From: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org (loud-fans-digest) To: loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Subject: loud-fans-digest V10 #37 Reply-To: loud-fans@smoe.org Sender: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk loud-fans-digest Monday, April 11 2011 Volume 10 : Number 037 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: [loud-fans] The Smiths & REM [Richard Blatherwick ] Re: [loud-fans] The Smiths & REM [robert toren ] Re: [loud-fans] The Smiths & REM ["R. Kevin Doyle" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] The Smiths & REM It's funny that you should post this as I woke up this morning with Rusholme Ruffians going round my head for the first time in ages! I'm with Bradley in not previously thinking there was too much of a connection beyond the line-up and instrumentation, but I didn't know of Peter Buck's comments. I have a feeling that the personalities and lyrics of the front men played a major role in colouring my perceptions of them, so it is entirely plausible that to someone else the similarities outweigh the differences. I'm interested in the songs you chose. Were you thinking of any particular REM songs, or particular albums that they'd fit onto? ... but can you picture Michael Stipe singing Vicar in a Tutu or Some Girls Are Bigger Than Others?? ;) - --- On Sun, 10/4/11, treesprite@earthlink.net wrote: From: treesprite@earthlink.net Subject: Re: [loud-fans] The Smiths & REM To: loud-fans@smoe.org Date: Sunday, 10 April, 2011, 7:01 It's funny, since they're the two bands I consider to be the most important of the 80's* I often think of them together, but I don't hear very many musical similarities at all aside from the jangly guitar aspects (which are very different to my ears.) In a recent MOJO article about The Queen Is Dead there's a short conversation with Peter Buck where he talks about how the two bands felt close and how they felt they were working towards similar ends, so I think my ears are drawn to the differences more than the similarities. That MOJO article is excellent, by the way, and draws attention to the fact that three of the best, most influential rock bands of the 1980's (REM, Smiths, Husker Du) featured frontmen who were gay. It's an interesting starting to point for a conversation about changing social dynamics as related to popular music and how someone like Kurt Cobain's personal politics were shaped and where his activism had, at least in part, its roots. B *I guess history has proven that U2 are probably the most important given their massive sustained popularity and influence. - -----Original Message----- >From: robert toren >Sent: Apr 9, 2011 10:29 PM >To: loud-fans@smoe.org >Subject: [loud-fans] The Smiths & REM > > haven't paid much attention to The Smiths - listening to The Queen is Dead for the first time - do they sound a hell of a lot like REM, or am I imagining things? esp There is a Light That Never Goes Out and The Boy with the Thorn in His Side... ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2011 08:23:02 -0400 From: Glen Sarvady Subject: [loud-fans] gay frontmen I haven't read the MOJO article (I assume the Smiths were the cover? I'll have to track it down) but I find it another sign of the times that none saw fit to acknowledge their sexuality during their heyday. Each took approaches different enough to populate an academic thesis: Morrissey (perhaps abetted by a more forgiving UK culture) adopted a winking celibate stance. Mould, who ultimately seemed to struggle with coming out more than the others, claims it was an open secret yet it was hardly well known. Interestingly, Stipe arguably stayed furthest above the fray, to the extent that he penned the AIDS elegy Automatic for the People (arguably the band's apex) and simply sat out the press junket for that album cycle, sidestepping all questions. Clearly each made it much easier for a follower to take the next step. Do I need to point out that I'm a big fan of all three bands? Yet it strikes me that a similar statement could be made about Elton John and Freddie Mercury a decade earlier- each left a few more clues to their orientation, or to some eyes courted stereotypes. But heck- back in the day the majority of the population hadn't even figured out the Village People! t's funny, since they're the two bands I consider to be the most important of he 80's* I often think of them together, but I don't hear very many musical imilarities at all aside from the jangly guitar aspects (which are very ifferent to my ears.) In a recent MOJO article about The Queen Is Dead there's short conversation with Peter Buck where he talks about how the two bands felt lose and how they felt they were working towards similar ends, so I think my ars are drawn to the differences more than the similarities. That MOJO article is excellent, by the way, and draws attention to the fact that hree of the best, most influential rock bands of the 1980's (REM, Smiths, usker Du) featured frontmen who were gay. It's an interesting starting to point or a conversation about changing social dynamics as related to popular music nd how someone like Kurt Cobain's personal politics were shaped and where his ctivism had, at least in part, its roots. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2011 10:50:10 -0700 (PDT) From: robert toren Subject: Re: [loud-fans] The Smiths & REM >> The Smiths - do they sound a hell >> of a lot like REM, or am I imagining things? > From: treesprite@earthlink.net > I don't hear very many musical similarities at > all aside from the jangly guitar aspects (which are very > different to my ears.) Hard to describe - they seem as different as they do alike, within certain parameters - punchy power-pop, with a smooth but emotionally confrontational vocalist and "message" lyrics, and esp - to my ears - the rhythm section - non-stop bass filling in the gaps, and no-nonsense (non-showy) but impressively inventive, catchy drumming - guitar focused on rhythm rather than lead - not the production for sure - Morrisey is way up front - I can easily imagine Stipe and Morrisey trading places - and imagine if you like one band, you'd like the other - Being brand-new to The Smiths, was just wondering if this was conventional wisdom, or just my ears BTW - digging God Save The Queen a lot! There is a Light That Never Goes Out is what grabbed me and, I see on wikipedia, that I am not alone - robert ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2011 09:19:45 -1000 From: "R. Kevin Doyle" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] The Smiths & REM I can only speak to our college radio community, but back in the 80's, R.E.M. appealed to a different subset of fans than The Smiths. When parsing through the playlists of different DJ's at my college station during that period, R.E.M. was more likely to appear with bands like The Lucy Show, Guadalcanal Diary, Let's Active, U2, and the various iterations of The Chameleons (U.K.), while The Smiths were more likely to be lumped with The Cure, Siouxsie and the Banshees, Echo and The Bunnymen, Book of Love, etc. This could be purely based on lyrical content, since "Girlfriend in a Coma" tends to be a little gloomier than, say, "Stand." I'm just thinking about the two bands during the period that they were both active. From 1984 to 1987, The Smiths' released their entire discography, while R.E.M. released "Reckoning" through "Document." During this period, I always hear a little more of The Byrds and Pylon when I listened to R.E.M. and a little more of The Kinks and Television in The Smiths. Maybe a little of Wire in both, though that's an argument for an entirely different discussion. That said, you've piqued my interest and you make a compelling rhythm section case, so I shall be listening to both bands today. :D On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 7:50 AM, robert toren wrote: >>> The Smiths - do they sound a hell >>> of a lot like REM, or am I imagining things? > >> From: treesprite@earthlink.net >> I don't hear very many musical similarities at >> all aside from the jangly guitar aspects (which are very >> different to my ears.) > > Hard to describe - they seem as different as they do alike, within certain parameters - punchy power-pop, with a smooth but emotionally confrontational vocalist and "message" lyrics, and esp - to my ears - the rhythm section - non-stop bass filling in the gaps, and no-nonsense (non-showy) but impressively inventive, catchy drumming - guitar focused on rhythm rather than lead - > not the production for sure - Morrisey is way up front - > I can easily imagine Stipe and Morrisey trading places - and imagine if you like one band, you'd like the other - > Being brand-new to The Smiths, was just wondering if this was conventional wisdom, or just my ears > BTW - digging God Save The Queen a lot! There is a Light That Never Goes Out is what grabbed me and, I see on wikipedia, that I am not alone - > > robert ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2011 15:59:09 -0500 From: Holly Kruse Subject: [loud-fans] Not the The Smiths & REM, but Duran Duran It may seem like a step down to mention Duran Duran here, but I have little shame and love(d) and love all three bands, so what the hell. Also, DD came up a little while ago and I didn't respond, so here I am now. Duran Duran never broke up, although there have been various combinations over the years. Simon Le Bon and Nick Rhodes have been the constant. The band has continued to put out new material throughout the decades, including the new album, produced by Mark Ronson, which I like very much. The band is now disowning the previous album, produced by Timbaland, which i didn't think was so bad. If you missed the YouTube Duran Duran concert directed by David Lynch last month, you really missed something. It may be available online somewhere, but I'm not sure where. It is not too late to catch Simon Le Bon's Twitter feed (http://twitter.com/SimonJCLeBON), which is one of the most genius things I've ever seen. I am not kidding about this. And