Current Music Books

[imp]

Really like the look of the 700-page epic on McCartney‘s early solo years (69-73).

[Amor de Cosmos]

Santa brought me Bob Dylan’s The Philosophy of Modern Song, which I fully devoured, along with mince pies, before New Year. Really, I’m such an easy mark.

Obviously Dylan could publish his used Kleenex and it’d be a dumb house that’d turn him down, or even deign to question what he wanted to do, and Simon & Schuster are far from dumb. As it turns out the book has an idiosyncratic fascination, but his intention remains a bit of a question.

It consists of 66 songs/chapters, each of which cover a song the Bobster thinks is pretty damn fine, or at least interesting. He explains why — sort of — in each case. As you might guess they’re a somewhat eclectic, and eccentric bunch. Only two entries are from this century. The majority could loosely be described as C&W. There’s also a fair number of Rockabilly and R&B songs. Your smooth cabaret crooners are well represented too. What there isn’t much of is, what might be described as pure pop, or folk music.

The entries are brief, typically two or three pages. An exception is Edwin Starr’s War, six pages where Dylan considers how war is always good for business: “privateers, rounders, rogues, international rapscallions, mercenaries and profiteers.” He notes, in that context, that War “obviously filled the coffers at Hitsville USA.” And was co-written by “the man who gave Motown its first hit, [Barrett Strong] that oft-covered anthem of avarice — Money.” He fails to mention though that his own recording of Masters of War, did a similar trick for Columbia.

Most entries aren’t that pointed however. Typically they consist of a sub-Subterranean Homesick Blues riff on what Bob feels the song does for him. Then a bit on the song/performer. Which is entertaining enough. The book also introduced me to a number of early 20th century country and bluegrass recordings I’d never heard before, and for that alone I doff my cap to him.

[Giggler]

I’m going through the Mark Hollis biography at the moment. It’s good in the early stages but I’m finding I just want to get I the bit where the switch flicks in his head and he decides he definitely doesn’t want to be a pop star. Then I want to find out what he did until and after his solo album came out. Did he go snd do the shopping at the local Spar? Did the spark recognise him if he ever needed to get an electrician round? Did he ever argue with the window cleaner?

[delicatemoth]

Just finished the Oral History of Joy Division, which is fascinating. The wave of books from or about post-punk musicians where said musicians talk about their playing, composing and recording processes is of intense interest to me.

Like The Fall, there was nothing consciously arty about JD, they just were art. Hooky and Bernard give every impression of being yobs who stumbled into making some of the most enduring and affecting music of its era, but they were the foundation of the group. Ian Curtis "thought Margaret Thatcher was fantastic". This wasn't the counterculture. I get the impression they thought Buzzcocks were a bit posh.

The big news (to me) of the book is that Curtis was really ill for at least a year before he died - fitting regularly, crudely treated with antipsychotics - and it sounds as if the group would have had to cease in its JD form even had he lived.

[Satchmo Distel]

JD created two of the best albums ever made but I've never really bought their claims that the dabbling with fascist allusions was just juvenile larks. The Thatcher quote probably plays into that. Some of them really did have far-right-wing sympathies even if they weren't thought out and they don't invalidate their musical greatness in any way.

I've also wondered if the ease with which some 1980s musical journalists have slid towards the right (as has Morrissey of course) is relevant here. Post-punk does not mean that the artist or journalist will always pursue a left-wing life path.

[Sunderporinostesta]

I’m going through the Mark Hollis biography at the moment. It’s good in the early stages but I’m finding I just want to get I the bit where the switch flicks in his head and he decides he definitely doesn’t want to be a pop star. Then I want to find out what he did until and after his solo album came out. Did he go snd do the shopping at the local Spar? Did the spark recognise him if he ever needed to get an electrician round? Did he ever argue with the window cleaner?

Bought a spurs season ticket is all I know about his post musician life.

[Satchmo Distel]

Wow, I knew things sometimes got bleak for him, but...

[steveeeeeeeee]

Have started Bobby Gillespie's autobiography, and it's harder work than I imagined it would be. He feels the need to mansplain every historical event mentioned. For example, he mentions he was born in the year of the Cuban missile crisis, which he then mansplains was a really dangerous incident when ships travelling to Cuba from Russia hadn't turned around, there would have been a nuclear war. Worst part yet is his description of the Lisbon Lions, it was good against evil, Inter played a form of football called Catenaccio. Catenaccio is a defensive form of football, invented in Italy. He then describes the Celtic players, born within 10 miles of Celtic Park. He finishes off by claiming the final was played at The Stadium of Light.

So, I'm skipping through vast sections of the book as Bobby recalls Mexico 70 (watched on TV) or the Ibrox disaster (read about it in the paper), Why someone didn't edit this book is beyond me, but I really want to learn about his life in the 80s, so I soldier on.

[steveeeeeeeee]

The Gillespie book just doesn't let up it's tedious mansplaining. I'm at page 95 and he's mentioned Celtic a hell of a lot, but suddenly decides that he needs to explain who Celtic are, how they were formed, what their history is.

Occasionally you get flashes of what you hope this book will deliver, those teenage years with Alan McGee and Andrew Innes. But I think Gillespie genuinely believes people want to share his knowledge on life rather than what his life was like. I'm already skipping vast sections as he goes into massive historical and at times inaccurate rants about clothing or music, stuff everybody already knows. I'll give it another 50 to 100 pages or so, hopefully the 80s will give a bit more insight to him and his circle of friends, but I don't hold much hope.

Thank god I only paid 99p for it.

[steveeeeeeeee]

Ah, I see I've sort of repeated my earlier post, a bit like Gillespie's book, really.

