Home Blog Page 568

Johnny Marr unveils video for new single ‘The Messenger’ – Watch

0
Johnny Marr has unveiled the video for his first ever solo single, "The Messenger". As revealed by NME last month, Marr will release his debut solo album, also called The Messenger, on February 25. The album was recorded in Manchester and Berlin, and mastered at London’s Abbey Road by Frank Ark...

Johnny Marr has unveiled the video for his first ever solo single, “The Messenger”.

As revealed by NME last month, Marr will release his debut solo album, also called The Messenger, on February 25.

The album was recorded in Manchester and Berlin, and mastered at London’s Abbey Road by Frank Arkwright. The pair previously worked together on remastering work for The Smiths‘ box set Complete.

“The Messenger” sees Marr turn frontman after years as star sideman and guitarist-for-hire. He said of the album: “The underlying idea of the record is my experience of growing up in Europe. When you’re away from your home city you’re more compelled to write about it, whether that’s because you’re homesick or you’ve got more objectivity, I don’t know. Growing up in the city influences you, and I’ve continued to see stories and energy in it.”

Song titles on the album include “The Right Thing Right”, “Upstarts”, “European Me” and “I Want The Heartbeat”.

Rare Elvis Presley press conference footage unearthed – watch

0

Rare footage has surfaced of Elvis Presley talking at a press conference. The event took place the day before the first of four nights at New York's Madison Square Garden in 1972, and is among the last press conferences Elvis ever did. Asked whether he would like to perform abroad, 'The King' expressed a desire to visit the UK. He said: "I've never been to Britain, I’d like to, very much, I’ve never been out of this country except in the service." The footage is included as part of the release of Elvis Presley: Prince From Another Planet, which is available today (November 13). The rare footage has been unearthed and added to a brand new anniversary edition of the Madison Square Garden show. As well as the two CDs, which feature the Saturday performance of his long-awaited New York residency, the bonus DVD features hand-held footage of his afternoon show and a documentary. This 1972 concert was the first time that Elvis had played in New York, despite his career starting 15 years earlier. It was also his last. The press conference took place on the Friday afternoon before the big weekend and was also attended by Colonel Tom Parker and Elvis’ father, Vernon Presley, who sat beside his son. Watch the footage below.

Rare footage has surfaced of Elvis Presley talking at a press conference.

The event took place the day before the first of four nights at New York’s Madison Square Garden in 1972, and is among the last press conferences Elvis ever did.

Asked whether he would like to perform abroad, ‘The King’ expressed a desire to visit the UK.

He said: “I’ve never been to Britain, I’d like to, very much, I’ve never been out of this country except in the service.”

The footage is included as part of the release of Elvis Presley: Prince From Another Planet, which is available today (November 13).

The rare footage has been unearthed and added to a brand new anniversary edition of the Madison Square Garden show. As well as the two CDs, which feature the Saturday performance of his long-awaited New York residency, the bonus DVD features hand-held footage of his afternoon show and a documentary.

This 1972 concert was the first time that Elvis had played in New York, despite his career starting 15 years earlier. It was also his last.

The press conference took place on the Friday afternoon before the big weekend and was also attended by Colonel Tom Parker and Elvis’ father, Vernon Presley, who sat beside his son.

Watch the footage below.

Fan footage needed for Springsteen doc

0

Ridley Scott's production company, Scott Free, are making a documentary about Bruce Springsteen. According to a story in Variety, Springsteen And I will be compiled by director Baillie Walsh from footage submitted by fans. Said producer Svana Gisla, "We are searching for a wide variety of creative interpretations, captured in the most visually exciting way you can think of, whether you've been a hardcore Tramp since 73 or have heard one of his songs for the first time today! If you have a parent, a sibling, a neighbour or a colleague who has an interesting tale, we want to know about them. If you can't use a camera or are not sure how to capture your story then get in touch and we will link you up with someone who can." Videos can be submitted online, but must be under five minutes in length. Submissions are being accepted from midnight GMT on Thursday 15 November for two weeks. These can be uploaded to the website www.springsteenandi.com. Longer clips can be provided by contacting the production team directly to arrange delivery. The format of the film is similar to their 2011 documentary, Life In A Day, which was crowdsourced from 80,000 clips taken on July 24, 2010. Springsteen And I will be released next year.

Ridley Scott’s production company, Scott Free, are making a documentary about Bruce Springsteen.

According to a story in Variety, Springsteen And I will be compiled by director Baillie Walsh from footage submitted by fans.

Said producer Svana Gisla, “We are searching for a wide variety of creative interpretations, captured in the most visually exciting way you can think of, whether you’ve been a hardcore Tramp since 73 or have heard one of his songs for the first time today! If you have a parent, a sibling, a neighbour or a colleague who has an interesting tale, we want to know about them. If you can’t use a camera or are not sure how to capture your story then get in touch and we will link you up with someone who can.”

Videos can be submitted online, but must be under five minutes in length. Submissions are being accepted from midnight GMT on Thursday 15 November for two weeks. These can be uploaded to the website www.springsteenandi.com. Longer clips can be provided by contacting the production team directly to arrange delivery.

The format of the film is similar to their 2011 documentary, Life In A Day, which was crowdsourced from 80,000 clips taken on July 24, 2010.

Springsteen And I will be released next year.

The John Lennon Lettters

0
Hunter Davies, who in 1968 wrote the first authorised biography of The Beatles and now more than 50 years on has compiled and edited The John Lennon Letters, admits in his introduction that he has for the purposes of the book ‘rather expanded the definition of the word letter’, which immediately...

Hunter Davies, who in 1968 wrote the first authorised biography of The Beatles and now more than 50 years on has compiled and edited The John Lennon Letters, admits in his introduction that he has for the purposes of the book ‘rather expanded the definition of the word letter’, which immediately sounds bit slippery, especially when he also describes some of the material he has unearthed as ‘notes and lists and scraps’. This sounds rather unpromising, as if Davies is preparing the reader for disappointments to come.

Flicking through the book’s 400 pages, you’ll quickly notice that the bulk of the correspondence collected here consists mainly of hastily scribbled postcards, letters dashed off in apparent haste, to family, friends and fans, scribbled nonsense a lot of them, at least at first glance. They are arranged chronologically, and the heart as they say sinks when you get to Lennon’s latter years, that time he spent largely in domestic seclusion in the Dakota building, a house husband and doting father, when all he seemed to write was shopping lists, or instructions to helpmeets and assistants, demanding this and wanting that.

Your initial impression therefore confirms the views of those critics of the book who’ve dismissed it as not much more than an exercise in barrel-scraping, the apparent triteness of much of the content diminishing rather than enhancing Lennon’s legend, at least two of them – Jarvis Cocker in The Observer and Neil McCormick in The Daily Telegraph – coincidentally suggesting that a more accurate title for it would have been The John Lennon Post-it Notes, such is the dearth, as they saw it, of anything collected here of obvious substance, clearly and spectacularly illuminating about Lennon’s life, personality, music and other related matters of significant import, the amassed correspondence revealing little more than the fact that Lennon’s spelling was fairly atrocious and he liked to doodle.

In the circumstances, you may approach the book, as I did, braced for a let-down, expecting it to be a bundle of nothing, padded out by a join-the-dots biography of Lennon and The Beatles, a familiar saga, re-told for the umpteenth time. What a turn-up, then, to find on closer reading that the book is far from being merely an anthology of the mundane, trivial and inconsequential. It is, in fact, fascinating, and by the end of it you wish more of Lennon’s correspondence had survived, and not so much of it lost, destroyed, mislaid.

As Davies explains, a lot of Lennon’s letters have ended up in the possession of private collectors, who acquired them at auction or high-end memorabilia sales, many of them sold on by the people they were originally written to, like the letter he wrote to Sandra Clark in october, 1963. As a 14-year old Beatles fan, she wrote to Lennon, not expecting a reply. ‘I was in tears when I got it – which is why the letter got stained,’ she tells Davies. She kept the letter for 20 years, a presumably treasured possession. In 1982, however, married with three young children and strapped for cash, she sold it for £440 to buy a new washing machine and with what was left put down a deposit on a new cooker.

The earliest letter here dates from 1951 – a touching note to Lennon’s aunt, Harriet, thanking her for a Christmas present, a towel with his name on it (‘The best towel I’ve ever seen!’). Letter 285, as it is designated, which appears a couple of hundred pages later, is a reproduction of the scrap of paper on which Lennon had scribbled his autograph for Ribeah Love, who worked on the switchboard of the Record Plant, where he’d been recording Double Fantasy. It was the last thing Lennon ever wrote. Twenty minutes later, outside the Dakota, he was shot dead by Mark Chapman.

