. I feel it might cast a light on male bands and those who have split. Those that remain together. How difficult it can be at times:

“If one moment sums up blur: To The End, a new film charting the return in 2023 of one of this country’s best bands of the last three decades, it is a quiet moment, during a break in recording, as the reunited band sit talking in the studio. Singer Damon Albarn slides into a tiny gap between guitarist Graham Coxon and bass player Alex James on a sofa. He leans into the warm, easy embrace from either side, as drummer Dave Rowntree looks on. It’s a rare moment of stillness and peace for Albarn.

This is a man constantly on the move, described in the film by James Ford – producer of Blur’s 2023 LP The Ballad of Darren, as “pathologically addicted to making new stuff all the time”. And it hints at the deeper story behind the band’s surprise, but hugely successful comeback.

Because when Damon Albarn hit a personal post-lockdown low, when he found himself living alone for the first time in decades, holed up in his secluded South Devon farmhouse, his finely tuned musical subconscious conjured the songs to bring his oldest friends to him. And they showed up for him.

The result was not only an album to rival any Blur have produced since forming in 1989 and the biggest UK shows of their career. Perhaps the even bigger result was a new, improved understanding between the four members.

Over the course of the film, we see Albarn, Coxon, James and Rowntree commune with their long and complex personal and musical histories and choose to cherish their commonality rather than dwell in their differences. And they ride this new wave of friendship and understanding all the way to Wembley Stadium.

So this is not the definitive Blur biography. Nor is it the inside track of the recording of The Ballad of Darren. And while we see the build-up to the two triumphant Wembley concerts in July 2023, rehearsals, back stage footage and highlights from the performances, a full-scale concert film is not arriving until September 2024. Instead, blur: To The End, expertly directed by Transgressive music group co-founder Toby L, strives for something more profound.

By showing four old friends coming together, blur: To The End is an all-too-rare depiction of long-term male friendship in all its complications and complexity, as well as an uplifting reminder of the power of music to transcend and heal.

The film opens with Albarn driving, precariously, along the narrow road to his home before welcoming his bandmates. He is nervous. A bit jumpy. “Blur are coming here,” he explains, as if he’s about to be visited by the ghosts of Christmas past. Guitarist Graham Coxon has never been before, he says. Bass player Alex James and drummer Dave Rowntree have not been since Blur – temporarily a three-piece – recorded Think Tank in 2002.

We see the worries dissipate. The new arrivals wrap him in love. James joins his singer for a cold-water sea swim, they eat together, it is, says bass player James, like being back in halls of residence at Goldsmiths.

Later, as they listen back to completed tracks for the new record, we see Albarn nervously glancing at Coxon – seeking approval from his oldest and closest collaborator, there are echoes of Lennon and McCartmey always finding each other’s eye-line in Peter Jackson’s Get Back documentary.

He needn’t worry. “The singing is fucking ace,” Coxon tells him, as the band lean into the emotion in the new material.

Few singers can convey heartbreak or melancholy like Albarn at his best. “This is an album about loss,” he explains, a little reluctantly, to the camera. “The aftershock of loss. Whether that is a dramatic break up or pandemic. Now I live alone in the countryside – and this record very much feels like that.”

Along the way, we see the roots of their friendship and hear about their history. There is even, for the first time, a recording of Real Lives – Albarn and Coxon’s first ever school music project. Albarn and Coxon return to their old school in Colchester, which now has a music room named after them. The singer tells the nonplussed current headteacher why he used to hide in the music room lest he get beaten up: “’Cos everyone thought I was a cunt.” Despite everything, he’s still giving frontman vibes. Still putting on a show. And still playing up for the camera, all those years after he was centre stage in every school production.

Albarn also recounts youthful hijinks, including risking life and limb to change the time on the New Cross Town Hall clock while on acid during their Goldsmiths years. And the band discuss how early lyrics from Leisure, Modern Life Is Rubbish and Parklife resonate even more today, the pressures of the Britpop success years and the impact on each of them, and why they have all felt the need to spend most of the last 10 years apart.

From there, we see the band preparing for Wembley. Coxon, never fully at home with the show element of showbiz, calls the stage show rehearsals in giant soulless enormo-drome a “great way to feel awful about everything you’re doing”. And the band are more fractious than in the studio.

But it is all viewed through the eyes of four 50-something men with a shared musical and personal history and increasingly dodgy knees.

So we see the way they understand each other now. Their different needs and personalities. Albarn confident, showy, always performing; Coxon more sensitive and shy; James a study in louche ambivalence is happiest to relive the heady days of hardcore drinking as the band set out on a warm-up tour; while Rowntree is more detached, a thinker, the current Labour Party candidate for Mid Sussex happier talking about the state of the nation than rock stardom.

Albarn is clearly the driving force. And the band accept this. “If we don’t keep him focused on the job in hand, he will literally be doing another opera before the third single is out,” James grins.

Between recording the album and playing at Wembley, Albarn has toured with Gorillaz, Coxon has been on the road with his band The Waeve, and James has been making cheese, running his farm and partying with his kids. And with Wembley approaches, Rowntree suffers a potentially tour-ending tennis injury.

But the band understand the significance of playing Wembley. “Me and Damon watched Live Aid on television together,” recalls Coxon. And their biggest ever UK gig coming at this stage in their career is not lost on them.

Then it’s showtime. After Jockstrap, after Sleaford Mods, after Self Esteem. After The Selector, after Paul Weller, it’s time for Blur to play Wembley Stadium.

“There is something very healing about creating a beautiful noise,” says Albarn, as this beautifully made film nears its end. “And I never know if it will be the last time”.

I am going to end with a five-star review from NME. As someone who discovered Blur in the 1990s and was a big fan, I am excited to see this. I never thought that we would be talking about them in 2024! It is amazing that they have stayed strong and have that incredible friendship. As much as anything, we will get some raw insights and revelations that explain and explore the complexities of their friendship. This is what NME said in their review:

“Time is not infinite,” offers Blur’s Damon Albarn in the opening scene of new documentary film, To The End. Born of the Britpop age that promised so much, the band now in their 36th year and on their second comeback seem acutely aware that they aren’t, as their gobby rivals once promised a generation, going to “live forever”.

We begin with Albarn enjoying a pastoral existence on the rural Devon coast; getting cut up by Land Rovers on winding roads, celebrating the first egg from his beloved pet chicken and living in a very big house in the country. But all’s not well. Shattered by the split from his partner of 25 years, the self-confessed workaholic turns his heartache into song – and can only do it with his oldest friends around him. As guitarist Graham Coxon puts it, “a boulder is dislodged” within his pal – with two decades of pent up emotion pouring out.

That frank and honest storyline alone (we often see the frontman struggling and in tears) would have made for a must-see film, but the stakes are higher. As well as charting the indie legends’ recording of their immaculate comeback album ‘The Ballad Of Darren’, To The End also follows them on the road to a pair of shows at London’s Wembley Stadium.

Directed by Transgressive Records founder Toby L, To The End is a joyful and touching tale of a band crawling out of their Last Of The Summer Wine years to get all Spinal Tap once more. Each member has a challenge to beat: bassist turned cheesemonger Alex James savours the party lifestyle while remaining fearful of his old problems with alcohol, Coxon wrestles with the notion of being a stadium band when he only ever wanted to be a punk, and drummer turned politician Dave Rowntree goes and breaks his bloody leg weeks before curtain-up.

Still, the highs are higher; it’s wonderful to see the band retrace their friendship right back to school, the live footage from their intimate warm-up shows and the Wembley gig itself put you right in the beer-soaked mosh-pit, and Coxon gets a laugh by doing something pretty gross with a can of Diet Coke. No Spoilers.

They bicker, they hug, they call each other c**ts, they get the job done. While Blur’s last doc and accompanying live movie No Distance Left To Run was a portrait of a band celebrating their legacy and giving a nostalgia-hungry world exactly what they craved, this spiritual sequel shows a band simply supporting each other. Whether they return again or not remains to be seen. But even if they don’t, this was one hell of a final fling”.

Even if blur: To the End has a title that suggests a closing chapter and goodbye, that has not been confirmed. It is going to be a chance to celebrate this legendary band. Also, for those of us growing up with their music, an intimate portrait of these four amazing musicians. They play Wembley next month and, after that, who knows?! Make sure you go and see the documentary on 19th July. As they say in To the End (from Parklife): “And it looks like we might have made it…

YES, it looks like we made it to the end”.

FEATURE: Dreams: Why CATTY Supporting Stevie Nicks at BST Hyde Park Has This Wonderful Romance

FEATURE:

 

 

Dreams

IN THIS PHOTO: CATTY 

Why CATTY Supporting Stevie Nicks at BST Hyde Park Has This Wonderful Romance

_________

IT happens now and then…

IN THIS PHOTO: Stevie Nicks/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

and is more common and possible in the modern culture. What I am referring to is artists who are perhaps rising or not yet at the mainstream being given the opportunity to perform alongside legends and truly established artists. Artists like Taylor Swift selecting various artists to support depending on which country she is performing her Eras Tour. It must be a moment of real shock and ecstasy for an artist who gets that opportunity. Something they can talk about forever. In years and decades past, maybe the process was slightly different. If you got that sort of chance, it is possibly the case that the artist’s manager – the big and established artist – sees this upcoming act and recommends them. Maybe there is this word-of-mouth vibe. It probably occurred less than it does now. You would hear stories of those waiting or working behind bars getting these massive opportunities. Their dreams coming true. Being pulled from that somewhat modest setting and making it onto a giant stage alongside a hero of theirs. Almost this Hollywood vibe. This takes me to the recent case of CATTY. This is someone who has been on my radar and I hope to feature in my Spotlight feature soon. She is an amazing talent who I hope gets interviewed and profiled a lot soon enough. Take her music to new levels and people. As the BBC write, CATTY has been given the chance this summer to appear alongside Stevie Nicks at BST Hyde Park:

“A singer has secured a dream gig performing as a support act at a Stevie Nicks concert after using Instagram to "sell herself like a dog".

Catty, also known as Catrin Hopkins, will appear on stage at the Fleetwood Mac star's BST Hyde Park show.

It was all thanks to her sending a voice note to the booking agent on Instagram saying: "Hi, this is so embarrassing, but I just think it should be me."

The independent artist, from Caernarfon, Gwynedd, still works as a waitress to fund her career and will now join six other artists to make the all female line-up on 12 July.

"I called my manager and said ‘there’s no way this can go ahead without me’," she told Radio Wales Breakfast.

"We basically just emailed everybody that we could and we weren't getting any responses.

"So I found the booking agent and I just sent her a voice note on Instagram."

Catty started her career in the pop duo Dusky Grey in 2016 before moving to London to become a solo artist in 2021.

"I am pushing myself constantly, I'm also still a waitress and I have no shame about that," she said.

"Making music is so, so hard in terms of making money. That's how I'm funding everything - that's how I fund every show, that's how I fund every song that I put out.

