FrontDoorAngel
Journeyman
so take the stage, spin down the ages
Posts: 76
|
Post by FrontDoorAngel on May 22, 2015 0:57:55 GMT
I have a channel on Youtube, where I go by the name Ian Trevor. I chose the name because it sounded so much like a guitarist's name. I was shocked to discover no matches for that name on Google. I have not searched for some years now, so I suppose there may be other Ian Trevors out there.
Bear in mind, my music was all recorded from 1999-2000, on a Yamaha MT4X cassette recorder. I had a toy drum machine that was not programmable, so all the drum tracks are monotonous. Nonetheless, I had a good guitar and an excellent effects processor - all explained in the vids - and I think by and large I did a fair job with what I had.
Note: This music is, save for one song, instrumental. Mostly I just laid down some simple riffage and provided myself an excellent excuse to solo to my heart's and fingers' content. If you don't care for electric guitar solos, don't even bother checking the tracks out.
The music ranges from very soft ambient music, to jazzy, to bluesy, to out and out heavy metal. There are vox on one song, "Child Again". The lyrics are available. I was doing my best Roger Waters impression.
The songs are mercifully short and the volume is LOW, since the tracks are converted to hard-disk from cassette. Some of the tracks have glitches and blank spaces due to pressing the wrong buttons during transfer.
Listen or don't, at your own peril.
I will, however, love you all the more if you take a listen! lol!
www.youtube.com/channel/UCoUNMn7bEmeORt9qqKfw3Tw
|
|
FrontDoorAngel
Journeyman
so take the stage, spin down the ages
Posts: 76
|
Post by FrontDoorAngel on May 21, 2015 3:00:03 GMT
If i listened to most of the reviews I'd read over the years regarding Jethro Tull,I'd probably wouldn't be here writing this now!The majority of critics are complete idiots who still believe that Ian Anderson is Jethro Tull!!!That myth began way back in the sixties folks!Critics are here to give an honest assessment of the product,and where applicable give criticism!There have been many times where i feel like criticizing the critic!Critics? No Thank You! I am not quite sure if I understand you correctly... What exactly do you mean when you say that Ian Anderson is not Jethro Tull? Personally I don't say that Ian Anderson is Jethro Tull, but then again there wouldn't be any Jethro Tull if it hadn't been for Ian... I don't think that the majority of these critics are complete idiots, but maybe just people with an opinion that differs from yours... I took the comment to mean that some critics think Ian Anderson's name is Jethro Tull? Maybe I'm wrong, but I do know some people who have said something like: "I saw Tull in concert. Jethro really rocks on that flute, man!"
I don't believe that any professional critic would make such a gaff, and if they did, it most likely wouldn't make it past an editor's desk and into print? But surely stranger things have happened: Like the libertarian candidate's name in the last POTUS election being spelled wrong on the early mail-in ballot I filled out!
I agree, Equus, that the majority of critics are not idiots. In fact, I don't think any professional critic is an idiot. But some of them may be far more pompous, pretentious, and egotistical than the artists they impute those characteristics to.
|
|
FrontDoorAngel
Journeyman
so take the stage, spin down the ages
Posts: 76
|
Post by FrontDoorAngel on May 20, 2015 4:54:21 GMT
Love it.
|
|
FrontDoorAngel
Journeyman
so take the stage, spin down the ages
Posts: 76
|
Post by FrontDoorAngel on May 19, 2015 7:53:00 GMT
I agree with much of what you say. Response to music is a subjective thing. Even the arch-Objectivist, Ayn Rand, said as much in one of her non-fiction pieces. There is a certain mystery about how music - periodic vibrations - affects each individual. Musicologists and various other professionals have done studies to the nth, but IMHO, they will never quite pin it down. Alright, let's not say never. But I think a comprehensive, scientific, quantitative (as opposed to qualitative) understanding of the operation of periodic vibrations on human beings and other animals is far off in the future. That being said, when I listen to Steve Vai, or when I watch him play (sadly for me only on video), particularly a song like "Tender Surrender" , I literally cannot imagine anyone else doing what he does with the instrument, or doing it that well. By that I mean his stage presence, his movements, everything. Sure, he's gifted in the looks department, but it took years of practice and determination to master the guitar the way he has. I'm sort of a "spiritual" guy myself and I believe that people like Steve Vai might actually be gifted, in a quite literal sense. Please note I say "might". I'm just venturing a gut feeling here. And I certainly don't want to wind up in an argument over religion or faith.