he's tweeting right now. You can always catch the weekly highlights on ology.com. The latest, for instance, can be found here: http://www.ology.com/humor/week-simon-le-bon-tweets-mar-18-24 And is prefaced with: "Friends, its time once again to check in with Twitter poet and life guru extraordinaire Simon Le Bon, lead singer of Duran Duran and king of the 140-character non sequitor. Relishing the successful fan and critical reaction to the bands Mark Ronson-produced new album All You Need Is Now, Mr. Le Bons tweets are an evergreen source of laughs, tears, and head scratch-worthy bits of wisdom, all from the wonderful mind of one of our favorite pop music icons. "This week, Simon cheers on a marathon in the rain, loses a bottle of white wine in a disastrous luggage accident, accidentally shreds a room service menu, and recalls a few funny stories from Duran Duran tours past." In previous editions... "This week, Simon has a paranormal experience, is held at siege by the Winnebago Boys, and encounters a very loud cat." "In this very special edition of This Week in Simon Le Bon Tweets, Simon prepares for a trip, has some very frustrating trouble with his luggage, sees a few politicians, listens to a Polish bands CD, and plays a blistering concert with Duran Duran at SXSW." "This week, Simon ponders his favorite foods, recommends a classic 70s dinosaur film, and encounters a very friendly dog." "This week, Simon wakes up a vampire, takes his dogs out for noodles, and reluctantly attends the Brit Awards with John Taylor." And so on. I hope with this post, I have made someone's life better. Because Simon Le Bon's tweets make everyone's life better. Holly (who really does have some old indie cred  see the damn book at http://hollykruse.com/site&sound.html  but loves that Duran Duran) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2011 21:38:54 -0400 From: Jenny Grover Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Not the The Smiths & REM, but Duran Duran On 04/10/2011 04:59 PM, Holly Kruse wrote: > It may seem like a step down to mention Duran Duran here, but I have little shame and love(d) and love all three bands, so what the hell. Heck, I like all the bands that have been mentioned so far in this thread! Jen ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2011 16:22:58 -1000 From: "R. Kevin Doyle" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Not the The Smiths & REM, but Duran Duran In regards to Duran Duran, I've written this elsewhere recently, but maturity has finally made it possible for me to appreciate and very much like the music that the 15 year old popular girls were listening to in 1984. About four years ago, it struck me that I loved the songs "The Chauffer" and "Save a Prayer" and, from those, rediscovered the whole DD catalog. And the new album rocks, if'n you like Duran Duran. On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 3:38 PM, Jenny Grover wrote: > On 04/10/2011 04:59 PM, Holly Kruse wrote: >> >> It may seem like a step down to mention Duran Duran here, but I have >> little shame and love(d) and love all three bands, so what the hell. > > Heck, I like all the bands that have been mentioned so far in this thread! > > Jen ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2011 21:37:30 -0500 From: Holly Kruse Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Not the The Smiths & REM, but Duran Duran Among lots of bass players (and apparently not in online bass geek forums), John Taylor of Duran Duran seems to be regarded as one of the best bass players around, and for a long time. Holly On Apr 10, 2011, at 9:22 PM, R. Kevin Doyle wrote: > In regards to Duran Duran, I've written this elsewhere recently, but > maturity has finally made it possible for me to appreciate and very > much like the music that the 15 year old popular girls were listening > to in 1984. About four years ago, it struck me that I loved the songs > "The Chauffer" and "Save a Prayer" and, from those, rediscovered the > whole DD catalog. > > And the new album rocks, if'n you like Duran Duran. > > On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 3:38 PM, Jenny Grover wrote: >> On 04/10/2011 04:59 PM, Holly Kruse wrote: >>> >>> It may seem like a step down to mention Duran Duran here, but I have >>> little shame and love(d) and love all three bands, so what the hell. >> >> Heck, I like all the bands that have been mentioned so far in this thread! >> >> Jen ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2011 16:47:33 -1000 From: "R. Kevin Doyle" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Not the The Smiths & REM, but Duran Duran On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 4:37 PM, Holly Kruse wrote: > Among lots of bass players (and apparently not in online bass geek forums), John Taylor of Duran Duran seems to be regarded as one of the best bass players around, and for a long time. Deservedly so. He has talent and takes bass incredibly seriously from everything I've read. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2011 21:52:56 -0500 From: Holly Kruse Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Not the The Smiths & REM, but Duran Duran And that should have read "and apparently not ONLY in online bass..." hk On Apr 10, 2011, at 9:47 PM, R. Kevin Doyle wrote: > On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 4:37 PM, Holly Kruse wrote: >> Among lots of bass players (and apparently not in online bass geek forums), John Taylor of Duran Duran seems to be regarded as one of the best bass players around, and for a long time. > > Deservedly so. He has talent and takes bass incredibly seriously from > everything I've read. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2011 21:10:05 -0700 (GMT-07:00) From: treesprite@earthlink.net Subject: Re: [loud-fans] gay frontmen What I think is interesting is that none of the three (aside from Moz, I guess) wanted their sexuality to be an issue (and in Moz's case, it's an incredibly complicated relationship between his "identity" and what he's doing lyrically. As it usually is with him.) In a sense their stand was not denial, but an attempt to suggest that it didn't matter unless you wanted it to on your own terms. The "open secret" concept is huge because all the gay kids I knew were confident in the homosexuality of all three long before any of them came out, and the "is he or isn't he" question became a source of discussion. It reflects a shift away from the theatrical shock tactics of someone like Bowie or Lou Reed, but it isn't the complete denial of a Freddie Mercury (despite the evidence!) I guess I think of it as a kind of awkward transition where Stipe and Mould were trying to avoid using the notoriety but also, perhaps, trying to make a quiet case for it being a non-issue in their success/creativity. Morrissey was operating a somewhat higher level of sophistication in that regard since sex and sexual identity are such key elements of his songwriting, but by not coming out he was able to let the controversy work in concert with his craft in a way that was able to function as high art without becoming activism. The shift, then, is that maybe there's more freedom to decide how one's sexual identity relates to the career, art and audience. I don't think it's merely "less of an issue" (although in the mostly liberal world of indie-rock, it is), I think it's more about it only being as much of an issue as the artist is interested in making it. >I haven't read the MOJO article (I assume the Smiths were the cover? I'll >have to track it down) but I find it another sign of the times that none saw >fit to acknowledge their sexuality during their heyday. Each took approaches >different enough to populate an academic thesis: Morrissey (perhaps abetted by >a more forgiving UK culture) adopted a winking celibate stance. Mould, who >ultimately seemed to struggle with coming out more than the others, claims it >was an open secret yet it was hardly well known. Interestingly, Stipe >arguably stayed furthest above the fray, to the extent that he penned the AIDS >elegy Automatic for the People (arguably the band's apex) and simply sat out >the press junket for that album cycle, sidestepping all questions. Clearly >each made it much easier for a follower to take the next step. > >Do I need to point out that I'm a big fan of all three bands? Yet it strikes >me that a similar statement could be made about Elton John and Freddie Mercury >a decade earlier- each left a few more clues to their orientation, or to some >eyes courted stereotypes. But heck- back in the day the majority of the >population hadn't even figured out the Village People! > > > > > > >t's funny, since they're the two bands I consider to be the most important of >he 80's* I often think of them together, but I don't hear very many musical >imilarities at all aside from the jangly guitar aspects (which are very >ifferent to my ears.) In a recent MOJO article about The Queen Is Dead there's > short conversation with Peter Buck where he talks about how the two bands >felt >lose and how they felt they were working towards similar ends, so I think my >ars are drawn to the differences more than the similarities. >That MOJO article is excellent, by the way, and draws attention to the fact >that >hree of the best, most influential rock bands of the 1980's (REM, Smiths, >usker Du) featured frontmen who were gay. It's an interesting starting to >point >or a conversation about changing social dynamics as related to popular music >nd how someone like Kurt Cobain's personal politics were shaped and where his >ctivism had, at least in part, its roots. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2011 21:30:08 -0700 (GMT-07:00) From: treesprite@earthlink.net Subject: Re: [loud-fans] The Smiths & REM The point about the different communities of fans is interesting because it really illuminates how _culturally_ different the bands were. They were probably the two biggest bands of my formative musical years, but I knew very few people (if any) who would have considered themselves fans of both! I think the biggest difference, without getting into technical musical detail, is with Stipe and Morrissey. Completely different lyrical styles, vocal styles and public personas. I think it's Morrissey that makes it difficult to really draw comparisons between The Smiths and other bands becuase no one does anything remotely like that (without copying.) There are some similarities in that they're both non-musicians who were also fully in charge of the artistic presentation of the band (album art, videos, iconography, etc.), but their influences in that regard are completely different. Also, REM really captured something fundamentally American. The folk-rock influences, the folk-art -- and here you could get into the musical details of REM's harmonic palette. It sounds like the South, but a version no had really heard before. The Smiths couldn't be any more British and, again, a version of Northern England that was completely unrepresented in the way that they went about it. And their musical influences were very British, too, to the point where they would draw from an artist who might be considered a rip-off of an American artist, but that second-hand shift is something Morrissey and Marr would be attuned to. Again, these are the differences I've been drawn to when thinking of the two bands together, but now it's interesting to think of their similarities and to think of them as working towards similar ends. I've been listening to them for 20 years and my opinions are pretty fully formed, I guess, but I'm digging turning that around to see it from a new perspective. It may sound odd, too, but I really don't consider REM after Pageant or Document in thinking about this stuff much. I really like some of what they did after that, but that's around the time when they stopped sounding completely unique -- Chronic Town through Fables features a singular musical vocabulary that was really all their own, and Pageant through Green is the shift of that sound towards more conventional sounds (again, not a judgement call on artistic quality.) The Smiths just weren't around long enough to undergo that same kind of shift (although Strangeways suggests it and Morrissey's solo career seem, to me, to demonstrate his abillity to function at the same high level in more conventional musical contexts.) Jeez, I guess I do a lot of thinking about these two bands! B - -----Original Message----- >From: "R. Kevin Doyle" >Sent: Apr 10, 2011 12:19 PM >To: loud-fans@smoe.org >Subject: Re: [loud-fans] The Smiths & REM > >I can only speak to our college radio community, but back in the 80's, >R.E.M. appealed to a different subset of fans than The Smiths. > >When parsing through the playlists of different DJ's at my college >station during that period, R.E.M. was more likely to appear with >bands like The Lucy Show, Guadalcanal Diary, Let's Active, U2, and the >various iterations of The Chameleons (U.K.), while The Smiths were >more likely to be lumped with The Cure, Siouxsie and the Banshees, >Echo and The Bunnymen, Book of Love, etc. > >This could be purely based on lyrical content, since "Girlfriend in a >Coma" tends to be a little gloomier than, say, "Stand." > >I'm just thinking about the two bands during the period that they were >both active. From 1984 to 1987, The Smiths' released their entire >discography, while R.E.M. released "Reckoning" through "Document." >During this period, I always hear a little more of The Byrds and Pylon >when I listened to R.E.M. and a little more of The Kinks and >Television in The Smiths. Maybe a little of Wire in both, though >that's an argument for an entirely different discussion. > >That said, you've piqued my interest and you make a compelling rhythm >section case, so I shall be listening to both bands today. :D > > >On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 7:50 AM, robert toren wrote: >>>> The Smiths - do they sound a hell >>>> of a lot like REM, or am I imagining things? >> >>> From: treesprite@earthlink.net >>> I don't hear very many musical similarities at >>> all aside from the jangly guitar aspects (which are very >>> different to my ears.) >> >> Hard to describe - they seem as different as they do alike, within certain parameters - punchy power-pop, with a smooth but emotionally confrontational vocalist and "message" lyrics, and esp - to my ears - the rhythm section - non-stop bass filling in the gaps, and no-nonsense (non-showy) but impressively inventive, catchy drumming - guitar focused on rhythm rather than lead - >> not the production for sure - Morrisey is way up front - >> I can easily imagine Stipe and Morrisey trading places - and imagine if you like one band, you'd like the other - >> Being brand-new to The Smiths, was just wondering if this was conventional wisdom, or just my ears >> BTW - digging God Save The Queen a lot! There is a Light That Never Goes Out is what grabbed me and, I see on wikipedia, that I am not alone - >> >> robert ------------------------------ End of loud-fans-digest V10 #37 *******************************