In between, there are examples of his early precocity – pages from The Daily Howl, for instance, a home-made newspaper he produced when he was 12 or 13, which anticipates so much of the surreal humour, absurd wordplay and literary buffoonery to come, with its echoes of Lear, Lewis Carol and Spike Milligan. There are copious letters and notes to his family, with whom he often struggled to stay in touch, often by the tone of his replies to letters unseen by us, to their dismay. They often felt estranged by his fame as much as he was often annoyed by their demands upon his time. Much of his correspondence was good-natured, bantering, full of in-jokes, sometimes baffling asides, free-associative bollocks and hilarious non-sequiturs (‘Pass me that cat, I’m starving!’). Just as often, there are letters that give full voice to an anger that regularly consumed him, at which point they are aggressive, sarcastic, bitter and not always very pleasant, like the infamous 1971 ‘John rant’, addressed to Paul and Linda (‘…get that into your pretty little perversion of a mind, Mrs McCartney’).

There are vulnerable, sentimental and sometimes self-pitying letters to Cynthia, including one written in August 1965, from the rented house in Hollywood where The Beatles were taking a break from an American tour. He is apparently wracked with guilt over his neglect of first son, Julian.
‘I miss him more than I’ve ever done before,’ he writes. ‘I spend hours in dressing rooms and things thinking about the times I’ve wasted not being with him,’ he continues. ‘Those stupid bastard times – it’s ALL WRONG! ‘I’ll go now cause I’m bringing myself down thinking about what a thoughtless bastard I seem to be – and it’s only 3 o’clock in the afternoon, and it seems the wrong time of day to feel so emotional – I really feel like crying – it’s stupid and I’m choking up now as I’m writing – I don’t know what’s the matter with me.’

Some of the most revealing letters are to his cousin Liela, with whom he kept up an irregular if usually lively correspondence. The last of his messages to her, now inescapably poignant, is dated January, 1979.

‘I’m 40 next year,’ he writes, looking ahead to 1980, the year of his death. ‘I hope life begins – i.e. I’d like a little less “trouble” and more what? I don’t know. . .’

The John Lennon Letters are published by Weidenfeld & Nicholson, the hardback priced at £25, the e-book version at £12.99.

Have a good week.

Damon Albarn to appear on every BBC radio station at once

0
Damon Albarn has created an 'audio collage' to be simultaneously broadcast on every BBC radio station in the UK and worldwide to mark 90 years of radio. The simulcast, named Radio Reunited, will reach a potential global audience of 120 million people across every inhabited continent. It consists...

Damon Albarn has created an ‘audio collage’ to be simultaneously broadcast on every BBC radio station in the UK and worldwide to mark 90 years of radio.

The simulcast, named Radio Reunited, will reach a potential global audience of 120 million people across every inhabited continent.

It consists of a three-minute transmission based on recorded messages submitted by listeners around the world on the theme of the future. An estimated 60 BBC radio stations will choose one message each, which will then be mixed together and set to a track specially composed by the Blur frontman.

Albarn told the Today programme: “The idea was people would be asked the question, What message would you give to somebody listening in 90 years’ time? There was this sort of anxiety and then there were a few younger minds musing on this and they in a way were the most interesting because they were very free and in a sense the only people who will have any connection with 90 years.”

He adds: “I don’t know what the various audiences will make of it… the biggest kind of block I had was, I can’t make it too Radio 4, but I can’t make it too Radio 1, but in Nigeria, none of those apply, or Afghanistan.”

The programme hints at some of the sounds that will be in Albarn’s collage: they include the chimes of Big Ben, a skylark, the name Bertrand Russell in Morse Code, the BBC radio pips and the sound of a Cold War spy station. “I tried to get the history of radio in a very abstract way,” says Albarn. “I don’t know what people will make of it – it is what it is.”

Radio Reunited will be broadcast on November 14 at 5.33pm, marking exactly 90 years since the first ever BBC broadcast.

Damon Albarn last month revealed that he’s keen to write another opera following the success of last year’s production of Dr Dee. Speaking at the English National Opera (ENO) in London on October 3, Albarn said: “I’ve got a really good idea. I’m not going to say what it is, but it’s interesting.”

My Morning Jacket frontman Jim James to release debut solo album

0
My Morning Jacket frontman Jim James is set to release his debut solo album. Regions Of Light And Sound Of God will come out in North America on February 5, 2013 on the ATO label. The album was inspired by the 1929 graphic novel God's Man, by Lynd Ward, writes Pitchfork. Of the album, James says:...

My Morning Jacket frontman Jim James is set to release his debut solo album.

Regions Of Light And Sound Of God will come out in North America on February 5, 2013 on the ATO label.

The album was inspired by the 1929 graphic novel God’s Man, by Lynd Ward, writes Pitchfork.

Of the album, James says: I wanted the album to sound like it came from a different place in time. Perhaps sounding as if it were the past of the future, if that makes any sense – like a hazy dream that a fully-realized android or humanoid capable of thought might have when it reminisces about the good old days of just being a simple robot.

The Regions Of Light And Sound Of God tracklisting is:

‘State of the Art (A.E.I.O.U)’

‘Know Til Now’

‘Dear One’

‘A New Life’

‘Exploding’

‘Of the Mother Again’

‘Actress’

‘All Is Forgiven’

‘God’s Love to Deliver’

The Rolling Stones announce New York tour date

0
The Rolling Stones have announced plans to play the Barclays Center in Brooklyn, New York on December 8. The show will come after the band's gigs at London's O2 Arena on November 25 and 29, and before their previously announced shows in New Jersey at the Prudential Center in Newark on December 13 a...

The Rolling Stones have announced plans to play the Barclays Center in Brooklyn, New York on December 8.

The show will come after the band’s gigs at London’s O2 Arena on November 25 and 29, and before their previously announced shows in New Jersey at the Prudential Center in Newark on December 13 and 15.

Tickets for the new date will go on sale November 19.

Mick Jagger recently spoke to Billboard about the high ticket prices for the band’s forthcoming shows, saying they are so costly because the band’s gigs are “expensive to put on”.

Jagger said: “You might say, ‘The tickets are too expensive’ – well, it’s a very expensive show to put on, just to do four shows, because normally you do a hundred shows and you’d have the same expenses.”

He continued: “So, yes, it’s expensive. But most of the tickets go for a higher price than we’ve sold them for, so you can see the market is there. We don’t participate in the profit. If a ticket costs 250 quid, let’s imagine, and goes for 1,000 quid, I just want to point out that we don’t get that difference.”

Billy Bragg talks Joe Strummer, Jake Bugg, Frank Turner during John Peel Lecture

0
Billy Bragg delivered the second annual John Peel Lecture earlier today (November 12) at the Radio Festival 2012 at The Lowry in Salford. Bragg's speech saw him rallying against the decline of state educated musicians in the UK Top 40, highlighting a magazine study which revealed that 80% of artist...

Billy Bragg delivered the second annual John Peel Lecture earlier today (November 12) at the Radio Festival 2012 at The Lowry in Salford.

Bragg’s speech saw him rallying against the decline of state educated musicians in the UK Top 40, highlighting a magazine study which revealed that 80% of artists in the charts in 1990 were state educated, as compared to the charts in 2010 which were dominated by those who had been privately educated.

He said – via The Guardian: “A decent education in the arts will only be available to those able to pay for it.”

He continued: “The prime minister went to Eton; the archbishop of Canterbury went to Eton; the Mayor of London went to Eton: even the man they tell me is the new Billy Bragg – Frank Turner – went to Eton.”

“Now you may be thinking here he goes – middle-aged Clash fan railing against the state of modern music. I don’t have anything against those who were sent to private schools by their parents – Peel himself went to Shrewsbury Public School and Joe Strummer went to Westminster. And my only real criterion when it comes to music is whether or not song moves me. This issue here is not one of social class, but of access.”

Bragg went to talk about the success of Jake Bugg. “When Jake Bugg got to Number One, it made national news headlines – why? Because he never went to stage school nor graduated from the Brits Academy. He didn’t enter Britain’s Got Talent, not submit himself to the humiliations of the X Factor. Because he’s just an ordinary kid from a state school.”

“Should that make him an exception? I don’t think so. I can’t believe that there aren’t plenty of articulate teenagers out there with an ear for a good tune and a chip on their shoulder who have something to say.”

Last year’s inaugural John Peel Lecture was given by The Who’s Pete Townshend.

