Beatlefan interview

[And No Coffee Table]

Elvis is interviewed in the latest issue (#191, July/August 2011) of the long-running fanzine Beatlefan.


Chatting With Elvis Costello
McCartney Brought 'Order' to Collaboration

Contributing editor Howie Edelson recently undertook several career-spanning interviews with Elvis Costello in which they talked about some of his late 1980s collaborations with Paul McCartney, his feelings on their demo recordings eventually seeing release, and his thoughts on John Lennon's final work. Here are portions of their conversations. ...

I wanted to ask you something as a fellow music fan. I've had your demos with McCartney for years …

Yeah, but how did you get them, they're pirated?

I bought them illegally…

Yeah.

… because they were not available legally.

But is that right? Is that right?

It's almost a compulsion — like an addiction.

Well, that's very interesting, but...

It's like, how am I not going to give somebody $20 — all I have to do is give them $20 — and I get you and McCartney in a room.

Yeah, well, I mean Paul and I had discussed releasing those recordings at one point, but we're both going forward with new work, and the opportunity to do so hasn't presented itself. And maybe you feel differently in time about them, and whether there's a period of time when you think, "Well, yeah, let them out." But there's no obligation on anybody's part that's a recording artist to release anything that they've made. A lot of my "sketches," as it were — if you were to look at my sketch book, if you take the analogy of an artist of some kind, the painting is the painting that you see in the gallery in the museum, and then you get a book of the sketches that led to that. I mean, the demos and the outtakes that are being released [by me], it's not a question of milking the audience to buy inferior versions. Presumably, there's something illuminating in certain cases — and in a couple of cases, I feel there are viable alternate versions of the records that are in the demo form. Two or three of the albums kind of had that relationship. On the other hand, demos that were sketches for writers that may have somehow slipped out — I don't think there's any obligation on our part to release them because somebody did steal 'em and make it available.

One of my favorite collaborations that you ever did with McCartney was "Back On My Feet," which was done completely differently than all the others, with you supplying lyrics to an already written melody.

Mmm.

And I always wondered whether they were written to order or had you pulled them from an existing melody of your own?

Oh, no. I think they were written — I believe; it's a little hard to recall the methodology behind every song — but I believe that was the first song that we wrote together: that and "Veronica" were the first two songs that we wrote. You can see that we were still finding the way to work together. [With "Back On My Feet"], Paul had music and I brought lyrics in. I had about 75 percent of "Veronica" — a recognizable form of it, anyway. If I played it, you would say, "Oh, that's the same song as you ended up with."

Well, he did the middle eight — the "Empress of India" is him, no?

Eh... the middle eight is a collaboration, and I think the spacing in the way the chorus is stretched out. Y'know, he had a good way of sensing when you were maybe rushing something, because the meter stayed the same during the verse, I think he stretched out some of the cadences in the chorus. Again, I can't exactly remember, but I know the song was much more effective — even though if I played you the very, very original sketch, you would recognize it as essentially "Veronica," but [there was an] order that he brought to it.

What did you make of "Strawberry Fields Forever" upon its release?

It's hard to exactly put your mind in — what year did "Strawberry Fields" come out — '68?

February '67.

'67 — I was pretty young. In February I was 12. I wouldn't have had any idea where that music was coming from. I knew from my folks — y'know, from my mother particularly [who was born in Liverpool], that Penny Lane and Strawberry Fields were real places in Liverpool. I mean, I said this when I played for the Gershwin Prize [Gala] at the White House when I sang "Penny Lane" for Paul, that one of the things that was extraordinary about it was that [laughs] my whole family took interest. It wasn't like my parents weren't interested in music; my dad would sing on the radio every week and was singing popular releases, so he learned new songs. But it was more of the point that something that beautiful could be made out of something which is relatively mundane, like just a residential street or just a regular kind of neighborhood in Liverpool. It wasn't talking about the most colorful part of town, it wasn't talking about the richest part of town — it was about a regular place — and "Strawberry Fields, even more so, had a sense on being just an incredible ... And once I got older and understood musically what was going on, on the record, a little bit, and I got to work with Geoff Emerick and got some understanding about what they went through to create those records, technically — what was involved in the engineering, and the recording process and the layering of it. You realize what a great work of imagination it was and unprecedented, really, in popular music at that point, y'know? And, I mean, like a lot of great things, it probably invited a lot of bad imitation, but it's an indelible record. I would say the best double A-side single in pop music.