^ All that being said, I love Martin Barre, and if I had a choice of getting a chance to meet Vai or Martin, there would be no contest. It's my objective, somewhat cooler nature that must tip the hat to someone like Vai; my heart belongs to Martin (guitar-wise. My heart belongs to Ian even more. Not like that! ). I've been listening to Jethro Tull since 1979, when I was 15. They got me through some rough times. I had to wear a back brace due to scoliosis for nearly two years, and that experience has left me leary of getting terribly close to someone to this very day. Tull is without question my favorite band and I don't even have to think about it, though objectively I can name any number of bands I think are better than Tull in various ways. Rush is mind-blowingly talented; Queen knocks my socks off every time I listen to them; Frank Zappa is a god, and his noodly appendages embrace me!
Didn't Mark Knopfler say that he envied Martin's tone, or something like that? That's quite a compliment, right there, if he actually said it. I've looked for confirmation of that but haven't been able to find it.
My favorite guitarists are guys like Martin who play with finesse rather than flash or speed: Joe Perry (terribly underrated), Billy Gibbons, Jeff Beck (Where Were You), Dave Gilmour, Robin Trower, Davey Johnstone, and the legendary Waddy Wachtel. And Martin Barre. Love him!
|
|
FrontDoorAngel
Journeyman
so take the stage, spin down the ages
Posts: 76
|
Post by FrontDoorAngel on May 19, 2015 4:04:18 GMT
The virtue and value of Tull is so far beyond average critic understanding. I read somewhere (can I be more vague?) that appreciation for Tull and Ian Anderson are on the upswing (Upgrade. Upgrade?).
I think the initial snarkiness and even outright contempt for Tull, as well as other big-name bands in 70s, was due to the idea that rock music should be loud, obnoxious, simple, and above all, accessible to the average joe (whoever the hell that is). Prog bands, as well as big ticket acts like Black Sabbath, Queen, Rush, etc., were taking rock music into all kinds of different directions. In a documentary about progressive music, Bill Bruford rightly points out that for such bands being unique, being different, was the objective, whereas nowadays it seems like bands want to look and sound the same. I for one can't tell much difference between any dozen grunge and/or metal bands that came out in the 90s and 00's. Especially in the metal genres, there are so many bands, and when I listen to samples it mostly sounds the same. Forget about top 40, or country-western. All sounds alike to me.
I got a bit off the track there -
It seems to me that the acts professional critics seem to drool the most over (forgetting armchair critics, like moi) were/are artists like Lou Reed, Neil Young, Tom Waits, Tom Petty, Springsteen, Bob Seger, The Ramones, R.E.M., etc. In my view, while I enjoy some of these artists, and love some of their songs (R.E.M. is one of my favorite bands!), their music seems rather formulaic to me, fundamental, accessible. I hate to use the word 'simplistic', but there you go. Not that that's a bad thing. If it works, it works. AC/DC and ZZ Top are two bands whose music I really like, and they both admit they've been making the same album for decades.
Prog bands rubbed critics the wrong way because they were really not rock bands, when you get down to it, though they played music often based in blues and/or rock, and often rocked as hard as anybody. Those bands were different. Frank Zappa, Yes, Genesis, Floyd, Tull, King Crimson, Gentle Giant, and many others that just aren't occurring to me - the music they made was as much classical music, or jazz, as it was rock, and often much more leaning towards classical. I think this irritated the critics because many of them just weren't qualified to critique that kind of music, and rather than show their lack of musical acumen, they found it easier to fling easy labels around: Pompous, pretentious, bombastic, egotistical. As if any music of any quality could be produced by an artist without an ego?