"It’s really hard, but there's no way that I would ever do anything else.”

Stevie Nicks will headline BST in Hyde Park on 12 July

Catty is no stranger to supporting big artists after singing at a Lewis Capaldi concert as part of Dusky Grey, but said this opportunity was her "big dream".

"I’m quite calm about it now because we found out two weeks ago, but this means the world to me," she said.

"The reaction I had when it was announced, I just cried. That’s literally my hero!".

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by 🌜CATTY🌛 (@catty.mp3)

Even if the circumstance of CATTY supporting Stevie Nick is not quite the same as being discovered oldskool or getting her name spread about town, it is a modern equivalent. This young and very passionate artist putting her heart out there to share the stage with a hero. What I love is that this sort of thing can happen more in the modern day. With platforms like Instagram and TikTok, smaller artists can reach these major artists and, sometimes, their dreams can come true. That Stevie Nicks Fleetwood Mac song, Dreams. It seems very appropriate for CATTY. There is something wonderfully almost filmic about this coming together. A new artist whose has this music idol and hero. Never assuming the two would meet. That now will happen. Although CATTY Joins other women on stage, there is something about her story and situation that is particularly fantastic and rare. Not to suggest that all artists take to Instagram and work tirelessly to get their heroes to notice them. It may not always pay off or be possible. CATTY is also someone who has put in the hours and hard work. It is not like she is a talent show contestant who has been given a shot because of some T.V. exposure. The marrying of something new like Instagram and that bygone thing about dreams coming true in this strange and unexpected way. I think this is why the story stood out for me. I wanted to write about it. We might see other artists get that same opportunity as CATTY. They may be working in bars or shops between gigs and music commitments. Suddenly find themselves in the position where they get the gig of a lifetime! You can get tickets to see Stevie Nicks on 12th July. There is this great and varied BST Hyde Park line-up. It will be amazing. Especially true for CATTY. Going on stage to support an idol of hers. It shows that, in a hectic, competitive and packed music landscape, where artists have to struggle for recognition and survival, dreams really can…

COME true.

FEATURE: Kate Bush: The Deep Cuts: Leave It Open

FEATURE:

 

 

Kate Bush: The Deep Cuts

Leave It Open

_________

I have written about this…

track a few times before. Usually when marking the anniversary of The Dreaming. Kate Bush’s fourth studio album was released in 1982. Although it reached number three in the U.K., EMI felt it was slightly underwhelming. Many still feel that this album is too inaccessible and weird. Too much experimentation and not enough quality. Deeper and more layered than anything she released previously, this was Kate Bush producing solo. Utilising the studio and technology like the Fairlight CMI. With various sonic inspirations blending together, this was a bold and brilliant new direction. An artist clearly growing in ambition and scope. Kate Bush was only twenty-four when The Dreaming came out. It seems even more remarkable when you hear the brilliance of the songs on the album. A song that was not released as a single and one I don’t think I have heard on the radio, Leave It Open is certainly a deep cut. I may retread some information I put into previous features. There is no doubting the fact that Leave It Open is a deep cut. A song that many people are unaware of. I will go into the track in a bit. First, and thanks to the Kate Bush Encyclopedia, we have examples of when Bush discussed one of her most intriguing, fascinating and compelling tracks. One whose range of sounds and contours is a real step above anything from her first three albums:

“Kate about ‘Leave It Open’

Like cups, we are filled up and emptied with feelings, emotions – vessels breathing in, breathing out. This song is about being open and shut to stimuli at the right times. Often we have closed minds and open mouths when perhaps we should have open minds and shut mouths.
This was the first demo to be recorded, and we used a Revox and the few effects such as a guitar chorus pedal and an analogue delay system. We tried to give the track an Eastern flavour and the finished demo certainly had a distinctive mood.
There are lots of different vocal parts, each portraying a separate character and therefore each demanding an individual sound. When a lot of vocals are being used in contrast rather than “as one”, more emphasis has to go on distinguishing between the different voices, especially if the vocals are coming from one person.
To help the separation we used the effects we had. When we mastered the track, a lot more electronic effects and different kinds of echoes were used, helping to place the vocals and give a greater sense of perspective. Every person who came into the studio was given the “end backing vocals test” to guess what is being sung at the end of the song.
“How many words is it?”
“Five.”
“Does it begin with a ‘W’?”
It is very difficult to guess, but it can be done, especially when you know what the song is about.
I would love to know your answers.

KATE BUSH CLUB NEWSLETTER, OCTOBER 1982

‘Leave It Open’ is the idea of human beings being like cups – like receptive vessels. We open and shut ourselves at different times. It’s very easy to let you ego go “nag nag nag” when you should shut it. Or when you’re very narrow-minded and you should be open. Finally you should be able to control your levels of receptivity to a productive end.

RICHARD COOK, ‘MY MUSIC SOPHISTICATED? I’D RATHER YOU SAID THAT THAN TURDLIKE!’. NME (UK), OCTOBER 1982

Talking about “guessing”, at last someone has discovered what’s being said at the end of “Leave It Open” – well done! But let me tell you about some of the fascinating encounters I’ve had. There is a Mr. John Reimers from the U.S.A. who has rung up once a week with his new version:
“Is it…?”
“Nope!”
“Well, is it…?”
“Nope!”
“Tell me! Tell me!”
John, you’re terrific!
But I’m afraid this is just a mild case. One night I woke up to a tapping on the window. It was someone hanging from a nearby tree by their feet. In their hands was a card, and written on it was: “Is it ‘We paint the penguins pink?'” I’m afraid I had to laugh, and shook my head. They burst into tears and ran off into the moonlight. But I think the cleverest was a phone call I had the other week.
“Hello, Kate?”
“Hello?”
“It’s Jay here, how are you doing?”
He sounded a little squeaky to me. Then he said: “You know, it’s ridiculous. I was sitting here listening to the end of ‘Leave It Open’ the other day, and I just couldn’t remember what you said – I know it’s crazy but -“
I interrupted.
“‘We paint the penguins pink.'”
“Oh, yeah! Of course, how could I forget? See you soon – bye!”
Hmmm… see what I mean?… C-lever!
But seriously, I have enjoyed your guesses tremendously, but I have terrible dreams about your reactions now that the answer has been revealed. Do I hear cries of “You’re kidding! But that’s stupid!” or “Cor, that’s pathetic – all our efforts overthat?”
Well, I hope not… And remember to let the weirdness in.

KATE BUSH CLUB NEWSLETTER, 1984”.

PHOTO CREDIT: Pierre Terrasson

There is a lot going on through Leave It Open. Even though journalists have not really spent too much time with the song – I have not seen a single feature dedicated to it (apart from ones I have written!) -, there has been some fan discussion and dissection. Thanks to this website for leading me to postings and theories by fans that go back to 1985. People spending time with Leave It Open and offering some interesting insights:

“On "The Dreaming" there is a two-way message that is sung at the end of "Leave It Open". When you play it forwards it sings "We let the weirdness in". And when you play it backwards it sings "And they said they would not let me in"!

I've tried this several times, and I can't hear the word "not". All I can hear is "They said they would let me in". As to how they did it, I'm not an expert in the field, but I have what I think is a pretty good guess. It's drowned out by the music in the part where the music is still going, but in the part at the very end, I can hear something in the background, and although the voice is intelligible, it still sounds weird. This makes me think that they've recorded the two messages separately in normal, forward voices, then reversed one of them, then combined the two signals together. I'm not familiar with the Fairlight, but I wouldn't be surprised if such things were not too difficult to do on it. They probably tried different relative speeds and offsets until they got something that produced the desired effect. When we play the record in one direction or the other, we're actually hearing both messages at the same time, one forward and the other backwards. Because we tend to notice intelligible speech more than unintelligible speech, we hear mostly the forward message. One of the scientists I work with has done some research in the field of speech intelligibility, so if I get a chance I'll talk to him about it and I'll forward his comments to this mailing list”.

That ending mantra of “We let the weirdness in” almost became a motto or mission statement for The Dreaming. It is a weirder and darker album than anything Kate Bush recorded before – or since really. Bush writes so beautifully and vividly through this song. There are so many standout lyrics and passages. I have some favourites. This is one of the best: “Narrow mind would persecute it/Die a little to get to it/(But now I've started learning how)/I leave it open”. I often wonder what compelled Kate Bush to write various songs. That thing about humans being like vessels and cups. Opening and shutting ourselves at various times. In a way, I think Leave It Open is a companion piece for the first single from The Dreaming, Leave It Open. That song is humanity's endless search for knowledge. I like how there are connected songs and clear themes. Maybe Leave It Open would not have succeeded as a single. It is a shame that it is under-exposed and explored. That lack of live performance and stage spotlight. I wonder what would have happened if Kate Bush had gone on tour after The Dreaming. Maybe exhaustion meant that this was not a consideration. Such is the atmospheric and powerful nature of those songs, to see them on stage would have been magnificent! In terms of the production and her vocals, I think that Leave It Open is one of her absolute best. I would urge people to check out the song. It is magnificent and should be played on radio. If many see it as not suitable for most stations, those with taste and appreciation of music that has surface and is not your ordinary Pop song should give this a shot. It is an important chapter and moment from one of Kate Bush’s albums. Many people close their minds and hearts to this song. I think that people should really…

LEAVE them open.

FEATURE: The Digital Mixtape: A Swedish Pop Mix

FEATURE:

 

 

The Digital Mixtape

IN THIS PHOTO: Zara Larsson

A Swedish Pop Mix

_________

WHEN you think of nations…

IN THIS PHOTO: ABBA/PHOTO CREDIT: Olle Lindeborg/AFP/Getty Images

that have provided the best Pop music, inevitably people’s minds go to the U.K. or U.S. In terms of quantity, I guess these are safe bets. In terms of Pop with a difference, maybe there are other options. It is renowned how strong Swedish Pop is. Rather than tie this playlist to a distinct date or anniversary, I felt a Swedish Pop mixtape would be a perfect energy boost for this week. Many might only feel there is ABBA and that is all there is to select from. If you take from more recent years, there are great Swedish Pop tracks that have come onto the scene. In a lot of cases, these are artists that were born in Sweden and now live elsewhere – though that would still constitute Swedish Pop. You will know almost all of these artists, yet there might be a few that are new to you. From the deliriously upbeat to something a little more tempered but still wonderful, this Swedish Pop Digital Mixtape shows what a strong and consistently brilliant nation they are. Maybe more eyes should be on nations like Sweden, Denmark and Iceland. Rich and diverse in terms of the music. For a pure hit of Swedish Pop, the playlist below…

IN THIS PHOTO: The Cardigans

IS all that you need.