The Radio Festival takes place from November 12-14. For more information visit radioacademy.org

Tim Hecker & Daniel Lopatin – Instrumental Tourist

0

Cosmic collaboration from two electronic masters... In an early interview Daniel Lopatin, aka Oneohtrix Point Never, attributed his hermetic sonic obsession and reluctance to play in a band to megalomania. Listening to the reticent cosmic melancholy of his music - most famously his “echojam” “Nobody’s Here”, which spliced an ectoplasmic sliver of Chris De Burgh’s “The Lady In Red” to a pixilated clip from an old Mario Kart game - you might have taken that confession with a cellarful of salt. Nevertheless since 2009’s compilation Rifts brought his work to a wider audience, he’s got into the (altered) zone, and is now shaping up to be hardest working man in dronebiz. In the past year alone he has launched his own label (Software Recording Co.), overseen the release a series of EPs and singles, edited a zine (Cool Drools), worked on an EP of remixes of his 2011 album Replica, produced a split album with Rene Hell and, at the behest of Saatchi and Saatchi, written a score for a robotic flying circus. Lest he be accused of resting on his laurels, his latest brainwave is SSTUDIOS, which promises to be a series of electronic collaborations, inaugurated with this jam with Canadian cosmonaut Tim Hecker. If Lopatin has been crowned the philosopher king of a certain strain of peculiarly Brooklynite new wave of new age - divining YouTube satori in nuggets of 80s MOR, paying more extensive homage to mid-80s synthpop with his label partner as Ford and Lopatin - then Hecker represents a more sober tradition: lecturing on sound art, releasing albums through venerable postrock and electronica labels like Kranky and Mille Plateaux, recording thoroughly conceptualised suites (2011’s RaveDeath, 1972 was based around field recordings of a pipe organ in a church in Rekyjavik). The combination of the two promised a novel double-act, sacred and profane, of sonic mysticism. For this collaboration though, they left preconceptions at the door to “embrace the tropes and techniques of jazz-based improvisation”. Nevertheless, a concept of sorts seems to have emerged. Instrumental Tourist is apparently based around the “acoustic resonance of digitally sourced ‘Instruments Of The World’” - and sure enough tracks like “Racist Drone” and “Grey Geisha” bear the trace of digital approximations of Andean pipes or Japanese koto. The title of the track “Whole Earth Tascam” - like Art of Noise’s “Moments In Love” being slowly lowered into an abyss - is suggestive. In 1966 Stewart Brand campaigned for NASA to release the first satellite photo of earth, in the hope that it might generate a heightened sense of the wonder and fragility of the planet. A lot of Instrumental Tourist, then, might be an attempt to imagine a sonic equivalent of that picture - a kind of cosmic take on Jon Hassel’s “fourth-world music”, conjured from the ethnomusical MIDI kitsch - from urban cacophony (the industrial glitch and sigh of “Uptown Psychedelia”), through mid-ocean calm (“Grey Geisha”) to radiophonic rainforest polyphony (“Ritual For Consumption”). However, as sublime as much of Instrumental Tourist is, it rarely fulfills that promise of improvisation, of a real sonic engagement or play, and struggles to exceed the sum of its parts. You could reasonably identify individual tracks as bearing the fingerprints of each auteur - Hecker’s electroacoustic signal decay on “Scenes From A French Zoo”, Lopatin’s loopy bliss on “Whole Earth Tascam” - so much so that it might have easily been promoted as split release without anyone being the wiser. Instrumental Tourist ventures into few new territories then, but, as another edifice in Lopatin’s increasingly imperial ambitions, for now it will do nicely. Stephen Troussé Q&A Daniel Lopatin Have you been a fan of Tim’s work for a while? For sure. I first heard Haunt Me, Haunt Me in the early 2000s, and then caught him later on doing a gig at Harvard sometime circa 2005. He was doing a max set with contact mics in his mouth and managed a completely romantic set with none of the oblique signifiers I was typically accustomed to. His sense of melody was singular. What impressed you about his solo records? His ability to extend and criticise the "ambient" frame through a uniquely sculptural and personal sound, but something ineffable as well. His music always reminded me of Rodin’s engorged, twisted bodies in motion. What surprised you about working with him on this record? His technical rigor was surprising because I had kinda pinned him as a melody guy. His fader mix style is super musical and was a pleasure to watch; it was like being at a live surgery demonstration. The title “Whole Earth Tascam” is suggestive of the 1970s Whole Earth movement. Are you nostalgic for that optimism? No, but I’m not a nostalgic person by nature. Like most of the titles we are often makng reference to the impossibility of their conceits, and the bravado involved therein. INTERVIEW: Stephen Troussé

Cosmic collaboration from two electronic masters…

In an early interview Daniel Lopatin, aka Oneohtrix Point Never, attributed his hermetic sonic obsession and reluctance to play in a band to megalomania. Listening to the reticent cosmic melancholy of his music – most famously his “echojam” “Nobody’s Here”, which spliced an ectoplasmic sliver of Chris De Burgh’s “The Lady In Red” to a pixilated clip from an old Mario Kart game – you might have taken that confession with a cellarful of salt. Nevertheless since 2009’s compilation Rifts brought his work to a wider audience, he’s got into the (altered) zone, and is now shaping up to be hardest working man in dronebiz. In the past year alone he has launched his own label (Software Recording Co.), overseen the release a series of EPs and singles, edited a zine (Cool Drools), worked on an EP of remixes of his 2011 album Replica, produced a split album with Rene Hell and, at the behest of Saatchi and Saatchi, written a score for a robotic flying circus.

Lest he be accused of resting on his laurels, his latest brainwave is SSTUDIOS, which promises to be a series of electronic collaborations, inaugurated with this jam with Canadian cosmonaut Tim Hecker. If Lopatin has been crowned the philosopher king of a certain strain of peculiarly Brooklynite new wave of new age – divining YouTube satori in nuggets of 80s MOR, paying more extensive homage to mid-80s synthpop with his label partner as Ford and Lopatin – then Hecker represents a more sober tradition: lecturing on sound art, releasing albums through venerable postrock and electronica labels like Kranky and Mille Plateaux, recording thoroughly conceptualised suites (2011’s RaveDeath, 1972 was based around field recordings of a pipe organ in a church in Rekyjavik). The combination of the two promised a novel double-act, sacred and profane, of sonic mysticism. For this collaboration though, they left preconceptions at the door to “embrace the tropes and techniques of jazz-based improvisation”.

Nevertheless, a concept of sorts seems to have emerged. Instrumental Tourist is apparently based around the “acoustic resonance of digitally sourced ‘Instruments Of The World’” – and sure enough tracks like “Racist Drone” and “Grey Geisha” bear the trace of digital approximations of Andean pipes or Japanese koto. The title of the track “Whole Earth Tascam” – like Art of Noise’s “Moments In Love” being slowly lowered into an abyss – is suggestive. In 1966 Stewart Brand campaigned for NASA to release the first satellite photo of earth, in the hope that it might generate a heightened sense of the wonder and fragility of the planet. A lot of Instrumental Tourist, then, might be an attempt to imagine a sonic equivalent of that picture – a kind of cosmic take on Jon Hassel’s “fourth-world music”, conjured from the ethnomusical MIDI kitsch – from urban cacophony (the industrial glitch and sigh of “Uptown Psychedelia”), through mid-ocean calm (“Grey Geisha”) to radiophonic rainforest polyphony (“Ritual For Consumption”).

However, as sublime as much of Instrumental Tourist is, it rarely fulfills that promise of improvisation, of a real sonic engagement or play, and struggles to exceed the sum of its parts. You could reasonably identify individual tracks as bearing the fingerprints of each auteur – Hecker’s electroacoustic signal decay on “Scenes From A French Zoo”, Lopatin’s loopy bliss on “Whole Earth Tascam” – so much so that it might have easily been promoted as split release without anyone being the wiser. Instrumental Tourist ventures into few new territories then, but, as another edifice in Lopatin’s increasingly imperial ambitions, for now it will do nicely.

Stephen Troussé

Q&A

Daniel Lopatin

Have you been a fan of Tim’s work for a while?

For sure. I first heard Haunt Me, Haunt Me in the early 2000s, and then caught him later on doing a gig at Harvard sometime circa 2005. He was doing a max set with contact mics in his mouth and managed a completely romantic set with none of the oblique signifiers I was typically accustomed to. His sense of melody was singular.

What impressed you about his solo records?

His ability to extend and criticise the “ambient” frame through a uniquely sculptural and personal sound, but something ineffable as well. His music always reminded me of Rodin’s engorged, twisted bodies in motion.

What surprised you about working with him on this record?

His technical rigor was surprising because I had kinda pinned him as a melody guy. His fader mix style is super musical and was a pleasure to watch; it was like being at a live surgery demonstration.

The title “Whole Earth Tascam” is suggestive of the 1970s Whole Earth movement. Are you nostalgic for that optimism?

No, but I’m not a nostalgic person by nature. Like most of the titles we are often makng reference to the impossibility of their conceits, and the bravado involved therein.

INTERVIEW: Stephen Troussé

Happy Mondays announce two December shows

0
Happy Mondays have announced two back to back shows in London in December. The reformed line-up will perform a double header at the Camden Roundhouse on December 19 and 20. Support will come from 808 State. Earlier this year, the Mondays confirmed that they are working on a new album, which will b...

Happy Mondays have announced two back to back shows in London in December.

The reformed line-up will perform a double header at the Camden Roundhouse on December 19 and 20. Support will come from 808 State.

Earlier this year, the Mondays confirmed that they are working on a new album, which will be the first time all the original line-up have recorded a record of new material since 1992’s Yes Please!.

The band’s manager Warren Askew told NME: “Yes, we are now planning to record a new album, after the success of the tour and with the band all getting on so well. Shaun has been writing and the band have been getting together in the studio putting ideas down. I’m sure it will be a great Happy Mondays album.”

Paul McCartney two feet from helicopter disaster

0
Paul McCartney, and his wife Nancy Shevall, were within two feet from crashing in a chartered helicopter, it has been revealed. The Beatles man and his wife were traveling in a £5million, 9-seater Air Harrods helicopter in May when their pilot became "disorientated" in poor weather conditions and ...

