Spike Demo Version Revisited

[alexv]

Agree with you on the singing, Deportee. And on the loss of creative urgency. He is in his early 50s after all. It's a bonus that his manic nature, ambition, careerism and sheer love of music keep him going at the pace he does. Every record, as you say, no matter how mediocre in comparison to this great early stuff, still has gems sprinkled here and there. Think of the alternative, look at folks from the same era and how inactive they've all become. I often think of EC and compare his output to that of some of my other favorites from the late 70s/80s (Sting, Talking Heads, Squeeze, Joe Jackson, Graham Parker, Marshall Cranshaw, XTC, REM and I'm sure that I'm missing some). Most are semi retired, and those that are not, like Parker and Marshall, are struggling along the fringes. Even the ones with sustained success (mega success) over the years, like U2 and Springsteen, take long sabatticals between records. It just seems to me that the natural cycle in pop/rock is for the great stuff to come early, and for the decline to also come early, either from lack of inspiration or from sheer boredom. You certainly get the sense that the ones who make it big, as they age, prefer sitting in their big houses for longer spells before coming out to get a fresh boatload of cash. What EC has done so well is to persevere, indulging in his musical eclecticism (which of course gets him farther and farther away from his true strengths, the short, punchy, melodic pop song, but that's the artiste for you) while holding on to a stronger-than-a cult fan base, and now that he has hit TV pay dirt, he's succeeded in getting the kind of mass name recognition that will allow him to indulge even more without worries of becoming irrelevant. Lucky for us, since as I said, he's still sprinkling every record with terrific songs here and there. Dylan is the great exception to all this. He's one of a kind: crazy and a genius beyond anything EC's greatness could ever get him to.

[alexv]

Chris, I agree with a lot of what you say about current EC versus early EC, but I miss your Great American Songbook comparison. I recall when the New York Times, after IB, tried to pin that label on Ec (comparing him to Gershwin). I sometimes think that's when Ec began to get too big for his britches, and self-consciousness started pouring in. I agree that he's written some great pop songs, and some of them have been ballads, but I don't see the connection to the type of song or quality of song by those great songwriters. They were musical pros, writing for hire, for different singers and situations. As far from early EC as you can get. His musical chops have increased over the years, but I would still never compare him to those old pros. His great stuff, to me, is Beatlesque, with all that this implies, not Porteresque. Note how few of his attempts at old fashioned ballads have ended up being covered. It was only when he teamed up with BB on that great record that he found the kind of Great American Songbook songwriter with whom to collaborate that anything even remotely resembling that style came out of him. Would love to see you elaborate on your point.

[migdd]

Note how few of his attempts at old fashioned ballads have ended up being covered.

Almost Blue is EC's most covered song.

[alexv]

Yep, Migdd. I'm not saying that no ballads have been covered, just that few of them. AB clearly tops that list (in terms of covers and quality of the artists that have given it a go). Part of the reasoning for me not buying into the Great American Songbook notion, and this also explains EC's overall lack of covers (from major artists), is that EC's songs, even his great songs, are typically too quirky, in terms of his lyric style and voice, for them to be accessible the way songs that get lots of covers usually are. AB is, by EC's standards, a fairly simple song, as is Broken (his Cait collaboration) which, oddly I've always thought since I think it's a boring song, gets covered a lot.

[Poor Deportee]

Alexv, for what it's worth I tend to agree that EC's real, primordial strength is as a writer of eclectic pop songs in The Beatles mode. In fact, I've often felt that EC's real secret recipe is his ability to combine the melodicism of McCartney with the acerbic lyrical gifts (and attitude) of Lennon: he's as close as you get to putting both Lennon and McCartney in one body. (Not to say he achieves their greatness as a partnership - only that, arguably, he pulls off this trick of combining both sets of virtues better than anyone else in pop). 'Trust,' while not his best album necessarily, might the the record that most clearly crystallizes EC as the true inheritor of The Beatles' pop mantle. In any case, I see his real genius as pop songcraft, and the further he has drifted from that home domain, the less consistently great his output has been.

Having said that, the American Songbook thing is also in his repetoire. We agree that it's not the *defining* aspect of his repetroire, but he has done it exceedingly well at times (Almost Blue, bits of 'North').