FEATURE: Misread: Kings of Convenience's Riot on an Empty Street at Twenty

FEATURE:

 

 

Misread

Kings of Convenience's Riot on an Empty Street at Twenty

_________

UNLIKE some albums…

turning twenty this year, Kings of Convenience’s Riot on an Empty Street probably won’t get the same attention. It is a quiet storm. Something swelling, beautiful, dramatic and vivid. It is a gentle album, yet one with such rich and sumptious vocals and wonderfully immersive lyrics. Songs that bring you inside. Ones you are captivated by. The second studio album from the brilliant Norwegian duo, Erlend Øye and Eirik Glambek Bøe, two of the songs feature Feist – Know How and The Build Up. I wanted to shine a full light on a really brilliant album that turns twenty on 21st June. I remember buying the album and not knowing what to expect. Three years after their remarkable debut, Quiet Is the New Loud, Riot on an Empty Street offered more of the same thing. If anything, their second studio album sounded bigger and fuller than their debut. You could feel that life in confidence and scope. Produced by Kings of Convenience and Davide Bertolini, I think that some reviewers missed out on Riot on an Empty Street. Others did not give it the praise it truly deserved. I can understand some doubts or criticisms against Riot on an Empty Street. For an album that tries to bring in more Dance and Electronic influences, maybe the blend is not quite right. Perhaps an album that nods more to the past rather than comes into the twenty-first century. Also, Feist perhaps underused or not given the strongest parts. There is also this sense of politeness and few risks. If you know what to expect and are not thinking it is going to be a big evolution from their 2011 debut, then Riot on an Empty Street offers plenty. The production is bigger and fuller. The duo’s most recent album, 2021’s Peace or Love, was praised. It retained their core sound but brought in Bossa Nova influences. Being released during the pandemic, perhaps it did not the attention and full exposure it would otherwise have enjoyed.

I do really love Riot on an Empty Street. The fact that Feist introduces a new vocal element. The standout tracks like Misread, I’d Rather Dance with You, Surprise Ice and The Build Up. Each time you pass through the album, you will discover something new. It is a beautifully deep album that is a lot more than surface. I feel some critics did not pay as much attention to Riot on an Empty Street as they should. Denying themselves of something stunning. I want to bring in a review from AllMusic. This is what they observed when they assessed the 2004 album from Erlend Øye and Eirik Glambek:

“Riot on an Empty Street ends a long period of inactivity for Kings of Convenience. During their three-year layoff Erlend Øye could be found making solo records and DJing while Eirik Glambek Boe was finishing his psychology degree. Luckily for fans of beautiful vocals and thoughtful indie pop, they decided to get back together. What this band is all about is the sound of Boe and Øye's voices blended together in harmony. Their first album (in both incarnations) erred on the side of consistency. Here the band seems to have learned the all-important lesson of pace and variety. The arrangements are fuller too with pianos, strings, the occasional electric guitar, and lovely guest vocals on two tracks from Broken Social Scene member Leslie Feist. Not to say that they have gone crazy with change. They still stick pretty closely to the acoustic guitars and vocals path, and the tone of the album is autumnal and restrained as before. They have just added more songs like the gently driving "Misread," the lilting waltz "Stay Out of Trouble," and the downright peppy "I'd Rather Dance With You." Øye's side trip into electronica only rears its head on the non-electronic but modern-sounding "Love Is No Big Truth." No matter what the song, though, when their tender, fragile voices harmonize it can be breathtaking. And heartbreaking. The moment in "Surprise Ice" when Eirik is joined by Erland will raise goose bumps. There are many others like that on Riot, and they are what sells the record. If you sort of liked the first record but wished it was more interesting, that it had more punch of both the sonic and emotional variety, then your wishes have come true”.

I do hope that there are plans to bring Riot on an Empty Street to vinyl. I am having a hard time finding too many options. As it is twenty on 21st June, it would be a good time to consider it. A really gorgeous album that you can lose yourself in, I would also hope people revisit it. Maybe opinions have changed. Though it received generally favourable reviews – The Independent gave it five stars; The Guardian four -, those who provided three-star takes or were a little mixed might do well to listen back now. I want to end with a review from No Depression. They make some interesting observations about the sumptuous Riot on an Empty Street:

“Over the last two decades, the idea that “dance music” could ever signify a static, all-encompassing genre has essentially passed. “Dance” has since melted down into a giant puddle of prefix-and-suffix-affixed subcultures, and Norwegian folk duo Kings Of Convenience are rallying for the inclusion of one more: post-club.

Part-time (and widely acclaimed) DJ Erlend Oye and his songwriting partner Erik Glambek Boe — adorably credited as “low voice” and “high voice” in the album’s liner notes — play tender folk songs remarkably well-suited to jerky cab rides at dawn, when your vision is foggy at best and home seems awfully far away. With their doleful acoustic guitars, breathy, microphone-eating vocals, and pristine production, Oye and Boe have mastered the art of the comedown.

Riot On An Empty Street, the duo’s third original full-length, nods to the soft intimacy of Nick Drake, and, perhaps surprisingly, fails to reference Oye’s extracurricular electro-jaunts. The Kings tend to avoid electronic flourishes, opting instead for pretty organics: piano, strings, guitar, and the soft muscle of two perfectly harmonized voices.

The opener “Homesick” is a joint love letter from Oye & Boe to Simon & Garfunkel (complete with self-referential longing for “two soft voices blended in perfection”), while “Know How”, featuring Broken Social Scene vocalist Leslie Feist, mixes a swinging, lounge-infused piano melody with sweet, toe-tapping vocals.

Folky, tender, and seeped in gray, pre-dawn light, Riot On An Empty Street is a tender homage to the art of descending”.

If you are unfamiliar with Kings of Convenience or their music, check out their official website. Hopefully we will hear more music from them. They always produce these tender and beautiful albums that have these sparks and bright colours at the edges. Different genre and instrumental influences. All pulling towards the stunning vocal chemistry and harmonies from their duo. As it is twenty this week, I wanted to show Riot on an Empty Street some love. It really is such…

A wonderful album.

FEATURE: Worthy Rumours: Would Kate Bush Playing Glastonbury Ever Be a Possibility?

FEATURE:

 

 

Worthy Rumours

IN THIS PHOTO: Kate Bush received the Editors Award at the Evening Standard Theatre Awards in the Palladium, London on 30th November, 2014/PHOTO CREDIT: Alan Davidson/Rex/Shutterstock

Would Kate Bush Playing Glastonbury Ever Be a Possibility?

_________

MAYBE that question…

IN THIS PHOTO: Emily Eavis/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

has quite an obvious answer. When we think about Glastonbury Festival and whether Kate Bush would ever appear, most people would say the same: absolutely not. In terms of logic, she is sixty-five, hasn’t performed live for nearly a decade. She has not released an album since 2011. In terms of Kate Bush and her live dynamics. She has her own set and confines. Bush does not play festivals. Aside from a Japanese song contest in 1978, Bush has not really performed to a huge crowd beyond her 1979 tour and 2014 residency. On both occasions, she chose the venues and there was this sense of her setting the parameters. Making sure she was comfortable in that space. The shows involved a sense of intimacy. Different sets and costume changes. Doing anything outside of that would have been a no-no years ago. Now, as we have not really heard anything new from Bush in so long, it would be an impossibility. I mention Glastonbury, not only because it is a matter of days away. One of its organisers, Emily Eavis, was asked which artist would be her dream headliner. She chose Kate Bush. This Louder article gives more details:

“Emily Eavis says her dream festival headliner for Glastonbury Festival is Kate Bush.

During a recent appearance on the BBC’s Sidetracked podcast to discuss this year's upcoming event, festival organiser Eavis was questioned by hosts Annie Macmanus and Nick Grimshaw on who her dream booking would be.

In response, she says: "Do you know who I would like to get who haven’t had… Is Kate Bush. I’d love to have her. I’ve put it out there that I’d love to have her.I hope one day."

Unfortunately for Eavis, such a scenario is unlikely to happen, considering Kate Bush has only ever hit the stage for two official tours across her entire career - firstly in 1979 for the Tour of Life, followed by Before The Dawn, her 2014 residency at London’s Hammersmith Apollo.

In spite of this, Eavis remains optimistic and adds: "But you never know I mean Elton was a pipe dream and it happened.

"But I think you’ve also got to create these new headliners like Dua Lipa. We’re creating this moment for her and that’s really as exciting as anything.”

Elsewhere in the interview, the organiser revealed that Glastonbury Festival will most likely be taking a year off in 2026, stating: "We are due a fallow year. The fallow year is important because it gives the land a rest, and it gives the cows a chance to stay out for longer and reclaim their land.”

She continues, “I think it’s important, I think it gives everybody time to just switch off and the public as well. Then you kind of go away for a bit and it feels lovely when you come back. And I think it’s quite good not to be seen to be cashing in.”

Glastonbury Festival will return to Worthy Farm, Somerset this year on June 26-30, with Dua Lipa, Coldplay, and SZA headlining the Pyramid Stage”.

In the past, I have been dismissive about anyone suggesting Kate Bush would play Glastonbury. I know people who do not know her history and views might naturally assume a festival slot would maybe be a possibility. I guess those who know Bush a bit better realise that Glastonbury would be out of her comfort zone. Even so, the fact that she is so sough-after means that you can never rule anything out. When Elton John headlined Glastonbury last year, many thought Kate Bush would make a guest appearance. The two are friends and she covered John’s song, Rocket Man (I Think It's Going to Be a Long, Long Time), in the 1990s. The two duetted on Kate Bush’s most recent studio album, 2011’s 50 Words for Snow. Many would have loved to see them share a stage. Also, as there are more intimate stages and areas at Glastonbury, maybe a Pyramid Stage slot would not be the only option. Obviously nothing will happen this year. Emily Eavis announced 2026 will be a fallow year for Worthy Farm. Giving the land a chance to rest and recover. It does call into question next year. It will be forty years since Hounds of Love was released. Seeing this iconic artist take to the headline stage and performing from that album would be perfect. Even if you could not get the same atmosphere and sense of amazement you might see at Eventim Apollo, maybe something could be produced that would bring to mind 2014’s Before the Dawn. You wonder whether, as that residency was unique and she performed twenty-two dates, would Kate Bush want to repeat herself?

I am not sure how much of Kate Bush’s career Emily Eavis knows about. Interviews where Bush has talked about live performances. How it would be difficult for her to consider doing anything like headlining Glastonbury. Of course, she can always surprise us. Given how Before the Dawn seemed like a closing chapter regarding live work, I would say there are very long odds of her doing anything like it again. Also, as Bush was nervous performing in a relatively small space like the Eventim Apollo, it would be astronomically nerve-wracking playing Glastonbury. Unless she has a very special desire to play there and maybe bow out with a headline slot next year, I think we can safely assume that it will be a ‘no’ from her – were more offers to come from. Regardless, it got me thinking about the appreciation there is for her music. Of course, we would all love for Kate Bush to be announced headliner next year and conquer her nerves and opinions regarding festivals. She is not overly averse to them, it is the fact she doesn’t play them and is not that kind of live artist. It got me thinking at least about the upcoming tenth anniversary of Before the Dawn. That happens in August. It will get people nostalgic. Those who were not at one of the dates would love to see Kate Bush perform somewhere else. Can we really rule out any more live work?! Whether it is a one-off at Abbey Road Studios in a more stripped-back capacity or Kate Bush would ever go on another residency, there will be a lot of speculation and fantasies. Discussion around Glastonbury will be on people’s mind. Emily Eavis has made it clear how much she wants Kate Bush to play.