Paul McCartney, and his wife Nancy Shevall, were within two feet from crashing in a chartered helicopter, it has been revealed.

The Beatles man and his wife were traveling in a £5million, 9-seater Air Harrods helicopter in May when their pilot became “disorientated” in poor weather conditions and dropped the aircraft towards trees situated within their East Sussex estate.

The couple avoided a potentially fatal collision with the treetops with only two feet spare when the pilot managed to pull the chartered Sikorsky S-76C helicopter away from the danger and land safely at a nearby airport, reports the The Mail On Sunday.

Information on the near miss has only come to light after the Air Accidents Investigation Branch of the Department of Transport decided to investigate the incident. The AAIB have categorised the episode as a “serious incident”, which it defines as “involving circumstances indicating that an accident nearly occurred”.

The AAIB report reveals that the helicopter’s altimeter measured a height of just two metres from a fixed point – in this case believed to be the treetops – and that flying conditions on the night of May 3 included “low cloudbase, poor visibility and raid”.

In detail, the report added: “While maneuvering, the commander became disorientated and the helicopter descended towards tops of trees in the forested area to the south and west of the landing site. The pilot then ‘executed a go-around’ or ‘aborted landing’.”

McCartney and Shevall were reportedly unaware how close they came to crashing into the tress and have declined to comment on the episode.

Interview: Crossfire Hurricane director Brett Morgen

0
As part of our current Rolling Stones cover story, I interviewed director Brett Morgen about his Stones' film, Crossfire Hurricane. I spoke to Brett for about half an hour, but we ended up only using about 300 words from the interview in the issue. The BBC are broadcasting Crossfire Hurricane as ...

As part of our current Rolling Stones cover story, I interviewed director Brett Morgen about his Stones’ film, Crossfire Hurricane.

I spoke to Brett for about half an hour, but we ended up only using about 300 words from the interview in the issue. The BBC are broadcasting Crossfire Hurricane as part of their Stones’ 50th anniversary celebrations, starting with ‘Part One’ this coming Saturday, November 17. So I figured this was a good enough opportunity to post the full transcript of my interview with Brett…

UNCUT: How did you become involved with the project?

BRETT MORGEN: I was approached by the band via Mick last October, about… I guess at that point, he was interested in making a movie as part of the 50th anniversary festivities. When I first got the call, I assumed they wanted to do a multi-part series like the Beatles anthology. I was told that they were more interested in doing something that felt like a movie, and the only real dictate was they didn’t want it to be a bunch of guys sitting around in armchairs discussing the past. They wanted it to feel cinematic. So the question then became: how do you make a movie about 50 years in two hours? The short of that is, you really can’t. For me what was important at that point was to hone in on a story, and whether that story happened over the course of five years, ten years or 50 years, we would find it. But we didn’t want the film to be Cliff Notes to history. If you’re doing 50 years in two hours, you’re doing a minute a year, or something. I’d been a fan since I was 12 or 13, that’s 30 years now, so I was incredibly intrigued. I also wondered if there was room for a Rolling Stones documentary, and didn’t know what they had in mind. There have been a lot of documentaries about the Stones… actually, let me rephrase that; there have been a lot of documentaries that the Stones have participated in. There haven’t been a lot of documentaries about the Stones story. Meaning, of the 11 or 13 documentaries that the Stones have participated in, almost all of them are either concert films or about a very specific moment in time. There was a TV film they did for the 25th anniversary, 25 x 5, but as far as I know, that was it.

Were you aware of Mick’s reputation before you came on board?

Yes, but a lot of that is coming from the fact, when the press has access to Mick, it’s generally because he’s promoting a project. He has a reputation, which he just said to me, “I was well aware of going into this…” I can’t speak to him, but if he is out to promote in 2012, the interviewer may want to ask him about the Exile recordings, but that’s not what he’s there for. So I walked into this process thinking that Mick would be the most challenging in terms of dredging up the past. In fact, all of his bandmates said that to me. Charlie said, “Oh, Mick’s going to hate this process…” But I actually found that particularly in discussing the early, early years, the origins of the band, he was really animated and excited. We did, I think, 14 interviews together, each one lasting at least two hours. So probably the most extensive interviews he’s done about the past. So we really took our time. At first, we weren’t getting more than a year per session. I think we did three sessions and it took us from 1962 – 65. I found him to be really animated. But when you talk to anyone in any endeavour about their formative years, it is very exciting, it is very innocent, and it’s only later that things become a little more difficult.

What kind of access did the band give you to their archive?

Once we decided we were making a movie, I started to try to get my hands on every element that existed in the period I was going to explore, which was predominantly 1962 – 1981. I felt I could tell a cohesive story during that period, and once I went beyond that a lot of the narrative threads would be disconnected. The story changes after that, so I saw it as a clean break for me. There are so many books written about the Rolling Stones, that I walked into this saying, I don’t want to make an academic history of the Stones, there’s plenty of books that have achieved that, but what I want to do with this movie is that which is unique to cinema – to create a visceral and aural experience, which I think film is most uniquely suited for. That also dictates the story, meaning there are very few discussions in the film about recording sessions, because to me the music is… I don’t want to micro-analyse something that’s ethereal and emotional. I don’t think we mention an album by name, I don’t think we mention the charts; I don’t think we mention singles. It’s more of the story of these five, six, maybe seven gentlemen who were in the Rolling Stones, and how they were launching into the world and how they adapted, over the course of the first 20 years.

When did you start doing the interviews?

The first interview was in January this year, and the last interviews were probably in July. Each of the guys is pretty different. Bill Wyman can talk… he’s somewhat of the band’s historian for the first 35 years of their history, can, is very well renowned for being able to give dates, days, he’s got an encyclopaedic memory of what happened. I probably ended up doing more interviews with Bill than Charlie, who doesn’t really enjoy interviews very much. So each guy required his own thing. Keith is very locked into… I found Keith knows his narrative very well, maybe because he’s written a memoir recently. So each guy required something different. I did two days with Mick Taylor, three days with Charlie, four or five days with Bill, six days with Keith, ten or 14 with Mick.

Were there any specific things you wanted to try and avoid with this film?

There was an overall feeling that we didn’t want this to be the Keith and Mick story. That story has been petty well travelled. And during the period in time that I’m documenting the band, there is an enormous amount of compatibility between them musically. I think that while they had… there were certainly tensions here and there it wasn’t as relevant at that time as it became shortly thereafter.

Is there a lot of unused material?

We did 80 hours of interviews, and there’s probably 60 minutes in the film. It’s always a challenge documenting famous people while they’re alive. The daunting task is that you don’t want to fuck up the Rolling Stones history. I don’t mean you don’t want to get a fact wrong, I mean, you don’t want to make a boring film about the Rolling Stones. Part of the narrative has to do with the fact that those happen to be the years that I listen to them as I was growing up. So I was drawn to it. I had a huge affection for the music I was documenting. But being a fan goes out of the window as soon as you enter the room. I think maybe the first 10 or 15 minutes I was in a room with Mick, I was like ‘Oh, its Mick Jagger.’ But that goes pretty fast. I have a job to do. So hopefully there is a little love and affection underneath everything. But at the same time, I recall saying to Mick when we started, that I’m not a journalist. With a journalist, if a journalist asks a question and Mick doesn’t want to answer it, he could though the journalist out of the room. But I had to have the safety net that I can ask anything I wanted and I was not going to get fired or kicked out of the room or shut down. So there was nothing that was off-limits in terms of what I could ask. But I do think it’s important to be slightly provocative, to push a little bit, because you end up getting some interesting things. But as much as we like to undress out celebrities, or demystify them, that’s not what I wanted to do in two hours. I really felt that this story, it’s 50 years, there’s a lot of people who may have limited knowledge of the band and this was a time to try and get the story of how we became the most dangerous band in the world, where did that come from, why were they sold to the world as the anti-Beatles, how did that affect them, how did that affect the music? That was leading the charge.

Do Mick and Keith address this in the film?