[Jack of All Parades]

Alexv will gladly try yet again to detail that connection as I hear and see it in the coming days. Am preoccupied at present with a post I wish to make having finally successfully summited Against the Day with a nod to Otis[wish he had made the climb]. I am also wrapped up with my middle daughter and her NCAA efforts this coming week in the nationals for Synchronized Swimming out at Stanford and beautiful San Francisco. Who knows maybe your daughter will be center court at Wimbledon in 2012 and mine will be forming a portion of a lotus blossom in the Olympic pool in London! Stranger things have happened.

[Jack of All Parades]

Here we go yet again-three strikes and one is out.

When I place EC in the tradition of the songbook I place him there primarily as a lyricist. What has been stated by me repeatedly in this thread and elsewhere is the clear geneology that one can trace from Kern, Berlin, I Gershwin, Porter, Mercer, Cahn, David, Sondheim, Lennon, Simon, etc to EC. What does this lyrical heritage share in common. I have repeatedly stated the following as shared components in all their work:

Playfulness with language. This means a wit and exhuberance that makes words come alive in a song and on the page if read as a lyric. Sheer wordplay.

A facility for rhyme. Just look at the individual great lyrics of these writers. The rhyme play is dazzling and facile and the sensitivity to its use internally and with consonants is always alive in a given line. I am not going to cite individual examples as that has been done ad nauseum in prior posts and by countless writers. We all have our favorite examples.

An ease with idiom. Hopefully this is self explanatory but just in case it means the particular use of a word or words in an order that is regarded as standard[all you have to do is think of the standard song form- chorus and refrain] or the way that a people speaks. It is using the language of the people.

Melodic talent-not just with music but with the way that words sound together.

These are the common components I see in the songbook. EC possesses them and did so right from the start with MAIT and throughout those first five or so albums. This is what he shares with the prior artists mentioned. I would also add that a great majority of the songs in this songbook address one topic and that is love and all its vagaries which includes the complicated relationships between men and women. If one has really listened to the bulk of the songs on those first five albums one then knows that they deal with relations, complicated, messy, what it is to be a young man trying to make sense of women and vice a versa. There is little difference between "I've Got You Under My Skin" and "High Fidelity" or "My Funny Valentine" and "Almost Blue". All contain the elements I have previously highlighted.

His material in these albums, like his predecessors, is erudite, cynical and yet filled with humor and humanity. There is an exhuberance that can be traced in a direct line from Kern to EC.

He still has this talent though it shows itself intermittently as he continues as a professional musician. I offer two examples from later work:

About Glad :
I'm just about glad that I knew you once
And it was more than just a passing acquaintance
I'm just about glad that it was a memory
That doesn't need constant maintenance
There are a few things that I regret
But nothing that I need to forget
For all of the courage that we never had
I'm just about glad

[Chorus:]
Just about glad we didn't do that thing
Just about glad we didn't have that fling
Just about glad we didn't give it a try
Just about glad, is that a tear in your eye

And on the few times I rang to propose
There was a man there or so I suppose
The greatest lover that you never had
I'm just about glad

They called time and vodka and lime
In some far flung Canadian club
(Just about glad)
And there I was just waiting to fall
Like a toe just aching to stub
(Just about glad)
Later on I could never accept it
When you finally gave it all to him
(Just about glad)
And you said that my nurse was sweet
But her lamp was just beginning to dim

I'm just about glad
That we never did that thing we were going to do
I'm just about glad I can look you in the eye
But I can't say the same for you
And though the passion still flutters and flickers
It never got into our knickers
For all of the courage that we never had
I'm just about, I'm just about
I'm just about, I'm just about

[Chorus]

And it's all just a stupid creation
Of my feverous imagination
If I'm the greatest lover that you never had
I'm just about, I'm just about
I'm just about, I'm just about

[Chorus]

Is that a tear in your eye

Here he yet again agily plays with the theme of love in this mirror song to "Almost Blue". All the self argument of the protaganist never culminates in a convincing case-hence the continuing refrain of 'Just about"- not a very convincing argument. I have always loved the self-doubt that punctures the bragadaccio.