IN THIS PHOTO: Kate Bush during 2014’s Before the Dawn/PHOTO CREDIT: Ken McKay/Noble and Brite/PA Wire

Undoubtably, as Emily Eavis has revealed Kate Bush is her dream headliner, fans like me are imagining possible setlists and how it would go. We are going to mark a decade of Before the Dawn in a couple of months. What comes next? There are no plans of new material or anything new. There has also not been any announcement or plan for footage of Before the Dawn to come to cinemas or DVD. It does leaver this hole. People who have never seen Kate Bush live. The big reason Bush returned to the stage – in terms of a big production – since 1979 was because of her son, Bertie. She needed a bit of convincing to get there. There would be even more reticence and hesitation doing anything massive like Glastonbury. Even if it was her final live performance. Bertie (Albert) is in his twenties now. There is a new generation of fans. That would be a push, I guess. Also, Kate Bush is always doing new things. In terms of between albums and the sound/themes. Her 1979 tour is very different to Before the Dawn. I guess there is always a slim bit of hope. It would be the most popular and perhaps best Glastonbury headline set ever. However, knowing so much about Kate Bush and the fact she has never played a U.K. festival, there would need to be this big incentive and reason. One cannot rule anything out in the next year. No doubt she will realise that Emily Eavis wants her to headline. People are very keen for Kate Bush to do something. Whether it is a live set or a new album. That tension and excitement. A new opportunity to hear from Bush. It may seem totally implausible and like he longest shot ever. That thought of Kate Bush stepping onto Glastonbury’s Pyramid Stage next year for the Sunday headline slot. Maybe coming out as Running Up That Hill (A Deal with God) plays. Ending with a song like Hounds of Love. It gets me thinking about all these concepts and possibilities. However remote, a Kate Bush Glastonbury headline set is…

WORTHY of consideration.

FEATURE: The Sounds of Science: Looking Ahead to the Thirty-Fifth Anniversary of Beastie Boys’ Paul’s Boutique

FEATURE:

 

 

The Sounds of Science

Looking Ahead to the Thirty-Fifth Anniversary of Beastie Boys’ Paul’s Boutique

_________

1989 was a truly legendary year…

IN THIS PHOTO: Beastie Boys in 1989/PHOTO CREDIT: Paul Rider

for Hip-Hop. Among the big releases from that year was De La Soul’s debut, 3 Feet High and Rising. Not only was this album one of the most important Hip-Hop albums of 1989: Beastie Boys’ Paul’s Boutique is among the finest albums ever released. One of the best from the year for sure. It is testament to its sampling, production and extraordinary variety that the trio’s second studio album is so enduring. It is still played to this day. A big step on from their 1986 debut, Licensed to Ill, not everyone embraced Paul’s Boutique. After their debut, there was so criticism. Some feeling they were a joke or novelty act. Some accused them of sexism and bad attitudes towards women (something the trio addressed on Paul’s Boutique). One reason why Paul’s Boutique alienated some was the amount of sampling and its scope. Perhaps not as accessible as Licensed to Ill. Their second album masterpiece was produced by the Beastie Boys and the Dust Brothers. It was recorded over two years at Matt Dike's apartment and the Record Plant in Los Angeles. Even if Paul’s Boutique was not promoted widely by Capitol and the sales were not as big as expected, it has become the group’s most loved albums. An iconic and seismic release. I am going to get to some reviews and features about the album. An album I would urge people to buy, I do wonder whether there will be a thirty-fifth anniversary reissue. Paul’s Boutique was released on 25th July, 1989. I would recommend people look at this Billboard feature that is a track-by-track guide. Also, this feature explores one of the greatest albums ever. I am going to start off with this article from Albumism. On its thirtieth anniversary (in 2019), they took us inside the brilliance and background of the Beastie Boys’ stunning second studio album:

“The road to making Paul’s Boutique was not an easy one, largely due to the all too familiar tale of the music powers that be and the artists not being on the same page. In the midst of the success of their 1986 debut Licensed to Ill, the Beastie Boys’ vision of where they wanted their careers to head were vastly different from that of producer Rick Rubin and Def Jam founder Russell Simmons. From 1986 to 1988, the Beastie Boys carved their own space in the frat boy hip-hop territory. Despite having hip-hop’s first Billboard #1 album, by 1987, the trio (Adam Horovitz a.k.a. Ad-Rock, Adam Yauch a.k.a. MCA and Mike Diamond a.k.a. Mike D) started to grow disenchanted with their situation.

According to their memoir The Beastie Boys Book, Horovitz said, “Things seemed to be going great, so we just rolled with it all. Going on tour, opening for Madonna, and then Run-D.M.C., it was like a dream that we didn’t even know existed for us that had come true. We’d become a big group of friends having ridiculous fun, making music, playing shows, traveling, and getting paid money to not actually have a job. But at a certain point, Rick and Russell started coming up with ideas and making decisions for us.”

Horovitz also claimed that Rubin chose the artwork for Licensed to Ill and re-produced their biggest hit, “(You Gotta) Fight For Your Right (To Party!),” without their consent. “We were too busy living the high life to pay attention. Big mistake. Kids, when someone’s making decisions for you, you can also bet that they’ve decided to take what’s yours,” Horovitz added.

Eventually they grew tired of that act, especially when Simmons suggested to Yauch that he continue his onstage persona of the drunk guy at the party offstage. The Beastie Boys became victims of the age old trick of being forced to tour endlessly, only to discover by the end of the tour that they were flat broke and they owed the label another album.

After a year of contentious lawsuits, the Beastie Boys signed a deal with Capitol Records with the groundbreaking Paul’s Boutique being their first record for the label. The group got a brand new lease on life and an opportunity to contribute to the making of the album. Produced by the Dust Brothers, Paul’s Boutique is a masterpiece that would not be able to be made today because of its groundbreaking use of samples. It would be financially prohibitive.

By the time the Dust Brothers and the Beastie Boys got together, most of the album’s tracks were instrumentals that the producers had been working on previously. In a 2009 interview with Clash magazine, Yauch stated, “They had a bunch of music together, before we arrived to work with them. As a result, a lot of the tracks on Paul’s Boutique come from songs they’d planned to release to clubs as instrumentals— ‘Shake Your Rump’, for example. They’d put together some beats, basslines and guitar lines, all these loops together, and they were quite surprised when we said we wanted to rhyme on it, because they thought it was too dense. They offered to strip it down to just beats, but we wanted all of that stuff on there. I think half of the tracks were written when we got there, and the other half we wrote together.”

The aforementioned “Shake Your Rump” contains an array of samples that require multiple listens to figure out exactly where the beats came from. The samples range from “Funky Snakefoot” by Alphonse Mouzon to “Jazzy Sensation” by Afrika Bambaataa and The Jazzy 5 to “Get Off” by Foxy. “Shake Your Rump” is three minutes and nineteen seconds of organized chaos that is infectious.

Among the other highlights from Paul’s Boutique are the lesser known “Egg Man” featuring the baseline from Curtis Mayfield’s “Superfly” and the theme from Jaws and “High Plains Drifter,” a song about a low life drifter traveling cross country with samples from “Those Shoes“ by the Eagles, “Your Mama Don’t Dance“ by Loggins and Messina, and “Put Your Love (In My Tender Care)” by The Fatback Band as the background music. The most successful single from Paul’s Boutique was “Hey Ladies,” which managed to peak at #36 on the Hot 100. It was a far cry from the hits on Licensed to Ill, but in terms of overall quality, the songs on Paul’s Boutique are far superior.

As you listen to the album, it’s clear that this is a Beastie Boys production without interference from a label head or producer. This was their voice going forward. They crafted outrageous stories set to beats and samples that set them apart from many of their peers. In his speech inducting the Beastie Boys into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame in 2012, Public Enemy’s Chuck D stated, “After Licensed to Ill, the Beasties left the Def Jam label and broke with their producer Rick Rubin and still kept it going on. Everyone wondered and many people were pessimistic about how the hell they were going to top their multi-platinum debut, Licensed to Ill. But their second album, Paul’s Boutique, broke the mold, and with it they accomplished everything they hoped for”.

<

Its approaching thirty-fifth anniversary is cause for celebration. I do wonder whether the surviving members, Adam ‘Ad-Rock’ Horovitz  and Michael ‘Mike D’ Diamond will mark it – we sadly lost the brilliant Adam ‘MCA’ Yauch in 2012. I want to move to this feature from Tidal. Again, in 2019, they were keen to go deep inside Paul’s Boutique on its thirtieth anniversary:

“Despite the success of Licensed to Ill, critics seemed less than impressed by the Boys. They often derided the Beasties as an obnoxious  “comedy act,” Run-DMC poseurs cashing in on the rap-rock sound. (The durags didn’t help.) Naysayers characterized the beer-fueled antics, irrepressible horniness and degradation of women in their music (and live shows) as earnest immaturity instead of thinly masked satire. (It was likely somewhere in the middle.)

The “Fight for Your Right (to Party)” video could have been called a documentary and no one would have blinked. With that single alone, unwittingly or not, three ex-punks were credited with creating the soundtrack to the execrable acts of fraternity pledges who probably found Andrew Dice Clay insightful.

Rolling Stone granted the Beasties some self-awareness, but their review of Licensed to Ill attributed the visceral, speaker-frying hybrid of concussive percussion and searing rock guitar entirely to Rick Rubin, despite the fact that the Beasties are listed as producers. If their scores on Kool Moe Dee’s infamous “Report Card” reflected the views of the Beasties’ peers, those who shared stages with the group also gave them a low passing grade.

Amid the critical backlash, Def Jam was, according to the Beasties, withholding royalties from Licensed to Ill as a punitive measure. The label wanted a sophomore record, but the group wanted a break after a year-plus of touring. “They did not fucking pay us — Rick [Rubin] and Russell [Simmons], our friends, Def Jam,” Ad-Rock wrote in 2018’s Beastie Boys Book.

There are differing accounts of how the Beastie Boys wound up recording the majority of Paul’s Boutique at the small, Hollywood apartment of the late Matt Dike, co-founder of the now-iconic Los Angeles label Delicious Vinyl (Tone Loc, the Pharcyde, Young MC). Ultimately, the Beasties were captivated by the instrumentals they heard from Delicious Vinyl affiliated producers the Dust Brothers (John “King Gizmo” King and Mike “E.Z. Mike” Simpson).

By 1988, they had split from Def Jam and moved to L.A., signed to Capitol for millions, and rented a mansion in the Hollywood Hills in hopes of making a record that would erase, or at least distance them from, the frat bro image.