What was your initial impression of "Double Fantasy" before it stood as a memorial and Lennon's swan song?

"Double Fantasy"? At the time when it came out — I haven't yet heard this remixed version with it stripped ["Double Fantasy Stripped Down]. I always liked Lennon as unadorned as possible. I mean, his voice was so extraordinary, and I didn't especially love the production of the record. But I think you understood that. ... The odd thing about it was, people always want to project onto the people whose music that they love, their idealized version of them — even if that quality comes from some more difficult part of their own experience — that they want the cruel part, the edgy part of that. It wasn't exactly a secret that Lennon could write very emotional songs about love. He'd written very naked songs about his childhood, and about his love for his wife — even before The Beatles broke up — and he wrote more on "Imagine." And then, after a period away, wrote these very dedicated songs that you hear on that — to his son and everything. And I suppose some people felt ill at ease with the ... I mean, particularly, if you think; it's 1980 — it's just right after punk. There were people wanting him to be somehow not singing music that had a sense of contentment. By why wouldn't he? Why wouldn't he want those qualities? You've already lived all the other stuff, y'know, all the other tortuous stuff. I just remember thinking that when he was singing he just sounded great. And he does — y'know, "Watching the Wheels" and these things, he sounds fantastic.

[FAVEHOUR]

Thanks, ANCT!

Remind me not to start a conversation with Elvis with, "I was just listening to bootlegged studio recordings of yours..."

Dave

[Jack of All Parades]

Thank you for that- particularly loved the comments on Lennon's voice. He is right-the pure unadorned voice of that man was and continues to be a thing of beauty. Nice to see him reflective like that-perchance it will grow into future music which might mirror his own pseudo 'Double Fantasy' style recording.

[ramalama]

Credit to the interviewer for being honest. It's not the purchaser or the seller that deserves his scorn, it's the trusted individual within the organization who leaked it.

[jardine]

really? so if a trusted employee leaves the store unlocked, i can steal stuff and it is that employee's fault? really?

even if the trusted employee takes merch. out of the store and I buy it in the back alley, I am in possession of stolen goods. I can't say it is just the employee's fault

of course, i'm not saying that i myself have never "partaken" but just that i don't feel as clean and clear and off the hook as this

[johnfoyle]

Contributing editor Howie Edelson recently undertook several career-spanning interviews

Is there more in the print edition Beatlefan?

[cwr]

I know that Elvis is staunchly anti-bootleg, but even he has admitted to hearing things like The Beatles' "Leave My Kitten Alone" before a version had been released officially. (And I'd venture to say that most people who own ANY pirated Elvis probably have bought his entire catalog on CD at least two or three times, and happily so.)

It's not EC's fault that the McCartney/MacManus demos haven't seen the light of day, though-- he clearly wants them out, but Paul seems to be the one dragging his feet, presumably for the same reason he seems to have cooled on their colalboration-- he doesn't want it to look like he needs a collaborator to do his best work.

Elvis' open letter to Macca recently seemed to be practically begging for Paul to make an album with him. I really hope it happens. It would be the kind of big seller that Elvis needs, and probably the best record Paul has made in decades. They would both benefit from such an album, but Paul seems to have too much pride to withstand the inevitable comments that Elvis would be bringing out the best in him...

Great interview, thanks for posting it. I hope there is more to come!

[And No Coffee Table]

Contributing editor Howie Edelson recently undertook several career-spanning interviews

Is there more in the print edition Beatlefan?

No. I was thinking the rest of the interviews could turn up somewhere else.

[verbal gymnastics]

Was this a bootlegged interview then?

Elvis must realise that fans are always going to want things that are not officially released

Personally I love hearing sketches of songs.