The age-old story is that Andrew Loog Oldham saw the band and decided to market them as the anti-Beatles. As Mick and Keith say in the film, you had to have that in you. Paul McCartney would have had a hard time playing the role that the Rolling Stones did. It was very easy for them to play the bad boys from the get go. I don’t think they realised they were doing it, at the beginning. They would just show up and they weren’t wearing matching outfits, and I don’t think they realised at that moment how scandalous that was. I think they embraced it, certainly in their song writing in terms of the image they were projecting into the world, and then I think it all turns when Mick and Keith get busted at Redlands. What Keith says in the film, which I think is relatively true, is 62, 63, there’s a line in the film when he says, “The Beatles got the white cap, so what was left was the black cap.” Then when we get to Redlands, he says, “Looking back on it, it was more like a grey cap, then after Redlands it was definitely black.” And I think what he was trying to say, was that there was a real innocence to those first three or four years as a scruffy, downtrodden underbelly of society – but really it was because their hard was a 16th of an inch longer than The Beatles. Looking back on it, it’s all silly and innocent. But in part, because they were put out there in that role, it certainly attracted attention from all sides, and part of that was The News Of The World, who decided to use the Stones as the centrepiece of their ‘pop stars and drugs’ exposes, tipped off Scotland Yard who arrested them in February, 1967 at Redlands. At that point, it was not a joke any more. It’s one thing to play the role, it’s another thing to be facing 10 years in prison. As Mick says, this wasn’t just a slap on the hands, there were people who really wanted to send them to jail for really nothing. As they tell you in the movie, they were all on acid that day, and they didn’t even get busted for acid – Keith got busted for having someone smoke pot in his house and was facing 10 years in prison as a result. And I think that not only took their eyes off the prize – meaning, instead of spending all their time in the studio, they’re dealing with lawyers and there’s courtroom stuff – I sensed, this is my own conclusion, that there was a major shift in Mick when that happened. There was more of a mistrust of the media when that happened. They realised they needed to… Keith felt from that moment on the cops were on his tail. In this film, he says, ‘If you want me to be an outlaw, I’ll be a fucking outlaw. I’ll be your fucking Jesse James. I’ve got myself a six shooter.’ It was cowboys and Indians. So then you have this shift in Redlands… where I think that Keith… and a musical shift, of course, where they went from Satanic Majesties to ‘Jumpin’ Jack Flash’, they really come in to their own musically in a big way coming out of Redlands. They hadn’t been on the charts for 18 months, and they come back and they kill it with ‘Jumpin’ Jack Flash” which takes it into a new sound for them. They were never really a hippie band, they were like a Seventies band in the Sixties. It’s got to be a lot more fun to be in the Stones, to be in the band where anything you do you’re celebrated for – no matter how bad or deviant your behaviour it just helps you. Keith told me that John Lennon used to say to him in the early days when The Beatles were a little more buttoned down, ‘I wish I was in your band, it’d be a lot more fun.’ So in a sense, the movie is about these guys who play this role then become this role, then the role almost kills them – it’s a survivors tale, in a way. If one is looking for an arc which is rife with drama, there’s few bands that provide that more than the Stones in the first 20 years of their career, where at any point they could have been derailed but they persevered and that’s what the drama is. I know Mick doesn’t like to talk about this, he’s in it so he can’t look at it this way, so he often says to me things like, ‘You’re the filmmaker, so you have to find these threads that to me that’s not what I was thinking at the time, it’s how you interpret it.’ I think in may ways their story is like a hero myth, that someone is plucked out of obscurity, thrown into the fire, tested, and they come out immortals. They were five guys, ordinary gents, and have to survive battles both external and internal. I think the first four or five years was all of the external battles, meaning the forces of oppression, and the quote unquote establishment, and then later it becomes more of the battles, after Altamont are internal – whether it be their addictions or in-fighting – then they come out the other side and they are truly as close to immortals as you can get.

Did you film the rehearsals in Weehawken, New Jersey?

We filmed the rehearsals in May. It’s not in the movie, unfortunately. I think some of that has to do with the fact the band; they were dubious of me filming rehearsals to begin with. What the Rolling Stones are today, they’re probably the greatest show on the planet, certainly over the last 30 years, and this is where my film ends and the next film begins, so to speak. They become one of the greatest – and they’ve always been great entertainers – but I think the showman in Mick has really blossomed since the Steel Wheels tour. So seeing them in rehearsals is not really the way they feel best represents them. For me, as a fan, it was the single greatest moment of my career.

How did that come about?

What happened was, we were shooting them… I’ve spent all this time with these guys individually interviewing them; I’ve never been in a room with them altogether at this point. So I felt as friendly, whatever… we’re supposed to shoot on a Friday so I needed to scout the day before and we went out to this rehearsal space in Weehawken, New Jersey and it was just… Ronnie, Mick, Keith, Charlie and Chuck on keys and Don Was filling in on bass. There were no managers in the room, there were no assistants in the room, and I went in there so I could see how they were moving around and they went into “All Down The Line”. And I’m literally in the room by myself, three feet from Mick, and I remember thinking to myself, I was so self-conscious, it was one of those moments where you’re like, ‘I want to remember every second of this.’ First of all, they sounded amazing. They hadn’t played together for six or seven years, and so someone would mention the name of a song, someone would say, “Gimme Shelter”, and they would go and throw on the album version or an old live version just to remind themselves of how the song went, and then they would break into it. Literally, in the first run, not having played together in seven years, to my ears it sounded better than I’d ever heard it. They did a “Gimme Shelter” that, having seen all their tours of the last 48 years on film; I’d never experienced anything like it. It was awesome. There are those moments… and then of course you’re sitting there and you’re the only one in the room and you’re like, Should I be dancing? Or is that unprofessional? I don’t want to sit here all professorial, with this certain face on like I’m holding my fingers up to frame a shot or some egghead who doesn’t know how to feel the music. Literally, it hard not to be self-conscious. But I will say the beauty of watching them there is that the essence of the guys is that whatever shit they’re dealing with internally or externally, the music has always been the glue. From my experience, Mick and Keith are as different as any two men I’ve ever met.

How are Mick and Keith currently getting on?

I think musically they get along. They always have, I guess. Listening to, I had access to pretty much all the recording sessions, and listening to how these great songs came to be, and you hear some of that in the film, I think you hear early versions of “No Expectations”, “Prodigal Sun”, “You Can’t Always Get What You Want”, of “Loving Cup”, these are all versions that I’m fairly confident don’t exist on bootlegs that no one’s ever really hard, so I’ve heard all those work up and even from the audio you can hear the camaraderie, compatibility between those guys. It’s hard to articulate, but they share the same ear. It’s not academics here, it’s music, it’s rock and roll and it’s just what sounds good to one person doesn’t sound good to another. Well, with Keith and Mick you have two guys who are completely different from one another who happen to hear with the same ear and really complement each other that way. When I listen to The Beatles, I can always go, ‘That’s a Lennon song, that’s a McCartney song.’ I find that to be much more challenging with the Rolling Stones, to be able to identify this as a Keith song and this as a Mick song. And at the same time, they couldn’t be more different from one another. All the public perceptions of their differences are rather true. They’ve been under the microscope for 50 fucking years so there’s no mystery there, they’re just very different people.

John Lennon’s letters to be released as a digital App

0

A selection of John Lennon's personal correspondence is soon to be released as a digital App. 68 letters have been chosen by Hunter Davies, editor of The John Lennon Letters, for inclusion, along with another 10 letters that will be exclusive to the App. Davies will commentary and context by Hunter Davies, audio transcriptions by Christopher Eccleston as John Lennon and a foreword by Yoko Ono. The app is currently exclusive to iOS, although it may eventually appear on other platforms.

A selection of John Lennon‘s personal correspondence is soon to be released as a digital App.

68 letters have been chosen by Hunter Davies, editor of The John Lennon Letters, for inclusion, along with another 10 letters that will be exclusive to the App. Davies will commentary and context by Hunter Davies, audio transcriptions by Christopher Eccleston as John Lennon and a foreword by Yoko Ono.

The app is currently exclusive to iOS, although it may eventually appear on other platforms.

Paul Weller to release new ‘Dragonfly’ EP in December

0
Paul Weller will release a new EP, titled ‘Dragonfly’, next month. The six-track collection, which is set for release on December 17, will feature songs taken from the recording sessions of his latest studio album Sonik Kicks. You can see the video for the title track by scrolling down to the ...

Paul Weller will release a new EP, titled ‘Dragonfly’, next month.

The six-track collection, which is set for release on December 17, will feature songs taken from the recording sessions of his latest studio album Sonik Kicks. You can see the video for the title track by scrolling down to the bottom of the page and clicking.

The tracklisting for Dragonfly is as follows:

‘Dragonfly’

‘Lay Down Your Weary Burden’

‘Portal To The Past’

‘Devotion’

‘We Got A Lot’

‘The Piper’

Weller is set to play a show at London’s Abbey Road studio this evening (November 9) and, although tickets were limited to competition winners and invited guests only, the gig will be broadcast as part of Channel 4’s Abbey Road Studios: In Session With VW Beetle series next week.