“I think that they were focused on not being a one-hit wonder and breaking away from the popularity and the fanbase that the song had garnered for them,” Mike Simpson told KEXP in a 2015 interview. “They really wanted to reinvent themselves and make a statement that they were more than ‘Fight for Your Right (to Party).’”

For the past three decades and for all eternity, all talk of Paul’s Boutique rightfully begins with the beats. The Dust Brothers took the thundering walls of disparate sounds pioneered by the Bomb Squad on Public Enemy records (e.g., It Takes a Nation of Millions to Hold Us Back) and dialed back the dissonance while dialing up the funk.

In the Dust Brothers and Matt Dike, who was present for and influenced many recordings, the Beasties had found true musical kinsmen — people whose eclectic tastes went beyond the rap and rock that had informed Licensed to Ill. Rubin’s beats on that album almost sound primitive by comparison.

“They’d grown up listening to many of the same records, so they were into it,” Simpson told KEXP. “It seemed to be a good match.”

Those records became Beastie-tailored collages, a collection of beats composed of (literally) hundreds of samples pulled from funk and soul (Curtis Mayfield, Rose Royce, Zapp, Kool & the Gang, the Meters), rock (the Beatles, Jimi Hendrix), rap (Funky 4+1, BDP, Run-DMC), reggae (Pato Banton, Scotty) and more. Drum breaks, bass lines, guitar riffs, vocals from rap records and radio commercials — nothing was off limits. The Dust Brothers and Beastie Boys expanded the horizon and parameters of sampling further than anyone thought sonically or technologically possible in 1989.

Capitol reportedly paid between $200,000 and $300,000 to clear as many samples as they could, but there are undoubtedly more left uncleared. The sum is paltry considering the amount rap artists would later pay for a single sample. It’s proof that the beats on Paul’s Boutique could have only existed in the era before sweeping and expensive (and arguably incommensurate) copyright litigation forever hamstrung the genre.

The only 1989 rap record that approached sampling with the same scope and playfulness was De La Soul’s Prince Paul-produced Three Feet High and Rising (which did result in a lawsuit).

There’s a fan-run website devoted to textually cataloging every sample (and lyrical reference) on Paul’s Boutique. If that’s not sufficient, you can visit WhoSampled to play the exact bar(s) the Dust Brothers and the Beasties looped. Hearing the pieces of music in isolation affirms the artistry required to make them fit together, to make them virtually indivisible.

For a test case, you needn’t look any further than “Shake Your Rump,” which is essentially the first song on the album. (“To All the Girls” is an intro.) There are four different drum breaks, but it never sounds like they’re from different records. Instead, they come off like brilliant tangents or improvised solos. If no one told you that the rubbery, undeniably funky bass line came from Rose Royce’s “Yo Yo,” you might think it was also from the same song sampled for the main drum break (Harvey Scales – “Dancing Room Only”).

The sounds on every beat, whether that’s the infectious Commodores riff on “Hey Ladies” or the multiple Beatles samples on “The Sounds of Science,” become inextricable parts of the whole. It’s as if each beat were a house made of vinyl, a structure that would collapse without the support of each interlocking bass line, drum fill and vocal sample embedded in dust-coated groove.

One of the main reasons the beats on Paul’s Boutique work so well is that the Beastie Boys were equally unpredictable, trading punchlines and shouting them in unison with an effortless polish and fluidity not present in the more rigidly delivered verses of their debut. Together, they weave in and out of each other, in and out of the drum breaks, like the Showtime-era Lakers on a fastbreak.

They don’t just rhyme around the esoteric vocal samples, the samples become part of the rhyme schemes, part of their hooks. They converse with them. The combination of their three distinctive voices, although grating to some, packed the collective bravado necessary to compete with the dozens of sounds playing in unison.

Lyrically, Paul’s Boutique was a marked leap forward for the Beasties. Largely jettisoning the Licensed to Ill narratives that played like an X-rated version of Fast Times at Ridgemont High, they had begun to find the right mix of high and low brow. Literary references to Jack Kerouac and J.D. Salinger appear on the same album with similes about The Flintstones and The Brady Bunch. With odes to egging people (“Egg Man”) and songs that seemed to glorify grand theft auto (“Car Thief”), it’s clear that they hadn’t abandoned all hijinks”.

I will end with a couple of reviews. There were a few dissenting voices in 1989. In years since, the retrospective reaction has been hugely positive. Paul’s Boutique was remastered on its twentieth anniversary. Pitchfork gave it a perfect ten when they shared their thoughts. I did not hear Paul’s Boutique when it came out in 1989. I discovered it in the 1990s. I first heard their debut before Paul’s Boutique. It was quite a leap in imagination and faith experiencing their second album! Since then, I have played the album so many times all the way through. I still have not to the bottom of it! A masterpiece in terms of sampling and its innovation, maybe Paul’s Boutique represents a time we can never return to. Artists unable to get clearance to samples so they can create something like Beastie Boys’ sophomore release:

“Paul’s Boutique is a landmark in the art of sampling, a reinvention of a group that looked like it was heading for a gimmicky, early dead-end, and a harbinger of the pop-culture obsessions and referential touchstones that would come to define the ensuing decades' postmodern identity as sure as “The Simpsons” and Quentin Tarantino did. It’s an album so packed with lyrical and musical asides, namedrops, and quotations that you could lose an entire day going through its Wikipedia page and looking up all the references; “The Sounds of Science” alone redirects you to the entries for Cheech Wizard, Shea Stadium, condoms, Robotron: 2084, Galileo, and Jesus Christ. That density, sprawl, and information-overload structure was one of the reasons some fans were reluctant to climb on board. But by extending Steinski’s rapid-fire sound-bite hip-hop aesthetic over the course of an entire album, the Beastie Boys and the Dust Brothers more than assured that a generally positive first impression would eventually lead to a listener’s dedicated, zealous headlong dive into the record’s endlessly-quotable deep end.

There’s a lot that's already been said about the daring eclecticism and arguably irreproducible anything-goes technique with which the Dust Brothers assembled the album’s beats. The music is a big, shameless love letter to the 1970s filled with a conceptual bookend (the Idris Muhammad-sampling, ladies-man ether frolic “To All the Girls”), numerous line-completing lyrical interjections from Johnny Cash, Chuck D, Pato Banton and Sweet, and, just for kicks, nine truncated songs spliced together and stuck in at the end as a staggering 12 and 1/2-minute suite. If the sonics on It Takes A Nation of Millions to Hold Us Back evoked a sleep-shattering wake-up call and 3 Feet High and Rising a chilled-out, sunny afternoon, the personality of Paul’s Boutique completed the trinity by perfectly capturing the vibe of a late-night alcohol and one-hitter-fueled shit-talk session. Even now, after being exposed to successively brilliant sample-slayers from the RZA to the Avalanches to J Dilla, it’s still bracing just how meticulous the beats are here. These aren’t just well-crafted loops, they’re self-contained little breakbeat universes filled with weird asides, clever segues, and miniature samples-as-punchlines.

There’s dozens of clever touches and big, ambitious ideas that still sound inspired: a cameo appearance by the opening drumbeats of Mountain’s “Mississippi Queen” in “Looking Down the Barrel of a Gun”; the manic yet seamless percussion rolls and the giddy tour through the Car Wash soundtrack on “Shake Your Rump”; the two-part slow-to-fast tweaking of late-period Beatles on “The Sounds of Science”; a sparingly-used Alice Cooper guitar riff adding a mockingly pseudo-badass counter to the whimsical Gene Harris-based soul jazz backbone of “What Comes Around.” It all gets writ large in “B-Boy Bouillabaisse,” the aforementioned album-closing suite, which careens through turntablist striptease, a not-yet-throwback 808/beatboxing showcase, funk grooves of every conceivable tempo, and a Jeep-beat bass monster so massive and all-consuming that Jay-Z and Lil Wayne 2.0’d it in late 2007. Even the less-frenetic moments are sonically inventive; there’s only two acknowledged and minimally-tinkered-with samples in “3-Minute Rule,” augmented with a starkly simple bassline from MCA himself, but it’s one of the finest examples of deep, cavernous dub-style production on any golden age rap record.

And, of course, there’s Ad-Rock and MCA and Mike D themselves. Where the aesthetic of Licensed to Ill could have permanently placed them in the crass dirtbag-shtick company of “Married With Children” and Andrew Dice Clay if they’d kept it up, Paul’s Boutique pushed them into a new direction as renaissance men of punchline lyricism. They were still happily at home affecting low-class behaviors: hucking eggs at people on “Egg Man”; going on cross-country crime sprees on “High Plains Drifter”; smackin’ girlies on the booty with something called a “plank bee” in “Car Thief”; claiming to have been “makin’ records when you were suckin’ your mother’s dick” on “3-Minute Rule.” But they’d also mastered quick-witted acrobatic rhymes to augment their countless pop-culture references and adolescent hijinks. “Long distance from my girl and I’m talkin’ on the cellular/She said that she was sorry and I said ‘Yeah, the hell you were’”—we’re a long way from “Cookie Puss” here.

While each member has their spotlight moments—MCA’s pedal-down tour de force fast-rap exhibition in “Year and a Day,” Mike D having too much to drink at the Red Lobster on “Mike on the Mic,” and Ad-Rock’s charmingly venomous tirade against coke-snorting Hollywood faux-ingénues in “3-Minute Rule”—Paul's Boutique is where their back-and-forth patter really reached its peak. At the start of their career, they built off the tag-team style popularized by Run-DMC, but by ’89 they'd developed it to such an extent and to such manic, screwball ends that they might as well have been drawing off the Marx Brothers as well. It’s impossible to hear the vast majority of this album as anything other than a locked-tight group effort, with its overlapping lyrics and shouted three-man one-liners, and it’s maybe best displayed in the classic single “Shadrach.” After years of post-Def Jam limbo and attempts to escape out from under the weight of a fratboy parody that got out of hand, they put together a defiant, iconographic statement of purpose that combined giddy braggadocio with weeded-out soul-searching. It’s the tightest highlight on an album full of them, a quick-volleying, line-swapping 100-yard dash capped off with the most confident possible delivery of the line “They tell us what to do? Hell no!”.

The final review I want to highlight is from AllMusic. It is always interesting hearing different perspectives on this wonderful album. Thirty-five years after its release, Paul’s Boutique continues to inspire and amaze artists. I am going to be interested how critics and fans view the album on its anniversary:

“Such was the power of Licensed to Ill that everybody, from fans to critics, thought that not only could the Beastie Boys not top the record, but that they were destined to be a one-shot wonder. These feelings were only amplified by their messy, litigious departure from Def Jam and their flight from their beloved New York to Los Angeles, since it appeared that the Beasties had completely lost the plot. Many critics in fact thought that Paul's Boutique was a muddled mess upon its summer release in 1989, but that's the nature of the record -- it's so dense, it's bewildering at first, revealing its considerable charms with each play. To put it mildly, it's a considerable change from the hard rock of Licensed to Ill, shifting to layers of samples and beats so intertwined they move beyond psychedelic; it's a painting with sound. Paul's Boutique is a record that only could have been made in a specific time and place. Like the Rolling Stones in 1972, the Beastie Boys were in exile and pining for their home, so they made a love letter to downtown New York -- which they could not have done without the Dust Brothers, a Los Angeles-based production duo who helped redefine what sampling could be with this record. Sadly, after Paul's Boutique sampling on the level of what's heard here would disappear; due to a series of lawsuits, most notably Gilbert O'Sullivan's suit against Biz Markie, the entire enterprise too cost-prohibitive and risky to perform on such a grand scale.