I'm rambling. Sorry.
|
|
FrontDoorAngel
Journeyman
so take the stage, spin down the ages
Posts: 76
|
Post by FrontDoorAngel on May 19, 2015 3:21:57 GMT
I thought I saw another post in here? Perhaps he/she removed it? Anyway, I recall something that poster said: that some of the worst critics are Tull fans.
That is no doubt true, if reviews at Amazon are any indication, which no doubt they are. I adopted a phrase used by one user there who referred to the "5 star Tull junkies"** who give every album 5 stars and post glowing reviews without much objective consideration. I have a few reviews there, and I think I gave Aqualung 4 stars, and 3 stars to Under Wraps. TAAB was my only 5 star review.
The point I was trying to get across about this particular review was that she was a professional critic working for what is arguably the most prestigious music journal in the world. Such a person, in my opinion, should have some considerable level of musical knowledge if they are going to be paid to write for such a publication. Please note I said in my opinion. I could be wrong and often am, and I love being corrected, which is why I asked for my fellow Tullians to join in and perhaps explain some of Charone's comments to me.
No harm meant, and I still allow for the possibility that Charone knows far more about music than I do.
** 5 Star Tull Junkies. I think that'd be a great name for a Tull tribute band.
|
|
FrontDoorAngel
Journeyman
so take the stage, spin down the ages
Posts: 76
|
Post by FrontDoorAngel on May 19, 2015 3:09:12 GMT
Critics are a strange bunch of people, many seem to know very little about the subject they are asked to comment on and, when they do, make assumptions that are either factually wrong or totally untrue and incorrect. So many of the well known critics of the 70s and 80s are now queuing up to give vox pops on tv documentaries and still, after many years, seem to have their own agendas. For example last week one was "talking" about the supergroups of the late 60s and he mentioned, and I quote, "Jimi Hendrix and his group" - not even a word about Mitch or Noel or even the fact that it was the Jimi Hendrix Experience. Still I suppose they need to make a living which seems to be rubbishing the musicians who originally enabled them to earn a wage in an attempt to further their dwindling careers and make them seem hip and vibrant in the 21st century. OK so they could be named and shamed but it would only fuel their tiny egos. Nietzsche said something to the effect that one of the most immoral things a person could do is intentionally try to shame them. I realize that maybe that's what I was trying to do, if not consciously, when I reacted to the now 40 year old article. That was not nice of me.
|
|
FrontDoorAngel
Journeyman
so take the stage, spin down the ages
Posts: 76
|
Post by FrontDoorAngel on May 18, 2015 4:43:02 GMT
Egads.
I went to the Boy Scout Manual site and was looking around. I found this photo of a review of MITG, written shortly after the album's release (I think - it's '75 anyway), and I just couldn't believe what I was reading!
www.theboyscoutmanual.com/galleries/?id=899
While the review is fairly glowing, the author, Barbara Charone, says a number of things that to my mind are just plain silly. It makes me wonder how such a person could ever get a job reviewing music for major publications. But what do I know? Could be she is/was a classically trained violinist/composer writing reviews for Rolling Stone just for sh%ts & giggles?
First off, she refers to Barriemore Barlow. She says, "Drummer Barriemore Barlow has stopped thrashing about at random..."
?