Yet another song:

Indoor Fireworks

We play these parlour games
We play at make believe
When we get to the part where I say that I'm going to leave
Everybody loves a happy ending but we don't even try
We go straight past pretending
To the part where everybody loves to cry

[Chorus:]
Indoor fireworks
Can still burn your fingers
Indoor fireworks
We swore we were safe as houses
They're not so spectacular
They don't burn up in the sky
But they can dazzle or delight
Or bring a tear
When the smoke gets in your eyes

You were the spice of life
The gin in my vermouth
And though the sparks would fly
I thought our love was fireproof
Sometimes we'd fight in public darling
With very little cause
But different kinds of sparks would fly
When we got on our own behind closed doors

[Chorus]

It's time to tell the truth
These things have to be faced
My fuse is burning out
And all that powder's gone to waste
Don't think for a moment dear that we'll ever be through
I'll build a bonfire of my dreams
And burn a broken effigy of me and you

Yet another strong variation on the theme of love only this time the wordplay builds into a final potential for conflagration instead of self-flaggelation. I have always loved that play on fire, both its consuming and at the same time celebratory quality.

Alexv, you call the past writers musical pros, writers for hire, churning out material for different singers. What else is EC? From the start he has been a working musician, does he not offer material to other artists? Berlin started out working in beer halls. Gershwin helped record piano rolls on tin pan alley. All are professionals.

The business has evolved since those days. There are fewer clubs with singers looking for good songs. The need for sheet music has eroded with the advent of the internet. The old writers did not put out albums but instead composed for shows or movies or the radio or reviews. These avenues are no longer promising ways for writers to get their music out to the public. Cabaret singers are a rarer breed now, fewer and farther between. A writer like EC now makes his money from the hopefull successful cover by another artist or by a constant life on the road as a performing artist. Hopefully one gets internet success but I think the financial model of that medium gives little back to the artist. You demonstrated this with your link to the Ron Sexsmith interview recently. As to why he is not covered as much as perhaps others- it may be intimidation with the material by other artists[that old bogey man of being too wordy], it may certainly be that the great bulk of music listeners in this country do not listen to his literate type of music, much preferring their Urban hip-hop or black hat mundane music found in Nashville or the electronic generated blandness that is new age music. His sophisticated word play has no place in this music.

I think you are right when you say he has a hard core group of followers who keep him front and center for themselves, enough to substantiate a record deal but not a long term one. He is a careerist, definitely in for the long haul. I am thankful for that and I look forward to the occassional gem that comes from his pen with gratitude.

[alexv]

I get what you are saying, CS, but I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. It's probably because my take on the Great American Songbook is different. Clearly EC's melodies, good as they are, can't compare with the pros mentioned (Porter, Gershwin, Sondheim etc.). Not even close. EC's musicality is just not even close, and that's where those great songs came from. But on lyrics, even though I agree that is EC's strength, he also doesn't match up. You cite word play and rhymes. Ec's rhyme, like a lot of rhyme patterns in great rock songs, don't follow the classic patterns of the great songwriters of that era. "professional" songwriters of their ilk would wince at a lot of the rhyme patterns. We can agree, and I'll go along, that this is just fussiness and that there is no rule that should restrict what rhymes are used. But that's not what we are doing here: we are comparing to see if we can fit him in with that group. Lenon wouldn't fit in either. To be clear, I'm not arguing that this makes Lennon and Ec lesser songwriters. I'm just saying that when I think of the tradition of songwriting exemplified by Porter, Sondheim et. al. I don't automatically think Lennon, EC. In looking at rock songwriters I would include in that list (meaning that they stand as working in that tradition albeit in the rock and roll era), writers like Elton John, Billy Joel, and yes I would include Simon. Some of the songs written by Tom Waits with Kathleen Brenna would fit, as would Randy Newman's stuff. Again, they've all diverged from the classic tradition, and I would bet that Porter would roll over in his grave if he found out that Tom Waits and he were being mentioned in the same sentence, but with these writers I see a link. With Ec, great as he is (and I think he's a greater songwriter than most on the rock list I just mentioned), and with Lennon, I don't see the technical style links that bring the Great American Songbook comparison. That's enough from me on this one, CS. Next question: Aquinas or Augustine, who did the most harm?

[Jack of All Parades]

I, too, agree to disagree. There is however a very famous story about Johnny Mercer driving with friends on Interstate 95 and bopping along joyfully to Chuck Berry on the car radio-think Cole would gladly pour a cocktail for EC[were he still drinking]. Aquinas, most definitely! Dude-afterall Augustine could revel in sin, expecially his own. Anyone for a pear? Or some variation of peel me a grape?

[alexv]

I think Mercer's I-95 jones for chuck had a lot to do with the cocktails he was probably imbibing. He liked his liquor, old Johnny, and with a couple of drinks in him he would probably even bop to Metallica.