Which is really a shame, because if ever a record could be used as incontrovertible proof that sampling is its own art form, it's Paul's Boutique. Snatches of familiar music are scattered throughout the record -- anything from Curtis Mayfield's "Superfly" and Sly Stone's "Loose Booty" to Loggins & Messina's "Your Mama Don't Dance" and the Ramones' "Suzy Is a Headbanger" -- but never once are they presented in lazy, predictable ways. The Dust Brothers and Beasties weave a crazy-quilt of samples, beats, loops, and tricks, which creates a hyper-surreal alternate reality -- a romanticized, funhouse reflection of New York where all pop music and culture exist on the same strata, feeding off each other, mocking each other, evolving into a wholly unique record, unlike anything that came before or after. It very well could be that its density is what alienated listeners and critics at the time; there is so much information in the music and words that it can seem impenetrable at first, but upon repeated spins it opens up slowly, assuredly, revealing more every listen. Musically, few hip-hop records have ever been so rich; it's not just the recontextulations of familiar music via samples, it's the flow of each song and the album as a whole, culminating in the widescreen suite that closes the record. Lyrically, the Beasties have never been better -- not just because their jokes are razor-sharp, but because they construct full-bodied narratives and evocative portraits of characters and places. Few pop records offer this much to savor, and if Paul's Boutique only made a modest impact upon its initial release, over time its influence could be heard through pop and rap, yet no matter how its influence was felt, it stands alone as a record of stunning vision, maturity, and accomplishment. Plus, it's a hell of a lot of fun, no matter how many times you've heard it”.

On 25th July, the landmark Paul’s Boutique turns thirty-five. In 1989, when so many genius albums were released, one of the finest albums ever came out. It really changed Hip-Hop. Taking it in new directions and showing what was possible. If you get a chance, go and listen to the album and play it the whole way through. It really is a listening experience…

LIKE nothing else.

FEATURE: Cease and Resist: Are Enough Artists Speaking Out Against Injustices and Evils in the World?

FEATURE:

 

 

Cease and Resist

PHOTO CREDIT: Anderson Santos/Pexels

Are Enough Artists Speaking Out Against Injustices and Evils in the World?

_________

EARLIER this week…

PHOTO CREDIT: Pok Rie/Pexels

Nadine Shah took to social media to say that she does not care whether her career is damaged or she loses fans because of her support for Palestinians and her repeated calls for a permanent ceasefire. This genuine anger and passion that she holds. Someone who wants an end to slaughter and this vile evil. It seems like a natural reaction we all should take. That said, when you are in the public eye or in an industry like music, there is a risk about speaking out and up. Even though it should not lead to fans reacting negatively or labels getting upset, it sometimes can be the way. It is not even a political statement or side: it is a stance for humanity and one against genocide. Fans took to social media to support Shah and her post. At a time when we are seeing some of the most horrific and disturbing genocide and destruction on a daily basis, it made me wonder why there is not a louder chorus out there. On a positive side, artists are pulling out of Download and Latitude. They also pulled out of The Great Escape in May. The reason is that Barclays are among the sponsors of these festivals. The bank is investing in companies associated with the Israeli military. It has made them (Barclays) targets. You can read more here. It is good that artists are taking a stand. After seeing Nadine Shah’s post and her continued commitment to end the genocide and call for change, artists are choosing missing out on a festival slot because of their objection to Barclays and their connections with Israel. At least there is that sense of defiance and moral stance. I do wonder whether artists need to be more vocal.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Nadine Shah (@nadineshah)

It is great that artists are standing strong. I do feel more artists should be doing more. Using their social media platforms to highlight what is happening in Gaza. It is not just the genocide there that should be highlighted. In terms of rights for the L.G.B.T.Q.I.A.+ community. The continued hatred against the transgender community. There is also the environmental destruction we are seeing. Throw into the mix the political ineptitude and insanity we are seeing in so many countries (including the U.K.), and you have to wonder whether artists are reacting enough. Of course, there are some that are speaking out. Big names in music such as Dua Lipa have called for a ceasefire in Gaza. Others call out politicians and ensure that their voices are heard. Consider the size of the industry and how urgent it is to do something. We are seeing people take to the streets in protest. In other areas, there is a lot of discourse and action. Aside from some festival withdrawals, is there enough anger and discussion?! One reason why Nadine Shah’s post was so startling and impassioned is that she must have been getting some heat and flack given her protest and disgust. Is there too big a risk for artists doing this?! Shah is someone who puts principles above fans’ reaction or her career. I know SPRINTS, Massive Attack and Annie Lennox have shown their support for those affected in Gaza. However, you have to wonder why many artists are either silent or, when it comes to action, not doing quite enough. You cannot force anyone, I know. It is a lot. Even so, things are so horrifying and bleak now! It is important that the industry speaks up. Not only in calling for an instant and permanent ceasefire. There is so much political turmoil, discrimination and misogyny that also is perhaps not being tackled and spotlighted.

PHOTO CREDIT: Marta Branco/Pexels

Some of the risk factors includes fans retracting support for an artist. They might also be abusive too. It can have a huge impact on the artist’s health. Labels might also feel that any protest or personal statement might be political. Something that risks dividing fans and maybe damaging their chances of radio play. It is tough for all artists to maintain a living. They have to please fans, get gigs, get airtime and also sell units. There is so much to balance. Many do not share political opinions because it might alienate some fans. It can be risky. Even if voicing anger and upset at the situation afflicting Palestinians is not political, there are some who feel it is not an artist’s place to get involved. That they should only be focusing on music and not this. I feel we have reached a point when there is no turning back in that respect. Why are more not breaking ranks and taking risks for something that is far bigger than music?! It is not that artists do not care. Even if politicians call it a ‘conflict’ or ‘war’, and our world leaders are sick and pathetic, as they either show sympathy towards Israel or do not call out genocide, artist are better than that! So many news channels talk about this ‘war’ and are covering it like Israel is being affected and should be cared about. They are not getting angry or doing the right thing. It is a callous and horrible thing to see nobody in the media or politics with any real shred of decency and humanity. It means that artists need to show their superiority and use their voices now. It is not really good enough to stay silent. As I say, things beyond the genocide. Politics, the environment, the L.G.B.T.Q.I.A.+ community, women’s equality and more. I can appreciate it is very hard for them to potentially take such a risk and strike out and show their hurt. To call out for change and everyone to do the same. We are at a moment when everyone throughout the music industry needs…

PHOTO CREDIT: cottonbro studio

TO show their anger!

FEATURE: …And Then the Deluxe Edition… Is There An Argument for Bringing Back the Physical Single?

FEATURE:

 

 

…And Then the Deluxe Edition…

PHOTO CREDIT: cottonbro studio/Pexels

Is There An Argument for Bringing Back the Physical Single?

_________

IT is great…

that artists can put out a studio album and then, very shortly, they follow with a Deluxe Edition. It gives fans extra songs. Some say that putting out the same album out – bar a few new tracks – twice in short succession means that fans are being exploited in a way. If it is a digital reissue, then you are not really charging anything. There are artists like Taylor Swift who can put their studio album out and then an expanded or Deluxe Edition. It is not only major artists. I do think it is mainly them, as they have the massive fanbase and I guess there is that demand. One of this year’s best albums, BRAT, has just come out from Charli XCX. Pitchfork report on a deluxe issue from Charli XCX. Called Brat and it’s the same but there’s three more songs so it’s not, the title at least is a nod that she knows that it is more or less than same album, with some extra tracks:

“Three days after Charli XCX released her new album Brat, the English pop star has unveiled a deluxe edition of the LP. Brat and It’s the Same But There’s Three More Songs So It’s Not features three new tracks and is out now. “Hello Goodbye” was produced by A. G. Cook; “Guess” was both produced by the Dare and co-written with 100 gecs’ Dylan Brady; and “Spring Breakers,” which samples Britney Spears’ 2003 song “Everytime,” was produced by A. G. Cook, Easyfun, and Jon Shave. Give it a listen below.

While record sales aren’t yet available for Brat until one week after its release, the album has already surpassed 2022’s Crash as Charli XCX’s biggest streaming debut on Spotify; Brat had 15.4 million streams on its release day, whereas Crash racked up 5.9 million. Charli XCX shared four singles before Brat’s release: “Von Dutch,” “Club Classics,” “B2B,” and “360,” the latter of which got a remix featuring Swedish acts Robyn and Yung Lean”.

I do like that artists can be tongue-in-cheek about the situation. I don’t think that it is taking advantage of a successful and popular artist. The plans for the quick expanded BRAT would have been decided upon a while ago, I guess. I do wonder, if artists put out the album with a few new tracks, is that a sign that the artists did not have faith in the material. Are they potential B-sides?! In a lot of cases, the extra tracks are actually fascinating. It may be the case that there was a form of economy and editing. Artists not wanting to put out a studio album with fourteen or fifteen tracks. In some cases, the original album has fourteen or fifteen tracks. So it is probably not an idea to add a few more. I guess a deluxe edition or expanded album means diehards can buy both - or, for those who did not get the original, you can have this wider-ranging album. I guess you cannot really compare the two types of albums. The first version is the one the artist wanted to release. I suppose anything after that is a treat for fans. Tracks that have no place to go. I suppose artists could put them on an E.P., though that might be not be ideal. I have nothing against artists releasing, as Charli XCX says, the same album with a few new tracks. It keeps momentum going and we get more insight into a wonderful release. Songs that were perhaps considered but then did not make the cut. Even if these new tracks are not as great as the original album tracks, it is good that fans get to own them. All of this got me thinking about modern-day physical media.

PHOTO CREDIT: Jorge Fakhouri Filho/Pexels

I suppose any deluxe or expanded albums digitally do not put fans out. Many would prefer to own them but, if artists are worried about expense or not being able to afford both, then having it in a digital form solves that issue. I wonder whether reintroducing singles might be a way that studio albums can come out and these extra tracks can also be released, just not on another albums. Maybe artists are fine as things are but, for fans, many might be spending £10 or more on the same album for a few new songs. I know that physical singles would cost money. Fans do want to own material. Artists could put out a leading single and have these extra tracks as B-sides. Maybe spreading them out over two singles. Given that artists are releasing albums on cassettes and C.D., clearly fans have a desire for physical material beyond vinyl. It is a shame that the single died out. At a time when we are getting so many albums reissued so quickly after they were released, there is this situation of fans paying twice for the same album. Maybe not a massive saving, having single options with B-sides would solve the problem – to an extent at least. Artists could then include demos or actual ‘B-sides’ on the mix and have a single with a few tracks on. It would sort of be like an E.P. but not. Having artists in such form and all this extra material they want to give to fans. I do like that connection and generosity. I do often wonder whether there is this situation for fans where they buy the album but also really want the reissue-re-release. Many can still do that, yet I am aware that many might be priced-out. Sure, if there is a digital release too then they get the same experience anyway. Many want the physical product. If there are albums with extra tracks, it suggests that these could have made their way onto a physical single. Giving fans those tracks before the album comes out would be a real treat.