Thrashing about at random? Excuse me? This is a drummer whom John Bonham called the best in the UK, if memory serves. A highly skilled musician. Next she goes on to say about Martin: "Martin Barre is still not a great guitarist — one suspects he will never quite make it — but as on "Aqualung" the lead guitar work is unimaginative but more than adequate." What is that supposed to mean? I don't mind so much if she says that Martin is not a great guitarist. Martin would not call himself great, and in the grand scheme of things there are scads of players who are on a much higher level, guys like Steve Vai, and virtuosos in that strata; but what exactly does unimaginative but more than adequate mean? To me it sounds like vacuous critic-speak. It sounds like something that's supposed to sound insightful but actually doesn't mean much of anything. If Martin is not what one might call a 'great' guitarist, he is most certainly an imaginative one; and an unimaginative lead guitar play could never be adequate in a top-selling, world famous rock band, let alone 'more than adequate." I just don't get it. Maybe someone smarter than me can explain it to me? And what about "one suspects he will never quite make it"? Make it? Hello, Ms. Charone, by 1975 Martin had already "made it", in spades no less! What do such words mean?
In what sense does she want Martin to "make it"?
She says this about Jeffrey Hammond-Hammond: "Bassist Hammond-Hammond lays low..."
?
Jeffrey may have laid a bit low on Aqualung, when he was learning the instrument. The bass is rather low in the mix on that LP; but by 1975, and especially on MITG, Jeffrey is doing quite the opposite of 'laying low': He is upfront and banging on all cylinders, not only in the eponymous track - where he really shines - but all over Baker St. Muse, Black Satin Dancer, and Cold Wind to Valhalla: just about the whole album!
Could it be Ms. Charone was being punny with 'laying low', as in laying down the basso profundo parts?
The author of the review goes on to say that the title track to MITG is "standard fare."
Standard fare? Minstrel in the Gallery — the song— is standard fare by what standard? No, Ms. Charone. Brown Sugar, and Honkey Tonk Woman, though both brilliant songs (I love them), might be called standard fare from the Rolling Stones, since while they were, and are, a great rock band, and while they did pursue some proggy threads early on, as in Their Satanic Majesty's Request and elsewhere, they essentially stuck with their winning formula throughout the last 50 years.
But "Minstrel in the Gallery" was probably the exact opposite of standard fare for Ian Anderson and Jethro Tull, at the time it was made. It was miles away from anything on WarChild, save for that incredible Martin Barre extravaganza in Back Door Angels, and it was not quite like anything they had ever done. The Aqualung album was heavy for its time, and particularly heavy for Tull, but MITG is far more powerful, and far heavier than anything on that seminal 1971 record. MITG might be the heaviest piece of music in the Tull catalog. Once it gets past the acoustic opening it is unrelenting, beating the listener around the ears, and soul, until it finally fades away.
Martin talks about the unusual nature of MITG, its challenges, etc., here.
I looked up Barbara Charone and did a little reading. Not much mind you. Seems she wrote a biography of Keith Richards, and this page says she grew up "on a steady diet of Rolling Stones and Bob Dylan." < That may help to explain things.
***
^ All that being said, I realize this board has been around for a while and this is probably old hat for you folk. I suppose I could do a search and look up old threads that refer to this review, MITG, and the Martin video on Youtube; but then again, maybe we can have a fresh discussion? It's good I think to revisit discussions and arguments that have occurred before. What would the world of philosophy be without the ages-old Freewill versus Determinism (Liberty versus Necessity) debate? How many pages have been filled with that one topic alone, over the past 3,000 + years?
If this has been hashed and rehashed hereabouts, I have no problem with admins or mods directing me to prior threads. I just got a wee tad flabbergasted and felt like feeling out my fellow TullIANs on this article.
|
|
FrontDoorAngel
Journeyman
so take the stage, spin down the ages
Posts: 76
|
Post by FrontDoorAngel on May 15, 2015 3:16:46 GMT
So why no love for Beggar's Farm,steelmonkey?I just love it's bluesy feel! I agree, Sherwood. Beggar's Farm is a great tune. I hated - and I mean HATED This Was when I first heard it. Over the years I developed an appreciation for it. I think I like every song, though I tend to lose interest in Cat's Squirrel or Serenade. I even like It's Breaking Me Up, which I think might be the only Tull song wherein Ian says "oh bab-eh". Correct me if I'm wrong.