It's hugely disappointing, one of my teenage music heroes writes a book and it turns out he's just a massive bore.

[imp]

You'd think that if you were lucky enough to lead an interesting life that thousands of people genuinely want to hear about, it would be easy enough to entertain and beguile your audience. Luckily, I don't rate their music, and the only time I've ever heard him speak was on NPR in the US, banging on about how, after years of being off their head on drugs, the band had suddenly realised the world's in a shite state and had decided to become politically aware. Thanks, mate, we're so grateful to finally have you on board. Twat.

Maybe the drugs explain why the book's so bad. Though it doesn't explain why an editor didn't have the guts to tell him.

[diggedy derek]

I heard a lot of excitement about Gillespie's book but then read some of the quotes in the reviews which ran something like this on “Come Together”:

“it was a mantra of spiritual resistance, an electronic intifada, an analogue bubble bath for the mind and body, an ecstasy symphony, an interplanetary dub record, an anthem for bombed youth,”

.... absolutely worthless writing in my book, I've no idea how anyone would plough through that

[steveeeeeeeee]

Hah, that's just an average sentence! There's a bit where he compares the streets of Glasgow to Syria, after "Putin and his boys" had destroyed it. He also uses "Godhead" way too much to ascertain something is really good, it's cringeworthy. I'd dread to imagine what an evening in the his company would be like, which is sort of heart breaking for me, because I've always seen him as the number 1 Mr Cool.

But that's because he was there, the epicentre of correspondent trips to McGee's The Living Room club, JAMC anarchy, Splash 1 happenings, Brighton scene, sharing a flat with Lawrence as he descended into heroin addiction, DIY sound system raves with Harvey, Andrew Weatherall. Truly massive things in music for me which I would kill to know his insight on, if he had any.

I'm totally expecting his description of joining JAMC as "I joined a band called Jesus and Mary Chain. Jesus was the son of god, he had 12 apostles and they fought for the working class. Mary was his mother, she was a virgin, totally oppressed She was God head. A chain is metallic, something you can use to secure your bike to a lamp-post."

[diggedy derek]

lol

[imp]

I'm totally expecting his description of joining JAMC as "I joined a band called Jesus and Mary Chain. Jesus was the son of god, he had 12 apostles and they fought for the working class. Mary was his mother, she was a virgin, totally oppressed She was God head. A chain is metallic, something you can use to secure your bike to a lamp-post."

That has got my day off to a very good start.

[steveeeeeeeee]

I read a big chunk last night, describing his time with Altered Images and The Wake. Much better and some good firsthand insight into their respective mentor bands, Siouxie and the Banshees and New Order.

[imp]

Nonetheless, I demand that you start a thread on Music with a title something like 'Bobby Gillespie explains band names'.

[Sunderporinostesta]

Im over the moon that more and more think Gillespie is a prick.
Nigh on 20 yrs ago we went to see Primal Scream and Happy Mondays at midweek gigs in either Brixton or Hammersmith Palais (cant remember which band was which venue) and the pair of them put me off live music for about ten years. Both bands came on stage at approx five mins to midnight in attempts to show how wild and rock n roll and how ooooh look at us we stay up late on a school night they were. If they'd come on stage five minutes later the audience would've been entitled to refunds as it'd be the following day.
Living in E17 at the time none of us fancied getting home across London at 2 or 3 in the morning. Hundreds were leaving after ten mins to catch the tube towards central London from both gigs. Neither band have had a penny out of me since and never will.

[diggedy derek]

Love the idea of asking for a refund because technically the gig is happening on the wrong date. That's quality.

[danielmak]

You would think that an editor would say, "No way. You have too much to offer. We're putting you with a reporter/writer and the credit will be changed to Bobbie Gillespie with XXXX."

[Satchmo Distel]

IIRC Taylor has witness Gillespie doing something very dodgy.

[steveeeeeeeee]

You would think that an editor would say, "No way. You have too much to offer. We're putting you with a reporter/writer and the credit will be changed to Bobbie Gillespie with XXXX."

It's published by White Rabbit, who have released a lot of good music related books, but very much leave the writers free to their own devices. I image a lot of publishers would have given good money for Gillespie's book, but he has insisted his original draft remain unedited and White Rabbit were one of the few publisher's willing to do this.

[steveeeeeeeee]

"We dug Dylan too but his spiteful and malevolent put-down amphetamine phantasmagorias lasting seven or eight verses of Symbolist and Beat imagery were way out of our reach. We knew that Bobby was a natural-born poet and way out of sight;"

Other than the above, I have to emphasise, it has got a lot better, read 80 pages this afternoon and enjoyed most of it.

[delicatemoth]

Happy Mondays

I really like this band, but remember seeing them at Glastonbury in 1990 (I think) and they were so bad that our burgeoning acid trips were damped right down for the duration, only to roar into life once we'd wandered off. They were anti-psychedelic.

[Benjm]

I too was a big Mondays fan and but seeing them headline a festival on Clapham Common in 2004 was horrendous. I say them, but it was Shaun, Bez and a pick-up band, the line up possibly even including the promoters, making their own teenage dreams come true. Altamont-y vibes around the whole event and a wretched performance. I saw them once more after that, performing after an evening race meeting at Sandown Park about ten years ago. This too was dispiriting in its own way; the original line-up had been restored and the band were really tight, much more so than in their heyday, but Shaun was phoning it in and his lack of commitment bled the energy out of the performance. In interviews he has been more honest than is perhaps advisable about the Mondays very much being a day job for him and Black Grape his passion project.

They were hit and miss live first time around. When the alchemy worked they were stupendous but when it didn't they were unspeakable. Workmanlike wasn't an option. Their 1991 Live album recorded at Elland Road is spectacularly shoddy.