The Lumineers – The Lumineers

0

Pounding folk debut album from Denver, Colorado-based trio... A rambunctious trio based, rather incongruously, in Colorado, The Lumineers create primal, pounding folk music which lead singer Wesley Schulz has likened to the sound of a “bunch of sailors on a ship, arm-in-arm”. But it’s not just that they make music worth hearing; in their lengthy slog to overnight success the band also have a tale worth telling. Originally from New Jersey, Schulz spent the best part of the last decade writing, demoing, performing and working numerous side-jobs, only to end up somewhere close to nowhere. Having landed in London, China and finally New York, he and Jeremiah Fraites, his songwriting partner-in-crime for the past seven years, found themselves feeling increasingly marooned among the hipsters and tricksters of Brooklyn. In the end they struck gold in the Rockies. In 2009 Schulz and Fraites decamped to Denver. Enlisting cellist Neyla Pekarek, they honed their songs and let a little mountain air into their music, before heading up to Seattle last summer to record these eleven tracks. Even before the US release of their debut album in April The Lumineers had begun to build a buzz, partly down to incessant touring but also thanks to key exposure on TV and radio. By this summer their album had risen to 11 in the US charts; the single “Ho Hey” has to date shipped somewhere north of half a million copies. In truth they have better songs, but as their vanguard anthem “Ho Hey” makes for a broadly representative advance party as they attempt to replicate their Stateside success in the UK. A cross between a briny sea-shanty and a chain gang stomp, the chanted verse is lifted by a chorus straight from a back room hootenanny. At these moments The Lumineers sound like nothing more adventurous than above-average roots revivalists. A propensity for pounding acoustic music, combined with period clobber, invite parallels with Mumford and Sons, the Avett Brothers or a more earthy Arcade Fire, comparisons which hold water through at least half of this record. The likes of “Flowers In Your Hair” and “Stubborn Love” are all stamped rhythm, simple chord changes, fast finger-picking and propulsive forward motion. With its cannoning drums and primal hollers, “Submarines” wouldn’t sound out of place on Funeral. The celebratory “Big Parade” features decidedly analogue handclaps, while its borrowed words - “I was blind but now I see” - snare the aura of slightly shapeless spirituality which infuses the entire album. This is all fine, but the best of The Lumineers lies closer to a kind of raw, spooked midnight music, suggestive of A. A. Bondy’s When The Devil’s Loose , Ryan Adams’ Heartbreaker and The Cave Singers’ No Witch. Of particular note is “Slow It Down”, a racked tale of violence, fear and tenderness which requires nothing more than Schulz’s voice and an unadorned electric guitar to conjure late-night malevolence. “Charlie Boy”, an anti-war hymn which trades platitudes for something more opaque and unsettling, is equally spine-tingling, Fraites’ mournful mandolin and Schulz’s cracked voice combining to moving affect. Crunching finale “Morning Song”, meanwhile, proves Schulz can pen a gut-twisting lyric worthy of Costello at his most self-torturing: “Did you think of me when you made love to him/Was it the same as us?” There is sporadic evidence of a desire to stretch out into other territories. On the quietly epic “Dead Sea” Pekarek’s cello and a well-turned minor chord add a Beatlesy undertow, while “Flapper Girl” is a graceful sing-along which sounds like it was written to accompany the flickering images of a silent movie. It’s all accomplished with a nicely understated sense of drama. Nothing is overcooked, and there’s no sound or texture you couldn’t imagine being easily recreated by the band on some makeshift stage. Yet for all its attributes, this fine debut stirs as much for its sense of what The Lumineers may yet become as for what they currently are. Graeme Thomson Q&A WESLEY SCHULZ Did you deliberately want to make a very uncomplicated sounding record? The rough edges and flaws, the humanity, is something we were consciously going for. A lot of our favourite records aren’t over produced, and we wanted a record that could be played through, front to back. New York to Denver is an unlikely path to glory... It was driven by economics. The cost of living in Brooklyn was too high, I had to work a number of jobs to pay rent and I didn’t have enough time to work on music. We unknowingly stumbled upon a thriving musical scene in Denver. We’d already hit our stride, the move only solidified the work because we had time to work the ideas out. How are you coping with all the success in the US? I don’t even know quite what it is that’s happened! It means I don’t have to work my side job anymore, and it means I get to live the life I thought I wanted for a long time. That’s an odd thing. When you get exactly what you think you’re after you have to set new goals. It’s like a dog chasing a car: what does it do when it’s caught it? In our case, we’ve caught the car. What now? INTERVIEW: GRAEME THOMSON

Pounding folk debut album from Denver, Colorado-based trio…

A rambunctious trio based, rather incongruously, in Colorado, The Lumineers create primal, pounding folk music which lead singer Wesley Schulz has likened to the sound of a “bunch of sailors on a ship, arm-in-arm”. But it’s not just that they make music worth hearing; in their lengthy slog to overnight success the band also have a tale worth telling.

Originally from New Jersey, Schulz spent the best part of the last decade writing, demoing, performing and working numerous side-jobs, only to end up somewhere close to nowhere. Having landed in London, China and finally New York, he and Jeremiah Fraites, his songwriting partner-in-crime for the past seven years, found themselves feeling increasingly marooned among the hipsters and tricksters of Brooklyn.

In the end they struck gold in the Rockies. In 2009 Schulz and Fraites decamped to Denver. Enlisting cellist Neyla Pekarek, they honed their songs and let a little mountain air into their music, before heading up to Seattle last summer to record these eleven tracks. Even before the US release of their debut album in April The Lumineers had begun to build a buzz, partly down to incessant touring but also thanks to key exposure on TV and radio. By this summer their album had risen to 11 in the US charts; the single “Ho Hey” has to date shipped somewhere north of half a million copies.

In truth they have better songs, but as their vanguard anthem “Ho Hey” makes for a broadly representative advance party as they attempt to replicate their Stateside success in the UK. A cross between a briny sea-shanty and a chain gang stomp, the chanted verse is lifted by a chorus straight from a back room hootenanny. At these moments The Lumineers sound like nothing more adventurous than above-average roots revivalists. A propensity for pounding acoustic music, combined with period clobber, invite parallels with Mumford and Sons, the Avett Brothers or a more earthy Arcade Fire, comparisons which hold water through at least half of this record. The likes of “Flowers In Your Hair” and “Stubborn Love” are all stamped rhythm, simple chord changes, fast finger-picking and propulsive forward motion. With its cannoning drums and primal hollers, “Submarines” wouldn’t sound out of place on Funeral. The celebratory “Big Parade” features decidedly analogue handclaps, while its borrowed words – “I was blind but now I see” – snare the aura of slightly shapeless spirituality which infuses the entire album.

This is all fine, but the best of The Lumineers lies closer to a kind of raw, spooked midnight music, suggestive of A. A. Bondy’s When The Devil’s Loose , Ryan Adams’ Heartbreaker and The Cave Singers’ No Witch. Of particular note is “Slow It Down”, a racked tale of violence, fear and tenderness which requires nothing more than Schulz’s voice and an unadorned electric guitar to conjure late-night malevolence. “Charlie Boy”, an anti-war hymn which trades platitudes for something more opaque and unsettling, is equally spine-tingling, Fraites’ mournful mandolin and Schulz’s cracked voice combining to moving affect. Crunching finale “Morning Song”, meanwhile, proves Schulz can pen a gut-twisting lyric worthy of Costello at his most self-torturing: “Did you think of me when you made love to him/Was it the same as us?”

There is sporadic evidence of a desire to stretch out into other territories. On the quietly epic “Dead Sea” Pekarek’s cello and a well-turned minor chord add a Beatlesy undertow, while “Flapper Girl” is a graceful sing-along which sounds like it was written to accompany the flickering images of a silent movie. It’s all accomplished with a nicely understated sense of drama. Nothing is overcooked, and there’s no sound or texture you couldn’t imagine being easily recreated by the band on some makeshift stage. Yet for all its attributes, this fine debut stirs as much for its sense of what The Lumineers may yet become as for what they currently are.

Graeme Thomson

Q&A

WESLEY SCHULZ

Did you deliberately want to make a very uncomplicated sounding record?

The rough edges and flaws, the humanity, is something we were consciously going for. A lot of our favourite records aren’t over produced, and we wanted a record that could be played through, front to back.

New York to Denver is an unlikely path to glory…

It was driven by economics. The cost of living in Brooklyn was too high, I had to work a number of jobs to pay rent and I didn’t have enough time to work on music. We unknowingly stumbled upon a thriving musical scene in Denver. We’d already hit our stride, the move only solidified the work because we had time to work the ideas out.

How are you coping with all the success in the US?

I don’t even know quite what it is that’s happened! It means I don’t have to work my side job anymore, and it means I get to live the life I thought I wanted for a long time. That’s an odd thing. When you get exactly what you think you’re after you have to set new goals. It’s like a dog chasing a car: what does it do when it’s caught it? In our case, we’ve caught the car. What now?

INTERVIEW: GRAEME THOMSON

Argo and the return of Ben Affleck

0
Ben Affleck. Who'd have thought..? I remember going to a sparsely attended screening of Jersey Girl, Kevin Smith's laugh-free 2004 romcom with Affleck cast alongside his then girlfriend, Jennifer Lopez, and wondering what had happened to derail such a promising career. Jersey Girl was the worst i...

Ben Affleck. Who’d have thought..? I remember going to a sparsely attended screening of Jersey Girl, Kevin Smith’s laugh-free 2004 romcom with Affleck cast alongside his then girlfriend, Jennifer Lopez, and wondering what had happened to derail such a promising career.

Jersey Girl was the worst in a dismal run of movies that Affleck had starred in – misfires like The Sum Of All Fears and Daredevil or godless romcoms like Forces Of Nature and Bounce. Films that took Affleck further and further away from his breakthrough, in 1997’s Good Will Hunting.