Query: Is that Mick singing Move On Alone? It sounds like it could be Ian, but it also sounds like it might not be.
I realize I could look this up, but I'd much rather get the answer from a living human being.
I think this forum may have created a monster. I foresee a thousand posts by 2016.
|
|
FrontDoorAngel
Journeyman
so take the stage, spin down the ages
Posts: 76
|
Post by FrontDoorAngel on May 15, 2015 2:57:33 GMT
Bottom 10 to piss everyone off: Automotive, Science, Enginering Stitch in Time Overhang Hymn 43 Small Cigar Broadsword Truck Stop Runner This is Not Love North Sea Oil Too Many Too A Stitch in Time is a poor Jethro Tull song.Actually it is without doubt the bands worst song. However I quite enjoy Overhang,and This Is Not Love. Oh boy, I love Stitch and North Sea Oil, and Broadsword...
My current top ten (Excluding APP & TA... ah hell, the "Flee Thee Icy Lucifer" edit rocks!)
1) Paradise Steakhouse 2) A New Day Yesterday 3) Nothing to Say 4) Black Sunday 5) Cup of Wonder (anything off SFTW, even Pibroch) 6) Beside Myself 7) Valley 8) No Lullaby 9) Minstrel in the Gallery 10) Broadford Bazaar
Second ten:
1) Mother Goose 2) The Third Hoorah 3) (The majestic) At Last, Forever 4) Flying Dutchman (Also majestic) 5) Ears of Tin 6) Beggar's Farm 7) The Clasp 8) Flying Colours 9) Back Door Angels (Best Martin solo?) 10) Taxi Grab
I could keep doing this until virtually every song was mentioned!
Bottom ten:
1) Hymn 43 2) Round 3) Dot.Com 4) Batteries Not Included 5) Pied Piper 6) Driving 7) Lots of songs on Nightcap 8) Play in Time 9) Son 10) 17
|
|
FrontDoorAngel
Journeyman
so take the stage, spin down the ages
Posts: 76
|
Post by FrontDoorAngel on May 15, 2015 2:35:24 GMT
A thread to explain how we got here both in Tulldom and Forum. Glasgow,Scotland 1972, 15 year old girl always on the lookout for the unusual and different bought an album with a picture of a lecherous old man on the cover from a lecherous young geek at one of the record shops in the town. Friends laughed when she showed it to them in some flat (Apartment) in some dimension as they sat tripping and pondering every note,heard and unheard, on “Meddle” or " In Search of the Lost Roach?" "No, not my scene" they said. She played it constantly - her granny had kittens at some of the lyrics however consoled when she was told that it was a piece of semi- religious music about redemption! Then she (the girl not the granny) went out to discover the Tull Pick n Mix bought..This Was – nope! didn’t like it. bought.. Benefit – Became a daily fix like the 20 Embassy Regal and the liberal amount of patchouli .. Ian sang to me – me alone. bought ..Minstrel – too “ninny nonny” Ian and I were beginning to grow apart. Went to first concert – Glasgow Playhouse 1972 – blown away and realised I'd backed the right horse. Again - at Glasgow Apollo 1973 Married a musician who didn’t like Tull – raised children,didn’t listen to enough music (1980’s) well except for hubbie's latest offerings huddled over the Teac in the dining room.bought Broadsword - and reacquainted myself with this wonderful musician - Ian...not husband. Some 210,000 hours passed and I had a notion. Thought I’d check out the official Jethro Tull website and there on the left hand of the front page was a little square of moving dialogue –the Live Chat. For the first time in my life I could speak to people who had the Tull affliction (some just an affliction) and I was reborn – the taste of Tull was almost more sweet and luscious than the first listen. I re-listened to the old songs, I listened to the new (to me) went to the 40th Anniversary concert – I was blown away and so grateful that he hadn’t been put off by my absence. Met Col ..via MySpace – I had a page called "Isla of Tull" – the 21st century equivalent of playing records in a bedroom surrounded by posters. Col asked me to join the Forum. Emphasis added. Reminds me of my hours and hours in 1999-2000 huddled over my Yamaha MT4X cassette recorder in the spare room, ignoring wife and family in my single-minded obsession with recording as much of my eccentric guitar noodlings as possible, in the hope that someone, anyone, would find them of interest. At long last I dusted off the cassettes - several hours of "music" - and transferred the tunes to my hard-drive, and with the help of my tech wizard of a son, uploaded several tracks onto my Youtube page, where the fruits of my labor are lovingly ignored to this day. Ah, technology doth make hopelessly obscure starlets of us all!
