From: owner-shindell-list-digest@smoe.org (shindell-list-digest)
To: shindell-list-digest@smoe.org
Subject: shindell-list-digest V2 #372
Reply-To: shindell-list@smoe.org
Sender: owner-shindell-list-digest@smoe.org
Errors-To: owner-shindell-list-digest@smoe.org
Precedence: bulk


shindell-list-digest     Sunday, December 10 2000     Volume 02 : Number 372



                               Today's Subjects:
                               -----------------
  [RS] Re: A long winded response to RG's comments (sorry--I type fast).  [T]
  Re: [RS] Hugh review/Richard preview.                  [Loracevoll@aol.com]
  Re: [RS] When You We're Born               [j a clary <drewclary@juno.com>]
  [RS] Re: A long winded response . . .                   [Rongrittz@aol.com]
  Re: [RS] Re: A long winded response . . .  [patrick t power <ptpower@juno.]

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 15:18:39 EST
From: Tom926@aol.com
Subject: [RS] Re: A long winded response to RG's comments (sorry--I type fast).

You betcha, Mr RG. I got plenty o comments on this. Partly because we were 
discussing Nanci Griffith (she who has turned into a ponderous schoolmarm 
from hell with her pronouncements, I mean songs that say, Everything I Sing 
Has An Earth Shattering Message Of Crucial Importance To Life, Liberty and 
The Pursuit of Pretentions Galore So Y'All Better Take Notes And Sit Up Real 
Straight Whilst You Listen) and partly because I think that this is something 
every artist faces, whether they are a musician or a painter or a doodler.

- ---  HAS Richard become formulaic?  Do we sense that as a potential problem?  
I mean, here we've had another "no surprises" collection of character pieces, 
strong 
musicianship, Larry's deft (if often less-than-sublte) production, etc.

Style is such a tough nut, y'know? I love Margaret Atwood--she is one of my 
favorite writers, but her style is so strong that it is what chiefly stands 
out in each book that she writes. Same thing with Mark Rothko in painting (I 
mean, individually the paintings are wonderful and emotional and meditative, 
but after seeing ten of them in a gallery I longed to see anything 
representational...a dog, a chair, dog doodies--I do mean *anything* 
different). Or Joan Crawford or Bette Davis in movies. 

Actually I kinda liked parts of both "The Flyer" and "Late Night Grande 
Hotel," but Nanci and Dar have faced the same kind of problem. Folk music is 
a cul-de-sac. I mean there is much to be said for living in a cul-de-sac, but 
folk will always be a special taste for people. And both Nanci and Dar wanted 
to reach out to a broader audience (Nanci is particularly bitter about her 
lack of record sales if you read some of her interviews)--so they Popped Up 
their basic style in order to appeal to more people. I know that the Dar 
fanatics will get me for that, but that is what I hear when I listen to GW. I 
somehow don't see how, for instance, "What Do You Love More Than Love " or "I 
Won't Be Your Yoko Ono" are deeply personal and revealing, but they are kinda 
nice little poppy numbers. "It's Too Late" on Nanci's LNGH cd is similar 
(though I must admit I love the song because Tanita Tikaram sings harmony and 
I ADORE Tanita). But here we are talking about stylistic changes in order to 
appeal to a broader audience. Which is somewhat different from what RG is 
talking about, no?

It IS possible for musicians to broaden their stylistic pallette. The Cranky 
Diva, Joni Mitchell, is an excellent example of someone who has continually 
added new sounds and approaches to her basic songwriting over time. Paul 
Simon did it by incorporating both jazz phrasing and world music to his basic 
songwriting style. Suzanne Vega completely reinvented herself with 99.9F and 
Nine Objects of Desire. REM has evolved considerably. Don't think "Up" (which 
I rather liked actually, though you can tell Michael Stipe was listening to a 
lot of Magnetic Fields) had much in common with "Murmur" or "Reckoning." 
Marianne Faithfull too has gone from English gal singer with her sweet 
soprano to the Rage Queen of "Broken English" to a reborn Lotte Lenya to her 
last cd--which is one of my favorites of 2000. And you should hear her talk 
about "Broken English" and how everyone wanted her to be The Rage Queen the 
rest of her recording days. Emmylou Harris is another example par excellence. 
Who'd a thought she had a "Wrecking Ball"--one of the 1990s best cds--in her 
after so many years of being pigeonholed as the godmother of neotrad country?

So it can be done. Richard is certainly a wonderful songwriter. But the 
production can be a HUGE factor in how a cd sounds. I love the songs on the 
first two cds, but the production to me is just so mediocre, so safely 
"folky," that RU and SNP were such a wonderful step forward to me. One thing 
Richard may consider is that he is now living in Argentina, which has a whole 
wonderful tradition of its own music that owes not one whit to the American 
Singer Songwriter tradition that he can explore. Or he can write songs that 
are personal rather than character studies. Or are just fun little 
ditties--not everything has to be deeply spiritual and meaningful to have 
meaning. I mean I love ABBA as much as Richard. There is something to be said 
for profound silliness.