I remember getting the U2 demos of rehearsals of what eventually became Achtung Baby. None of the songs were complete but it was fascinating to hear what they eventually evolved into.

[wordnat]

Elvis' open letter to Macca recently seemed to be practically begging for Paul to make an album with him.

Huh? I'm obviously out of the loop. What's the story here?

[johnfoyle]

Elvis' open letter to Macca recently

Not really a letter -

http://www.elviscostellofans.com/phpBB3 ... hilit=Mojo

[watercamp]

Is there really anybody out there that believes the McCartney/MacManus Collaboration wasn't deliberately leaked by the players themselves?

Q: How many people do you know who own bootlegs by an artist and none of their official releases?????????
A: none

[Natasha]

I kind of agree with Elvis.

On the one hand it's obvious that people interested in bootlegs or leaked stuff are the people who buy all the records legally released (sometimes in all formats avaiable). I'm pretty sure he knows that.

But, on the other hand, if they (Paul and Elvis) didn't release it it's because they (both of them or only Paul, like you guys said) are not satisfied with the results, otherwise they would release it. So, I don't see why I would want to get a sketch, an unfinished work. Moreover I wouldn't like people see an unfinished work of mine (specially without my permission).

so I think he has the right to be pissed that those recordings leak and people give money to the people who stole it.

[Natasha]

Thanks, ANCT!

Remind me not to start a conversation with Elvis with, "I was just listening to bootlegged studio recordings of yours..."

Dave

I laughed reading the first part of the interview and imagining Elvis face while the guy tells him about the pirated stuff.

[Top balcony]

Beyond Belief magazine used to carry this in it's bootlegs review section :

..As Elvis said in a recent Japanese interview , "live bootlegs can be funny. Studio bootlegs are the work of gangsters and thieves." "

Think he's right to be unhappy in this context, and this is coming from someone who bought both The Great Lost Album and Kojak Variety.

He must be aware of the plethora of fan recorded audio and, increasingly, video. I wonder if this will be a factor when a commercial decision is made whether or not to release a DVD of the Revolver Tour? Could make an argument either way ie that this is whetting the appetite of fans or depressing the market.

Colin Top Balcony

[jardine]

i think so too, especially given how generous he's been with studio stuff on all those re-issues (and this from someone who has the mc/mc btlg...).

i smiled, too, thinking of the interviewers face as it dawned on them exactly how much Shi$$% they were in. i think they did make the best of getting out of it and into something else with some grace and face.

[cwr]

I'd venture to guess that the amount that Elvis has been hurt financially by bootleggers is less than zero.

The kind of fan who'd ever buy an EC bootleg (or download an unauthorized recording or release) is exactly the same kind of person who'd also buy This Year's Model on vinyl, then on CD, then on Ryko reissue, then on Rhino reissue, then on Hip-O deluxe, then on Mastersound vinyl...

Or at least two or three of those.

Even now, if he released an official version of the Gangster Is Back concert (the first EC bootleg I ever owned), I'd buy it. EC fans are generally pretty good about supporting Elvis when he puts something out officially.

I get why he's against them existing, but it makes little sense for him to give fans shit for wanting to have these things. If we didn't want them, who would have EVER bought a single one of his bonus-laden reissues? The desire is there. Hats off to those with the moral/ethical self-control to avoid them, but at the same time, it's hard not to think that those people actually just aren't as into the music as the ones who can't help themselves...

[verbal gymnastics]

Even Elvis jokingly commented about the reissues at the Beacon 23rd May show (thanks CTB).

As far as bootlegs are concerned I can't believe for a minute that Elvis has never had or sought out bootlegs by other artists.

And it is abundantly clear (well to me anyway) that people on this forum would look to buying demos etc. There is no doubt an untouched wealth of songs which we haven't heard as well as a wealth of songs we do not know about.

It's great hearing new songs live, it's great getting them via recordings and it will be great when they're released officially.

The original reissue of TYM mentioned about 2 sadly lost recordings which were then found and issued on the next reissue. Cynically in my mind there are more of these to be found for future reissues.