|
|
FrontDoorAngel
Journeyman
so take the stage, spin down the ages
Posts: 76
|
Post by FrontDoorAngel on May 14, 2015 14:48:06 GMT
Sorry, I should have thought more about what I was typing! What I meant was that Ian was self-taught as a musician, or at the very least on the flute, which I gather is true based on the reading I've done and various interviews. I didn't mean to suggest that he hadn't had the usual education a person of his generation would have had.
I ran off at the fingers without being very clear about what I wanted to say. This happens a lot with me. I try like heck to be clear, but wind up obtuse, or just plain wrong.
But it's such a fascinating subject. All musicians who were UK based and of a similar age to IA during their formative school years of say 12 to 16 would have studied the classics (poetry, literature, music) as part of normal school lessons. I firmly believe this is why there was an explosion of what is now called prog rock in the early seventies when musicians began to use the ideas and concepts that they had learnt at school to form a large part of their musical compositions. IA and his contemporaries would have certainly had the opportunity to hear the works of Elgar, Vaughan Williams, Delius, for example, as part of their exam course work alongside the works of earlier classical composers (Tchaikovsky, Beethoven, Liszt etc) and this is not forgetting the work of Cecil Sharp and others of his ilk, who scoured the British Isles collecting and saving traditional folk songs and music for future generations. That says volumes about the superiority of the public education system in the UK as opposed to the states! Is that the way it is nowadays, or was it that way just in your/IA's generation?
When I went to school (Kindergarten thru 12th grade, no higher) we were taught literature of course, but exposure to music was scant. I remember learning about fundamental musical theory, bits of info about various composers, etc; and I remember we saw some films and heard some music, but it was nothing in depth: very sketchy and basic. My love of music was engendered at home, where my father would play all kinds of music from the classics up to the Beatles, Stones, and plenty of rock, though he was not terribly into progressive rock or heavy metal. My fondest memories are of being sat on the couch and listening to Procol Harum, The Doors, Beatles, Stones, Elton John, Simon & Garfunkel, Cat Stevens, and later on groups like Boston, ELO, even Blondie. My pop was born in 1944.
My earliest interest in poetry and lyric-writing (I played in a band for 10 years and have recorded my own music) stems from those childhood moments with my father. He would engage my brother and I about the music, what we thought about it. He would tell us the words and ask us what we thought they meant. I distinctly recall him asking me my interpretation of "Fool on the Hill", and I remember thinking - I was all of seven or eight, I imagine, at the time - that "the eyes in his head" referred to eyes in the back of the character's head. I was a sprout and was thinking literally, of course. I even recollect an image of a Humpty-Dumpty type fellow sitting on a hill, with a pair of eyes in the back of his head.
I learned about "poetry", as in work written by famous poets, in the later years of school, say from 7th grade thru 12th, but I also remember hating it when I was in 8th grade. I remember reading William Carlos Williams' seminal poem, The Red Wheelbarrow:
www.poets.org/poetsorg/poem/red-wheelbarrow
and thinking to myself: "What a load of crap! It doesn't rhyme and it looks like a kid could do it! Poetry sucks!"