I suppose the problem around physical singles is what to play them on. There are cassette and C.D. players. Do many younger fans especially find them too old-fashioned or jarring?! Given the reliance on smartphones, it might seem somewhat primitive or long-winded. When they can stream a song instead. Even so, artists are putting out expanded albums on C.D.s. Fans do snap up these and cassettes and then just leave them aside. If they invested in a device alongside having smartphones, then they could have the best of both worlds. I do feel that there is this wonderful excess that means there is call and mobility for the return of proper singles. I do find it slightly odd that studio albums come out and then, days or weeks later, we get the same thing coming back out. It is the only way artists can do it. If we have singles, then these additional tracks already have a home. It means we can focus on the album and not really have the worry about putting it out again with new tracks. Even so, I have nothing against artists doing that. Many fans are happy to have the option. Physical music is very much experiencing this resurgence. Multiple generations investing in albums in multiple forms. It will cause debate, I know. It is a thought I have that will be shared by others. Not just a nostalgia thing, I believe that physical singles could find…

PHOTO CREDIT: Swapnil Sharma/Pexels

A dedicated fanbase.

FEATURE: Groovelines: Joni Mitchell – Little Green

FEATURE:

 

 

Groovelines

IN THIS PHOTO: Joni Mitchell in a 1971 shoot with Vogue/PHOTO CREDIT: Jack Robinson/Getty Images

Joni Mitchell – Little Green

_________

ON 22nd June…

Joni Mitchell’s masterpiece, Blue, turns fifty-three. Its third track is one of the best on the album. Little Green is one of the most emotional and beautiful songs that Mitchell ever recorded. Although it has a hopeful tone, I was not fully aware of the story behind the track. Because Blue is fifty-three soon, I wanted to focus on a song that maybe would not be people’s first choice to dig deep with – that would be Carey, Blue or California. Hardly a deep cut, I don’t think many people rate Little Green as highly as some of the more established and played tracks from Blue. I like the colour connection to. The mix of Green and Blue in the titles. In any regard, it is worth focusing on a deeply personal song that many did not know the meaning of when they heard it in 1971. These years later, we know the story behind a standout from a genius album. There is a lot of information I need to include. I will start with American Songwriter and the heartbreaking decision that inspired the track. Apologies if any details are repeated between these features:

“The intensely emotional story behind Joni Mitchell’s “Little Green,” much like the track itself, was hidden in plain sight for decades. Mitchell tucked the song neatly in the middle of the A-side of her deeply cathartic album ‘Blue’ (an album so excruciatingly personal, Mitchell would later say it embarrassed Kris Kristofferson, who told her, ‘God, Joan, save something of yourself’).

But in that summer of 1971, Mitchell wasn’t in the business of hiding anymore. At the height of her fame and with a long, promising road ahead, Mitchell used ‘Blue’ as a rearview mirror to revisit and reconcile with her past. In its reflection, the singer-songwriter saw a younger version of herself, pregnant and abandoned by her boyfriend in a dilapidated Toronto boarding house.

She had her child on February 19, 1965, and named her Kelly Dale Anderson, after the verdant shade of green. “Little Green” would be reborn into musical perpetuity six years later.

“Little Green” Paints A Devastating Picture of the Events of 1964

In the summer of 1964, Joni Mitchell had just dropped out of the Alberta College of Art and was living with her then-boyfriend, Brad MacMath. After Mitchell became pregnant, MacMath left. He went to California, she sings in the second verse of “Little Green.” Hearing that everything’s warmer there. So, you write him a letter and say, ‘Her eyes are blue.’ Little Green, he’s a non-conformer.

The “Big Yellow Taxi” singer tried to raise her daughter at first. At a time when it was taboo to be a single, unwed mother, the musician entered a marriage of social convenience with fellow folk singer Chuck Mitchell. Both attempts at a stereotypically “normal” family life fell short. Joni placed Kelly up for adoption six months after she was born, and she and Chuck divorced shortly thereafter.

Joni kept her child a secret from her parents, who were still living in Saskatchewan. She sings of her younger self in the third verse: Child with a child pretending, weary of lies you are sending home. So, you sign all the papers in the family name. [Mitchell’s family name was Anderson.] You’re sad and sorry, but you’re not ashamed. Little Green, have a happy ending.

Joni Mitchell Explained Her Reasoning For Naming Her Daughter Kelly

For all of the heartbreak imbued into Joni Mitchell’s writing, “Little Green” was melancholically hopeful. Mitchell placed her daughter for adoption in the hopes that she would enjoy a better, safer, and more stable life than the struggling artist could provide at the time. The vivid shade of Kelly green, after which Mitchell named her daughter, personified this deeply rooted optimism.

Call her Green, and the winters cannot fade her, she sings in the first verse. Call her Green for the children who’ve made her. In the song’s chorus, Mitchell compares the shade of green to the color when the spring is born and like the nights when the Northern lights perform. She even muses on what her daughter’s future late-winter birthdays would look like. There’ll be icicles and birthday clothes, Mitchell sings. And sometimes, there’ll be sorrow”.

I imagine that all songs on Blue have a very deep and rich history. A fuller story that many listeners do not know about. Certainly, a lot has been written about Little Green. It was pretty brave of Joni Mitchell to write about the baby that she gave up for adoption. Few songwriters would have that sort of strength. I can imagine, as she has revisited the song fairly recently, that it still must be quite strange. This article on Joni Mitchell’s official website gives us even more depth into Little Green:

“It is all there, encoded in the song. A true story of secrets and lies. The child "born with the moon in Cancer" is the baby that Joni Mitchell gave up for adoption. She felt she had no choice. At 21, she was Joan Anderson, dirt poor and pregnant, an unknown folksinger in a Toronto rooming house. The girl was born on Feb. 19, 1965. The child's father, a Calgary artist named Brad MacMath, had, as the song says, disappeared "to California/hearing everything was warmer there." Joni balked at the prospect of being a single, destitute mother, and was not prepared to ask her parents back in Saskatchewan for help--they did not even know she was pregnant. She tried a desperate marriage of convenience, to a fellow folksinger named Chuck Mitchell, but it would soon collapse, leaving her nothing but a new surname. "Weary of lies," as Joni sings in Little Green, she "signed all the papers in the family name," and sent her baby, Kelly Dale Anderson, into the unknown. Kelly, as in kelly green.

Penned two decades before Mitchell's secret was finally exposed in a tabloid newspaper four years ago, Little Green was part private confession, part wishful prophecy. And the "happy ending" hoped for in the song had already begun to unfold. At the age of six months, Kelly--renamed Kilauren Gibb--found a home as the adopted daughter of two teachers, David and Ida Gibb, in the cozy Toronto suburb of Don Mills. Kilauren grew up in a world of private schools and country clubs and tropical vacations. She landed a career as a fashion model.

But, as the song predicted, there was also sorrow. The mystery of Kilauren's adoption cast a lengthening shadow over her life. She says that her parents did not tell her she was adopted until she was 27 and pregnant with her own child. Kilauren then embarked on a frustrating five-year quest to track down her birth mother. Now 32, she is separated from the father of her son, Marlin, who is almost 4. And a "happy ending" quite different from the one envisioned in Little Green has come to pass. In the past few weeks, amid a blaze of media attention, mother and daughter have reunited, their high cheekbones, blue eyes and long blond hair framed side by side. "I've had pain and joy in my life, but nothing like this," Mitchell told a reporter in Los Angeles, where she has lived since 1968. "It's an unparalleled emotional feeling."

The story reads like a fairy tale. But the tale is beginning to show some tarnish. Mitchell, who is twice divorced, has not just gained a daughter, she has inherited an entire family, innocents who have found themselves in the spotlight at a time of tremendous emotional upheaval. Losing Kilauren to her birth mother "was our greatest fear," adoptive mother Ida Gibb told Maclean's last week. "It was a nightmare that this would happen to us when she was little and when she was a teenager. Now, it is easier to take. But it's still hard."

Kilauren, meanwhile, has had to cope with the excitement of finding her birth mother and becoming famous all at once. Hounded by reporters, she disconnected her phone last week and abandoned her apartment. Soon, she had handlers marketing her, selling interviews and juggling requests from the likes of Barbara Walters, Oprah Winfrey and Larry King. "You can't imagine the onslaught of press from all over the world," says Mitchell's Vancouver-based manager, Sam Feldman. "It's so bizarre. It's something out of a movie."

The Joni-Kilauren saga is a story that has become too good for its own good. Its appeal obviously goes beyond Mitchell's mellowing stardom. It is about seeing the destinies of the famous and the unknown thrown together in a lottery-like twist of fate. It is also a fable for the baby boom generation, one that suggests miracles can still be salvaged from the emotional losses of the Sixties. But above all it has played out as a very public adoption drama--and shed light on the dilemma faced by families whose adopted children seek out their biological parents.

What really complicates an already sensitive issue, however, is the fact that Kilauren Gibb's story has become a property. Swamped by interview requests, Gibb put Mitchell's manager in charge of her publicity. And she also had her boyfriend, an orthopedic parts salesman named Ted Barrington, act as a go-between. After several days of trying to set up an interview with Gibb last week, Maclean's finally received a call from Barrington, who said it could be arranged for $10,000. When told that Maclean's does not pay for interviews, he became impatient. "It's all business to me," he declared. "The money's for Kilauren. She doesn't have a pot to piss in. She's a student right now [living on student loans while studying desktop publishing at George Brown College in Toronto] and she should really be able to profit from this, at least monetarily."

But what about her newfound birth mother? "Joni's asset-rich but not cash-rich," replied Barrington. Kilauren is getting "quite anxiety-ridden. If you were in her position, and you were being hounded all day long, you'd say what the f - - - am I getting out of this, except a real bad headache." Then he added, before hanging up, "If you've got an offer, let us know. You have my pager number." Later, after talking to Feldman, Barrington phoned back to apologize. "I was out of line," he said, adding: "All the good stuff is at the back end with book deals and all that. I'm just worried about Kilauren being exploited. I'm just worried about my girlfriend."