[Jeremy Dylan]

I've never paid for a studio bootleg. I don't understand the concept. Why should someone who had absolutely nothing to do with the recording of the material you're paying for profit on it. There's a long list of people who deserve to get money for, say, demos of studio outtakes - starting with the artist, the label who paid for the sessions, the players on the sessions, the producer, the engineers, etc. The guy who burned the CD of them is not on that list.

[Poor Deportee]

It *is* funny to read the start of that interview. Whoops!

I don't collect illegal bootlegs as a general rule, and I understand an artist wanting to control his own output. Having said that, EC doesn't seem to recognize the effect that his work has on people. It's not just prurient obsession; part of it is the knowledge that the music is intrinsically worth hearing, and another part the interest that comes from following the twists and turns of an artist's evolution. And artists are not always the best judges of their own work, the proof being Bob Dylan's career-long tendency to withhold some of his most important songs (or even, in the case of The Basement Tapes, an entire double album). There is a legitimate sense in which art is not simply the property of the artist - it enriches the world and the world, therefore, has some claim to make on it, especially when there are not just demos but actual unreleased songs involved.

It's a bit like prohibition, then. The way to deal with this is not to withhold major material, which everybody knows exists but can't get their hands on legally. A collaboration between these guys is of considerable fan and musicological interest - especially considering the travesty uinflicted upon the stuff by McCartney's regrettable 1980s production choices. The solution is simply to release the material, just as he did with, say, Taking Liberties, or Tom Waits did with Brawlers, Bawlers, and Bastards.

[cwr]

I will say that it's hard to fault EC on the grounds that he's been stingy with his archives-- it's just that he has recorded SO MUCH that even multiple rounds of bonus track-laden reissues have still left a lot of really good material unreleased.

For instance, The Wendy James Demos-- a significant piece of work by EC, the bridge from from making The Juliet Letters to reuniting with The Attractions-- we have 4 of them as official b-sides (if you can track down the Brutal Youth CD single that had 3 of them and the vinyl single that had "London's Brilliant" on it) and one on a promo-only CD ("Do You Know What I'm Saying") that was never made available commercially, but the four other tracks have only been available unofficially, and the opening track ("This Is A Test") has never leaked at all.

The Rhino program was supposed to remedy this, but the last word we've heard was that supposedly Elvis has "misplaced" the demos and can't find them. This may or may not be true, but if it is, then the pirated versions of those 4 tracks (including one that he saw fit to put onto the Spinning Wheel recently, "Earthbound") could be the only way those recordings survive. Suddenly the gangsters and thieves are slightly more akin to Alan Lomax or Harry Smith, preserving music that would otherwise be lost.

W/r/t the McCartney/MacManus demos, it's interesting to note that when it comes to Beatles music, McCartney was always the one trying to convince the others to put out stuff like "Carnival Of Light" with the others vetoing it, whereas Macca seems to be the one dragging his heels while EC wants their demos to be put out officially.

I've never been that concerned with how much my money is benefiting those who sell studio bootlegs, any more than I've been concerned with the goings-on of the huge corporations EC has been working for over the past two+ decades. I'm interested in hearing his music and owning it, but where my very small amount of money goes and who it ultimately benefits is too complex a web for me to untangle. Who was ultimately benefiting, and how much did they deserve it, when EC was toiling for the "Universal Music Group"? It hardly seems like it's worth worrying about-- in the end, he probably cost them more money than he made them, right? Or if he turned them a profit, they're such an enormous corporation that they barely even felt it... It's hard to imagine that they guy "burning" the CDs for the pirated Kojak Variety* pre-1995 made much money off that venture...

*I bought "Barbados Mega Mixes" at a Chicago CD store shortly before seeing my first EC concert in Tinley Park in 1994. I bought Kojak Variety the night before it came out in 1995 when a store clerk accidentally put the "new releases" out just before closing time, and then I quite happily bought it again in its excellent Rhino reissue edition. I'd buy it again if they ever put it out on vinyl, which jesus CHRIST they should-- that LP cover art needs to be seen on a 12" sleeve!!