Many, many years later, I developed a keen appreciation of that handful of words. There's still much debate as to its worth as poetry - but perhaps that's for another thread.
And I believe you're quite right about that group of people in the UK at that time. All those incredibly talented, unique bands popping up around the same time. My spiritual side likes to think it was God (or the Aristotelian Prime Mover) who was behind that, but your explanation is the more rational. If only the prog-haters in the world, who are Legion if Youtube and Facebook are any indication, which no doubt they are, would get rid of that knee-jerk desire to dismiss those artists as "pompous" and "pretentious" and sit down and give them a fair listen. << I shouldn't generalize. I know there are many people who have given prog works a chance and still can't stand them. One of them's a good friend of mine named Robbie MacKenzie, a Scot. Hey, Robbie! *waves hand*
|
|
FrontDoorAngel
Journeyman
so take the stage, spin down the ages
Posts: 76
|
Post by FrontDoorAngel on May 14, 2015 9:07:59 GMT
One of the things I respect the most about Ian Anderson is his gift for poetry. And I've always thought it odd that he's said that he doesn't care for poetry at all. Hmm. I suspect he means poetry as in Lord Tennyson, or Robert Frost, or something academic like that; or perhaps he refers to the kind of 'poetry' that most non-literate people think of when they hear that word: Hallmark card type ephemera, saccharine garbage about rainbows and unicorns, grandmas and moony junes? With Ian it's hard to know for sure. All I know is, his lyrics are extremely literate, very often metrical (if only for musical purposes), and jam-packed with every tool and device at a poet's disposal: rhyme & meter, alliteration, metaphor, multiple meanings, allusions to history, literature, music, philosophy, etc. When I first opened up the first Tull LP I ever heard, Songs From the Wood, at the tender age of 15 (1979), I was instantly enchanted by the words, before I even heard the music they accompanied: IA's schooling would have included the classics - it is/was part of the curriculum and as such would have been part of the English Literature lessons. Being the same age as IA his school work would have been similar to mine, and Shakespeare, Tennyson, Milton et al would certainly have been part of his study courses along with 20th century writers such as George Orwell, J. B. Priestly, J. R. R. Tolkien and even Noël Coward at his acerbic best. Sorry, I should have thought more about what I was typing! What I meant was that Ian was self-taught as a musician, or at the very least on the flute, which I gather is true based on the reading I've done and various interviews. I didn't mean to suggest that he hadn't had the usual education a person of his generation would have had.
I ran off at the fingers without being very clear about what I wanted to say. This happens a lot with me. I try like heck to be clear, but wind up obtuse, or just plain wrong.
|
|
FrontDoorAngel
Journeyman
so take the stage, spin down the ages
Posts: 76
|
Post by FrontDoorAngel on May 14, 2015 6:08:25 GMT
I picked (painstakingly of course!) - in this very order: 1. Songs From the Wood 2. A Passion Play 3. Roots to Branches 4. Stand Up 5. Minstrel in the Gallery SFTW broke my Tull cherry, so that is indisputably my favorite. APP is when Ian finally finds his natural voice. I love TAAB but feel that he was still using that youthful, snotty, somewhat up-yoursy tone that you hear all over Aqualung (which by the way is my least fave save for Dot.Com and Catfish Rising - but that's for another overlong thread , and I believe he really came into his own for APP. Actually, the Chateau D'isaster tapes, but again, that's for another thread. Roots to Branches is a beautiful album with some of Ian's best music. I think it was the best studio release since SFTW. Stand Up was miles ahead of This Was, simply because the master took command, and it was brilliantly recorded; and Clive and Glen were dynamite. They faded into the background on Benefit, I thought, especially Clive! Then there was Aqualung, which even Ian has stated was not produced well. The songs were fabulous, but the recording on that LP is notably sub-excellent, though Steve Wilson did spiffy them up a bit. The fifth choice I dawdled and thunk over, rubbing my gray chin in conflict. I love WarChild, Heavy Horses, Stormwatch, and A....Crikey, and Broadsword! But I went with MITG finally. Maybe the decision wasn't really mine, and the Antareans forced their super duper cooperation rays through my aluminum foil hat?