The point is that it is up to Mr Shindell to explore what HE wants to 
explore. I think when artists like Nanci start pandering to their audience in 
order to become more pop(ular), the music always always suffers. And unlike 
RG, I am a fan of musicians and am a bit of a mad completist--even of the 
dreck (for instance, I own a copy of Kate and Anna McGarrigle's "Pronto 
Monto" which really is dreck compared to the albums which came before). I 
would hate to see Richard turn into a pop tart, though it might be 
interesting to see him with big hair playing 80s dance tracks on a synthezier 
with a set on Linn drums in the background. LOL Just kidding folks.

The point is to evolve, not pander. 

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 16:45:47 EST
From: Loracevoll@aol.com
Subject: Re: [RS] Hugh review/Richard preview.

In a message dated 12/10/2000 11:01:48 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
Rongrittz@aol.com writes:

> 
>  So, I'm not saying that Richard should keep making "Somewhere Near 
Paterson" 
> 
>  over and over for the rest of his career, but where do we think he should 
go 
> 
>  with his next CD, or rather, the one that will follow the Live CD we've 
been 
> 
>  advised is being recorded in the spring?  Different producer?  Different 
>  style?  
>  
>  Thoughts?

Yeah.

Don't fix it if it ain't broke!!  <G>

While Richard's ballad style may not vary dramatically, he always seems to 
find different and compelling tales to tell with each new ballad.  And thus, 
it really seems like new ground he's covering.

Perhaps the next CD could be a little less "concept" and throw in a more 
upbeat type tunes like "Summer Wind" or "Arrowhead"  although when even his 
Lite songs are filled with angst.

.....Carol

"I Rule!!"
~ Lester Burnham in American Beauty

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 14:39:58 -0800
From: j a clary <drewclary@juno.com>
Subject: Re: [RS] When You We're Born

>> Do we know the sex of the lost child in Abeulita?  If not, does anyone
make any assumptions as to whether the child is male of female based on
the lyrics? <<

Hi Ed.  I see many grandparents, not just grandmothers, wandering the
square, looking at many children.  I don't see this particular pair's
faces.  It's kinda like a Hitchcock film...black and white, dusty, and I
hear the action more than I see it.  I sense the grandmother's angst and
hope as she and the others walk in circles, dancing if you will, hoping
to glimpse a grown up view of their memory.

Have I strayed too far from your question?  I guess I make no gender
assumption because I see so many people in this scene and I keep shifting
my gaze to the next pair.  I want to believe that each child is there and
that the grandparents have come to the right square and they will meet if
they keep dancing.

I try to imagine that each Grndparent takes a verse or part of a verse as
my gaze shifts, but the chorus is always sung by the first grandmother,
as she laments Soledad and her Juan Luis' disappearance.  I maintain that
they are alive too.  It is my deepest hope throughout this song.

j a c

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 18:51:51 EST
From: Rongrittz@aol.com
Subject: [RS] Re: A long winded response . . .

<< Or he can write songs that are personal rather than character studies. >>

Interesting, since that's when Nanci Griffith started to no longer matter to 
me.  On her earlier CDs, it was the character studies that made me adore her. 
 Rita and Eddie from "Love at the Five and Dime."  Mary and Omie.  The hotel 
owner in "Love Wore a Halo."  The couple in "Trouble in the Fields."  The 
couple in "Gulf Coast Highway."  And so on.

It wasn't until she started writing about HERSELF, around the time of 
"Flyer," that I began to realize that Nanci Griffith wasn't nearly as 
interesting as the people about whom she'd been writing.

Not that I fear this happening with Richard, mind you.  Some of my favorite 
RS songs ARE ostensibly about him: "You Again," "Blue Divide" and "Wisteria" 
come to mind immediately.

I also can't imagine him doing a completely self-indulgent album of "Greatest 
Hits" backed by the London Symphony Orchestra.

RG

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 20:18:43 -0500
From: patrick t power <ptpower@juno.com>
Subject: Re: [RS] Re: A long winded response . . .

Ron wrote:

<<I also can't imagine him doing a completely self-indulgent album of
"Greatest Hits" backed by the London Symphony Orchestra.>>

This isn't necessarily topic-related, but . . .

This is interesting in light of the concert that I saw last week -- Arlo
Guthrie with the Michigan State University Symphony Orchestra.

The concert was billed as "A Classic Christmas" with the orchestra and a
couple of choirs performing the first half of the concert and Arlo
performing with them for the second half. For the most part, the concert
worked pretty well -- that is, if you don't include the part (in fact,
the very first song -- "City Of New Orleans") in which the piano's vocal
microphone didn't work and Arlo was left to his own devices until they
got the mic to work . . . which they didn't (he performed the rest of the
night without the piano) .

As a friend of mine said, it turned into a folk concert!

As nice a show as I think it would have been with properly working sound
equipment (he did well in choosing songs that worked with orchestral
arrangements), it was an event to remember thanks to the gaff of the
sound crew and Arlo's wonderful wit.

Pat

------------------------------

End of shindell-list-digest V2 #372
***********************************