Of course, while Affleck’s career drifted further into the dumps, you couldn’t help but wonder what he thought as his Good Will Hunting partner Matt Damon began to pile up impressive credits on his CV: Ocean’s 11, The Bourne Identity, Gerry… In 2005, I went to New York to interview Damon, who was then starring opposite George Clooney in Syriana, a fearless political thriller that ended up with a pair of Oscar nominations. While Damon was high on the hog, that same year, Affleck reprised his role as Matt Murdoch in Daredevil spin-off, Elektra. The scene was cut from the finished print.

So where did it start going right for Affleck again? There was good work in Hollywoodland, playing George Reeves, the star of the 1950s Superman TV series, who committed suicide. Hollywoodland is a good film – underrated, I think – and Affleck gave his best performance in years, perhaps seeing something of himself in Reeves: a charming man whose acting career has stalled.

But Affleck has stumbled across a more potent second act: as a director. His debut, 2007’s Gone Baby Gone, was a well-crafted thriller about an abducted child adapted from a novel by Dennis Lehane. The followed it up with The Town, a throwback to the hardboiled, character-driven thrillers from the 1970s. Both are great films. Although Hollywood is a notoriously unforgiving and cutthroat place, it seems true in Affleck’s case that sometimes you can get a second chance and pull it off.

Which brings up to Argo. Argo is the name of “a $20 million Star Wars rip-off”, a fake movie concocted by the CIA’s “exfiltration” expert, Tony Mendez (Affleck himself), as a cover to help six American diplomats escape from revolutionary Iran during the 1979 hostage crisis. Mendez, posing as Argo’s associate producer, will fly to Iran, issue false identities to the Americans, claim they are scouting locations for the movie, and then fly them out.

A true story, Affleck’s film shifts between sweaty political thriller and Hollywood satire; the kind of oddball period thriller favoured by producers George Clooney and Grant Heslov (best pals with Damon, Affleck’s now clearly muscling in for some love). The opening sequence of the American embassy under siege is shot in jittery hand-held close-up for extra ball-tightening tension; the Tinseltown duo of John Goodman’s Oscar-winning prosthetics guru and Alan Arkin’s producer, recruited by the CIA to launch the film, are hilarious, a kind of Mel Brooks/Zero Mostel double act. The facial hair is commendable: Affleck looks like the male lead in a Marilyn Chambers porno. Meanwhile, the actors playing the six diplomats all bear a slight resemblance to ‘real’ actors of the day – one looks a little like Meryl Streep, another like Diane Keaton, a third like Keith Carradine.

It’s the kind of film Clooney has been championing for years: a witty and suspenseful thriller, with a contemporary political subtext bubbling away beneath its handsome surface. The publicity machine is cranking up talk of an Oscar nomination for Affleck, which might prove to be more than just PR guff. But as a director, Affleck’s future finally seems assured, and the movies can only profit from his experience of failure as well as his determination to succeed.

Argo is in cinemas today

Kraftwerk announce residency in Germany for January 2013

0
Kraftwerk have announced a residency in Düsseldorf this coming January. After their residency at New York's Museum of Modern Art in April, where the group played one album per date along with additional works from their back catalogue, the band will follow a similar programme in their hometown. T...

Kraftwerk have announced a residency in Düsseldorf this coming January.

After their residency at New York’s Museum of Modern Art in April, where the group played one album per date along with additional works from their back catalogue, the band will follow a similar programme in their hometown.

The performances, called 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8, will take place at the Kunstsammlung Nordrhein-Westfalen Museum, first from January 11 – 13, then 16-20. Like the MoMA shows, Kraftwerk will play one album per date and will be accompanied by 3-D visuals.

This is Kraftwerk’s first performance in Düsseldorf since 1991.

Jan 11 Autobahn (1974)

Jan 12 Radio-Aktivität (1975)

Jan 13 Trans-Europe Express (1977)

Jan 16 Die Mensch-Maschine (1978)

Jan 17 Computerwelt (1981)

Jan 18 Techno Pop (1986)

Jan 19 The Mix (1991)

Jan 20 Tour de France Soundtracks (2003)

Tickets go on sale on November 10.

A photo exhibition, Kraftwerk / Roboter / Fotografie Peter Boettcher, will also run from January 11 at the Forum Nordrhein-Westfalen Museum.

The Rolling Stones: “We ain’t acting”

0
The Stones’ new compilation, GRRR!, is reviewed in the new issue of Uncut (December 2012, Take 187), out now, so for this week’s archive feature we head back to Uncut’s April 2008 issue (Take 131). Mick Jagger is micro-managing the release of their new, Scorsese-directed concert movie, Shine A...

The Stones’ new compilation, GRRR!, is reviewed in the new issue of Uncut (December 2012, Take 187), out now, so for this week’s archive feature we head back to Uncut’s April 2008 issue (Take 131). Mick Jagger is micro-managing the release of their new, Scorsese-directed concert movie, Shine A Light. Keith Richards is lounging on a Caribbean beach with his dogs. They both find time, however, to tell Uncut about pet hygiene, “fucking crap” modern music and having rebellion thrust upon them. Words: Andrew Mueller

________________________

“Yesterday,” says Keith Richards, from the home he’s had for the past five years on the Turks & Caicos Islands, in the Caribbean, north of Cuba, where he’s lounging, you like to imagine, on a sun bed, a large glass of something cold and strong in his hand, waves lapping at the shore of a beach, “I took the dogs to the beauty parlour.”

Dogs?

“I’ve got a Labrador and a little mutt from Russia. He was a stray in Moscow stadium, who worked his way into my dressing room. His name is Rasputin. Almost 10 years ago, that was.”

How, I wonder, no expert on these things, did he get a stray dog out of late-’90s Moscow?

“Well, this is very interesting,” Keith says, ready with a typically raspy anecdote. “One friend I knew, a guitar player who used to work in a KGB band. I called his number and told him I had this dog, and could we sort it out. They took care of him for six weeks, got all his shots, and then shipped him over. Although apparently it caused a divorce, but that’s another story.”

Indeed, it most likely is. But we are here, ostensibly at least, to talk of other things, among them Shine A Light, Martin Scorsese’s film of two shows held at New York’s 2,800-capacity Beacon Theatre in October 2006. Given the volume of live Stones material – from The Stones In The Park to Cocksucker Blues and the DVD souvenirs of more recent tours, it’s fair to ask what Shine A Light could possibly add to the yards of film already dedicated to capturing, over the last 45 years, their every move.

“Why would we want to shoot another live show?” Keith muses, before quickly answering his own question. “Martin Scorsese.”

“My idea for this movie,” explains Mick Jagger the following day, “was that we were doing this show in Rio, on the beach. I thought it’d be great to film this, because it’d look amazing – all the background of Rio, all the birds up and down the beach, great. I was talking to Martin Scorsese about some other projects and asked him if he’d like to do it, and he said no. He said he didn’t want to do big, he wanted to do a small, intimate Stones movie, so he talked me into doing it at this theatre [the Beacon]. Marty’s idea was to do an art house movie, with all the intimate relationships shown up. In the end, the joke was on him, as it’s all being blown up into IMAX, so we should have done the Rio show.”

Shine A Light is a celebration, rather than a rugged documentary, including guest appearances by Jack White, Christina Aguilera and a show-stealing Buddy Guy – as well as an introduction by Bill Clinton, who even brings along his mother-in-law for a backstage meet-and-greet with the band.

Scorsese illustrates the band’s backstory with illuminating – and often hilarious – archive footage. Largely a montage of The Rolling Stones’ encounters with the press over the years, it amounts to a series of studies of conflict between fatuity and ennui – decades of bedazzled or bewildered reporters running aground on the obstacles of Jagger’s supercilious petulance and Richards’ wry mockery.

But mostly Shine A Light radiates a genuine, heartening joy in performance among four men who would, you’d have thought, have more excuse to be jaded with it, and each other, than most. It also serves as a powerful elegy to an enduring, if often famously fractious, friendship.

Keith Richards and Mick Jagger in particular, co-owners of one of the most famous songwriting credits of all time, have known each other more than half a century, since meeting at Wentworth Primary School in Dartford in 1951. Down the last 57 years, there have been numerous fights, fallings out, drug busts and more, from Redlands to Toronto, Marianne to Anita. Shine A Light reinforces the roles they’ve come to play in the popular imagination – Jagger the hyperactive narcissist onstage and workaholic organiser off, Richards the raffishly avuncular buccaneer. It seemed as good a cue as any to ask the pair of them what Shine A Light helped them see in themselves, and each other.

Keith went first. Although he’d not yet seen the finished film – “They sent me the DVDs but I want to see it in a theatre – it’s Marty!” – he was aware of the archive footage interspersed throughout.

_______________________________

UNCUT: As one of the few people whose entire adult life is on film, what do you think of the young Keith Richards when you see him now?

RICHARDS: I’ve been thinking about that, looking at it. It’s not the first time I’ve been confronted with my youth, but I feel comfortable with him. I know what he was like then, and we ain’t that much different. We’ve made a few whoops-a-daisies, but apart from that we’re fairly constant.

Is there anything you’d like to be able to tell him?