|
|
FrontDoorAngel
Journeyman
so take the stage, spin down the ages
Posts: 76
|
Post by FrontDoorAngel on May 14, 2015 3:57:02 GMT
But nevertheless,,,,very poetic and nicely expressed introductory post. I too expect loud Tull (APP) as the soundtrack down the Jasmine Corridor...I always imagined my death taking place on a bicycle, in downtown SF, corner of geary and market with three similtaneous thoughts; Tull song...probably Passion Play That girl is pretty, I wonder if..... Yellow light...but I can make it, no problem... Thanks, steelmonkey! I'm something of a poet - have had a number of pieces published in reputable journals over the years here in the states and in the UK - but I appreciate the kind words.
One of the things I respect the most about Ian Anderson is his gift for poetry. And I've always thought it odd that he's said that he doesn't care for poetry at all. Hmm. I suspect he means poetry as in Lord Tennyson, or Robert Frost, or something academic like that; or perhaps he refers to the kind of 'poetry' that certain people - not Ian - think of when they hear that word: Hallmark card type ephemera, saccharine garbage about rainbows and unicorns, grandmas and moony junes? With Ian it's hard to know for sure. All I know is, his lyrics are extremely literate, very often metrical (if only for musical purposes), and jam-packed with every tool and device at a poet's disposal: rhyme & meter, alliteration, metaphor, multiple meanings, allusions to history, literature, music, philosophy, etc. When I first opened up the first Tull LP I ever heard, Songs From the Wood, at the tender age of 15 (1979), I was instantly enchanted by the words, before I even heard the music they accompanied:
I'll buy you six bay mares to put in your stable, six golden apples bought with my pay. I am the first piper who calls the sweet tune, but I must be gone by the seventh day.
or:
I believe in fires at midnight when the dogs have all been fed, a golden toddy on the mantle, a broken gun beneath the bed.
^ If those, and many, many verses like them, are not the work of a fine poet, then I know nothing about poetry.
Ian's natural, unschooled genius expresses itself in so many ways. The world is a finer place for such men (and women). All of the anti-Tull vitriol on the world - particularly on the part of professional music critics - is the result of jealousy, plain and simple, and a heaping helping of 'good' old-fashioned snobbery. Autodidacts often offend the powdery noses of the so-called "upper-class", who cannot conceive of a naturally gifted person succeeding in life without a university degree, or the time honored help of Old Money.
I'm an autodidact myself - barely made it out of high school. So was Frank Zappa. And Charles Dickens. There are many others. And with Youtube, the world is seeing the proliferation of self-taught geniuses in all fields of artistic and intellectual endeavor, and in places where your typical snob wouldn't think to look: Southeast Asia, Burma, South America, China, literally Everywhere.
Sorry for the long, discursive post! You'll be seeing quite a lot of these from me, no doubt, since I've decided to start reaching out to my fellow Tullians.
JT & Ian forever! <3
|
|
FrontDoorAngel
Journeyman
so take the stage, spin down the ages
Posts: 76
|
Post by FrontDoorAngel on May 13, 2015 5:07:32 GMT
Hello. Just joined. Been a diehard Tuller since 1979, and will be hearing Ian in my head when they slide me into the oven...wait! Crikey! If that's the case then I wouldn't be dead, would I? Alright, let me just say that when I take my rattling last breath, it will be to the tunes Mr. Anderson has jammed my noggin full with (sorry to end on a preposition).
May I croak before him, and he live on one-legged till all the velvet greens and silver-stream-saturated daffodils have dwindled away to the size of a dot on a die that's a six or a two.
|
|