Even Mitchell's octogenarian parents, Bill and Myrtle Anderson, have been swept up by the media blitz. "It's sort of a fairy-tale thing," Bill told Maclean's from his home in Saskatoon, "but some of the publicity isn't so entertaining as far as we're concerned. It's been hectic, especially for Myrt. The phone's been ringing off the wall." Myrtle and Bill both say they are happy to discover their granddaughter, and a great-grandson. "But I feel sorry for the adoptive parents," says Myrtle. "They do all the work and then suddenly they have a rival." Her husband concurs: "The parents who brought the child up deserve a lot of credit, and sometimes we feel they're being overlooked," he says. "I hope they don't lose her."

Kilauren's parents live on a quiet crescent in Don Mills, in the same grey-brick bungalow where they raised their children. They invite a visitor down to the basement, into a classic Fifties rec room with wood panelling and a red shag rug. Framed photographs of Kilauren and her older brother, David (now a 36-year-old Toronto advertising executive), cover the walls. Although David is not adopted, the siblings look remarkably matched, both blond and long-limbed. There are glamor shots from Kilauren's fashion portfolio. David, who dabbled in modelling himself, strikes a muscled pose in white underwear. There is also a picture of a beaming David, as captain of the football team at Upper Canada College, being introduced to Prince Philip. Kilauren was educated just down the road from U.C.C., at equally exclusive Bishop Strachan School.

More photographs, hundreds of them, in albums stacked on the rec room table, showing the children frolicking on beaches from Maine to Florida. A number of the pictures are inscribed with loving captions such as "my two chickadees," and they are all meticulously dated. "I would say we had a happier family life than average," says Ida. "We were very fortunate." Before retiring, she taught teenagers with learning disabilities and her husband taught at a teachers college and worked at the ministry of transportation. "When David was 3 1/2, we were doing very well, and we wanted to share it with someone," explains Ida. "Taking a child into your home seemed like a good way of doing it. We just phoned the agency, and what surprised us is how quickly it came through," recalls Ida, who had to drop out of a postgraduate course in education to take care of their new charge.

Ida seems puzzled by Kilauren's claim that she did not find out she was adopted until she was 27. "She knew when she was a teenager," she says. "Her friends told her. But maybe the full significance didn't sink in." Kilauren's father, meanwhile, says: "The mistake we made was in trying to say she's not adopted, that she's one of us and let's forget the whole thing and put it away somewhere, because we wanted her to be part of the family." Then he adds: "People are born. They are a life. They belong to nobody."

Kilauren's brother, David, expresses empathy for his parents. "There's a lot of fear there," he told Maclean's. "They're thinking, 'My gosh, are we going to lose her? Are we being replaced?' On top of that, you add the fame component. They're very modest, very quiet people, and all of a sudden there are people knocking on their door at seven in the morning wanting to take their picture. It's a lot to deal with. But it's all turned out better than you could have hoped for."

Ida is getting over her shock. "The thing is, Joni phoned me and we had a good chat," she says. "I found her to be quite a nice person, and that made all the difference in the world to me. She assured me that there weren't going to be any big changes, that nobody's going to lose anything."

Mitchell also put in a call to Kilauren's biological father. She had her first conversation with Brad MacMath in 32 years. "It was very weird," says MacMath, 56, who runs a Toronto photo studio with his wife. "But there was no animosity." Last week, MacMath also met his daughter for the first time. "I was elated," he says. "But it was very strange. We had fun noticing the mannerisms we have in common. We walk the same, have the same dimples, the same little knobs on our shoulders--surfer knobs."

In the excitement surrounding Kilauren's reunion with her birth mother, meeting her birth father almost seemed an afterthought. Trying to contact MacMath, Ted Barrington phoned Linda Miller, an old acquaintance from Don Mills--without realizing that she was MacMath's wife. "I'd photographed Ted's wedding five years ago," Miller laughed. "The marriage only lasted six months. So yesterday he phoned me up out of the blue, because I'm the only photographer he knew, and he said, 'Have you heard of this Brad MacMath guy?'"

That, as it turns out, is just one in a trail of bizarre coincidences linking Kilauren to her past--slim degrees of separation between Sixties abandon and the Nineties commitment.

Kilauren's biological parents were both art students in Calgary when she was conceived. They moved to Toronto during the pregnancy and discussed settling down. "Oh yeah," sighs MacMath, "we had to go through all that. But we were not communicating." He went back to Saskatchewan, then on to California. "I was trying to be an artist," he says, "and when she got married to some other guy, I just divorced myself from the whole situation. That was the last straw."

Mitchell, in a recent interview with the Los Angeles Times, says that her main concern at the time was to conceal her pregnancy from her parents. "The scandal was so intense," she recalls. "A daughter could do nothing more disgraceful. You have no idea what the stigma was. It was like you murdered somebody." Mitchell's mother, however, now says, "If we had known she was expecting a baby, we would have helped. I'm sure we would have encouraged her to keep the baby, but we didn't know anything about it until several years later when she and Chuck separated and she was home and told us about it."

Mitchell remembers giving birth in a Toronto hospital, where "one of the barbaric things they did was they bound the breasts of unwed mothers to keep the milk from coming," she says. Complications, she adds, kept her in the hospital for 10 days with her child. During the early years after the adoption, Mitchell told the Times, she "worried constantly" about the child's health because her pregnancy diet had been "atrocious." In an interview on CBC Newsworld's Pamela Wallin Live--broadcast, by coincidence, on Feb. 19, 1996, Kilauren's 31st birthday--the singer explained that she had no recourse but adoption. "I didn't have a penny," she said. "I had no money for diapers, or a room to take her to. There was no career on the horizon. Three years later, I had a recording contract and a house and a car, but how could I see that in the future?"

In 1968, Mitchell's career began to take off. She won a Grammy for her album Clouds, and singer Judy Collins turned one of its songs, Both Sides Now, into a hit. Another cut, Chelsea Morning, would later inspire Bill and Hillary Clinton in naming their daughter. In 1970, Mitchell released Ladies of the Canyon, which featured such classic songs as Big Yellow Taxi, Woodstock and The Circle Game. The same year, she recorded Blue, an intimate excursion into loneliness and loss, which many consider her masterpiece.

Although Mitchell kept her secret from her parents for several years, and from the media for almost three decades, those close to her knew. "It was very much part of her life," singer Murray McLaughlan told Maclean's. "I think she was always looking for the child." Another friend, Toronto music manager Bernie Fiedler, remembers being with her at the Mariposa Folk Festival about four years after Kilauren's birth. "There was a couple with a little girl wanting to speak to Joni. We went over and talked to the girl, who must have been 4 or 5, and afterwards Joni turned to me and said: 'That could be my daughter.' I will never forget that. She was obviously suffering tremendously."

Over the years, Mitchell made some quiet attempts to track down her daughter, without success. But while promoting her album Turbulent Indigo (1994), she fielded questions about a tabloid report of a "love child," and took her search public for the first time.

Kilauren, meanwhile, was already looking for her mother. She says it took nearly five years for the Children's Aid Society to produce the adoption documents that she requested. Even then, the papers offered non-identifying information, just dates and some telling biographical details. A Joni Mitchell fan could have matched the profile to the singer without much trouble. But what finally led Kilauren to identify her birth mother was a tangled thread of coincidence winding all the way back to the birth of the Sixties counterculture.

The maze of events begins with Duke Redbird. Now a Toronto CITY TV entertainment reporter, in 1964 he was writing and reading poetry at folk festivals. Redbird moved into a Victorian rooming house on Huron Street, and Mitchell, already pregnant, moved in across the hall. Most of the boarders were broke. "It was a very sad and lonely time for her," Redbird says. "I remember Joni being a very private person. I would hear her singing in that beautiful voice of hers, strumming her guitar behind the closed door of her room."

One day, Redbird's brother, John (now deceased), came by and gave Mitchell a couple of apples, a gesture that she never forgot. Years later, she met Redbird at a concert and asked him to convey her thanks to his brother.

Cut to 1988. Redbird meets Annie Mandlsohn while both are studying at York University. "Never tell this to anybody," he told her, "but I lived in the same house as Joni Mitchell; she had a baby and nobody knows." Late last year, Mandlsohn's current boyfriend, Tim Campbell, introduced her to Kilauren Gibb--Campbell, Gibb and Barrington had all grown up together in Don Mills. Gibb showed Mandlsohn the Children's Aid information describing her mother as a Saskatchewan folksinger who had moved to the United States. "That was the key," says Mandlsohn. "I said, 'Kilauren! Your mother is Joni Mitchell!'”.

I am going to end with a feature from The Guardian, In 2020, Cameron Crowe spoke with Joni Mitchell. It was around the release of Joni Mitchell Archives Vol 1: The Early Years (1963-1967). Mitchell talked about life before fame, and the correct way to sing her songs. Little Green was mentioned in the interview. It is interesting seeing how she relates to the track all these years later:

“CC Back to Live at Canterbury House [the fifth of the five discs in The Early Years]. You’re playing three sets at night, and for the second show you open with Little Green. It’s a very personal song, a song to your daughter who you’d painfully given up for adoption. To deliver the song properly, did you have to go to a difficult place to sing it?

JM No, the song kind of rose above the difficulty.

CC I remember you once saying every vocal performance is acting: “You must be the character who wrote the song when you sing it.” When you listen to this early music, are you playing a character? And “No, it’s me” is a valid answer.

JM It’s not like that. It’s, you know, the words to the song are your script. You have to bring the correct emotion to every word. You know, if you sing it pretty – a lot of people that cover my songs will sing it pretty – it’s going to fall flat. You have to bring more to it than that.

IN THIS PHOTO: Joni Mitchell in a 1968 shoot for Vogue/PHOTO CREDIT: Jack Robinson/Getty Images

CC You later included Little Green on Blue. You once told me that all your albums were concept albums. I asked you what the concept was for Blue. You paused and just said: “Blue. ‘I am blue.’ That’s the concept.” You also said that there was an image you’d dreamed of at the time: human organs in a cellophane bag.

JM Yeah, it was about that time. I had a dream that I was a plastic bag sitting at a concert, and there were a lot of fat women on stage all playing strange instruments, like big tubas and accordions, and not hip instruments, you know? I was sitting there, a bag of organs, sobbing in the audience, transparent – you could see all my innards. It was a strange dream. I tend to remember my dreams. They’re little movies, they’re visual. I tend to remember the things that are visual. That’s the way I was feeling at the time. I felt very vulnerable.

CC What was your concept of love back then?

JM I didn’t have one. I just occasionally would fall into it, or thought I did. I’d have a strong, palpitating attraction to somebody; that’s what I called love, I guess.

CC Has your idea of love morphed or changed over the years?

JM Not that much, really. It’s still the same. I make the same mistake over and over again, and I’m just a fool for love”.

On 22nd June, Blue turns fifty-three. One of the greatest albums ever released, it is a flawless work. One of its more underrated tracks is Little Green. I hope that it gets more airplay and attention as we head to the anniversary. You do hear it now and then, though other cuts from Blue get more focus. I think Little Green is one of Joni Mitchell’s best tracks. Knowing a lot more about it makes the song…

EVEN more moving and vivid.