Yeah, I’d have said, “Lay off the dope.” That’s my advice now to all younger, uh, members who are into this sort of thing… “Oh, give it up, it ain’t really worth it. I knoooow the fascination, but it ain’t worth it, pal.”

The film also reinforces the idea of a dichotomy between Jagger the control freak, and you the amiable, good-time guy. It’s not the first time this has been suggested, of course, but how accurate is it?

Where there’s smoke, there’s fire. And Mick’s a maniac. He can’t get up in the morning without knowing immediately who he’s going to call. Meanwhile, I just go “Thank God I’m awake,” and wait for three or four hours before I do anything. Mick… yeah, he is a power freak, and there’s nothing we can do about it. I don’t want to do anything about it. Let him bugger about. It doesn’t make any difference to what we do.

There’s a set-up at the start, where Mick chooses all the songs and keeps tweaking the set-list – is that how it is?

It has to be. Listen, he’s the one who has to go out there and sing it. From my point of view, from the band’s point of view, it’s the frontman that calls the shots on what to sing. He might say, “That one’s too high for me tonight, I can’t make it.” There’s a lot of physical things that go on. I might make an adjustment here and there, say “Change that one to that one as they’re in the same key, even though you didn’t realise it,” to break it up a bit, but otherwise I just try to make it easier for Mick. A band’s job is to make the frontman feel confident. If he feels that there’s some division behind him, he’s not gonna feel… well, that’s the whole point of a band. Once you’re up there, it’s all for one, one for all.

That said, though, the film does come across more than anything else as a kind of homage to Jagger’s physical presence…

Excuse me while I laugh…

What do you think of that focus on him?

He’s a bit vain, let’s put it like that.

It’s not unheard of in lead singers…

Well, what do you expect? We want a vain bloke up there, don’t we? Meanwhile, the band can go to work. Vanity will not carry a band. But a band can carry vanity.

Has he ever tried to interest you in his fitness regime?

Bollocks, no. Everybody’s different. I think a lot of Mick’s frenzy about physical stuff is actually mental. That’s the way he is. For me, doing a Rolling Stones show for two hours a night, that’s enough fuckin’ exercise, you know? Then I’ve got to go to bed with the old lady, bonka bonka. You know?

Uhhh… OK.

What I’m trying to say is that I’m trying fit my life’s work, whatever that is, into my domestic life without any big difference. I pretty much operate the same off or on.

Is finding equilibrium between the two difficult?

It’s killing me, pal. But I’m used to it.

There’s a great shot at the end, of you, Mick, Charlie and Ronnie that focuses on the detail of your faces. I was reminded of that line of Orwell’s, that at the age of 50 every man has the face he deserves. Do you think that applies to the Stones?

He was probably right. Though he didn’t get much beyond it.

Or even to it, I don’t think… 46, if memory serves.

Well, that’s what happens to Burmese policemen.

But it emphasised the singular position you’re in, that you’re charting new territory. We don’t have any idea what a rock’n’roll band of pensionable age is supposed to look like, or be like.

Rock’n’roll has only existed since, what, 1956, so it just depends who can hang. We’re not going for the longest fall of all time, it just happens that we like to do what we do, and we still do it better than most. Rock’n’roll takes a while to learn, funnily enough.

Are you still protective of the Stones’ reputation? I ask as you rather famously wrote a letter to a Swedish newspaper last year, taking umbrage with a bad review.

That was a prick, you know. The guy’s got a hard-on against me and I decided to answer him – just told him to shut his gob or I’d run his man out of town. It was just so unnecessary, and so untrue, and I’m looking at all the other reviews of the same show and they’re all totally the opposite, and I’m thinking, ‘Hello, this guy, I know him.’ I don’t know. Maybe I screwed his old lady…

I was surprised, though, because I thought surely if there’s one musician who must be past having to care what anyone writes about him, it’d be you.

I don’t care what shit they say about me personally, but when you knock the band, up comes the shield and the sword comes out, and there’s St George, know what I mean? Hey, how many times have I been trashed, man? Shit, I’m the expert at it. I just decided to let this one have it. He’s only a Swede, after all. He’s not even a turnip, is he?

So you’ll defend the band, but not yourself.

Absolutely. Myself, I can take any knock there is. I’ve taken ’em all, several more than anybody deserves. But when you’re knocking the band, as a unit, get out of here. That deserves a reply.

Is the loyalty to The Rolling Stones as an idea, or to the other guys in the band?

When you’ve run something this long, and put a band together that everybody agrees is fantastic, then some arsehole says they’re useless, you’ve gotta do something, right? I mean, I could have had him shot.

He might have been reflecting what a lot of people would assume, that after all this time it can’t possibly still be that exciting for you.

It has to be. Once we’re up there, it’s let’s go, we’re The Rolling Stones, man, we want to give them the best show we’ve got and we want to give ourselves the best show we’ve got. We always want to impress ourselves.

Do you ever have days when you feel like you’re just clocking on, and that you just want to bash the concert out and go home?

Never. Even if you feel like that before you go on, what I’ve found is that there’s amazing adrenalin. Even if you don’t feel like doing it when you’re going up to the stage, by the time you’re into the first song, everything changes, and you sometimes come off cured, which is amazing.

Steve Van Zandt told me that you can never quite remember the feeling of walking onstage in front of thousands of people, and that’s why it’s still exciting to do.

That’s right. You just hope that it’s there, and up until now, it always has been. There’s a certain energy when a band gets together – open the cage and let the tigers out.

There’s also that iron-clad law that all great bands are more than the sum of their parts, as they usually demonstrate by going outside the band and doing something not as good.

Absolutely. It’s very rare that you can put a bunch of guys together and do anything. You can put great musicians together, make superbands, but that doesn’t make a group. It doesn’t click, or they’ve not been together long enough. A certain amount of experience does help.

Do you ever have nights – on the last tour, for example – where you come offstage and just think you sucked?

No… we went out there every night to try and top the last one.

And at those moments when it’s just the four of you in a room, what do you talk about?

A-ha, ha, ha. Good one, Andrew. We talk about the music. Charlie might come to me and say, “I think I should change to brushes on that one.” Just minor details, you know. You’re trying to be Mozart, but you ain’t ever gonna be.

Going back to the film, I thought that was a nice moment when you gave Buddy Guy your guitar after his guest spot…

I did indeed. He was fantastic that night, so I said, “This is yours, mate.” It was one of my favourites, but he just shone that night. I’ve got loads of other guitars, but that was a special one, and I just felt that I should give it to Buddy Guy for all that he’s given to everybody else.

It seemed that there was a definite hierarchy in place, though. It was the difference between Jack White and Christina Aguilera being beside themselves that they were onstage with The Rolling Stones, and The Rolling Stones being beside themselves that they were onstage with Buddy Guy.

I guess you’re right. Buddy Guy comes from our generation. We were listening to Buddy before we had two pennies. He has a little seniority on us, but not that much. Buddy Guy is… Buddy Guy. You’re talking about one of the greats here. The others, Jack White… hey, cool. Probably be all right. The other one I can’t even remember.

Christina Aguilera. I thought she was great.

Yeah, very nice. Very nice chick. Nice bum. But if you only have one song, you don’t have much time for interaction, and usually we blow their wigs off. Playing in front of the Stones is kind of a surprise to some people.

Jack White looked terrified.

He did a good job. It’s kind of hard to walk up in front of something like that.

The gift to Buddy Guy appeared a sort of sportsmanlike concession – do you still feel like you have anything to learn about the guitar?

You never stop, man. That damn thing is the worst mistress in the world.

How often do you play, just for yourself?

Some days, probably hardly at all. Other days, I wake up in the middle of the night, and it’s all quiet, and I sit around and play for hours.

Have you ever managed to get your head around the idea that you’ve written three or four songs – well, three or four riffs – which can probably be played by everybody who owns an electric guitar?

The de rigueurs.

Well, they are. But “…Satisfaction” is one of the first half-dozen things everybody learns.

It’s pretty easy.

It is. But it’s weird, isn’t it?

It warms my heart, man. Are you kidding me? That other guys want to play what you played. That’s how I started. The idea that you’ve passed it on, like some kind of troubadour thing… yeah, of course. It warms the cockles of my fuckin’ heart.

When you play them live, these songs that everyone knows, do you have a feeling that you’re taking them back, stamping your mark back on them?

Never thought about it in that sort of aspect. I’m just looking round to make sure everyone’s in sync. Only later on, you get all the crap. You have to sublimate your ego with everything like that, as much as you can, except for the lead man, who has to boost his to the max. As part of the band, you’re just watching the singer, where he goes, what he’s doing… it’s something you don’t think about, just something you do. It’s weird.

So you don’t feel possessive or proprietorial about them?

No, not in that way. I’m very proud of them. Well, some of them. But let it go. Also, I’m interested in what other people might do with them, as a songwriter.

Any particular favourite interpretations?

You can’t go wrong with Otis Redding’s “…Satisfaction”, or Aretha Franklin’s. There’s plenty of others, but let’s leave that at that. After that, I felt like I’d actually arrived as a songwriter.

You could afford a certain complacency at that point, I guess…

Well, not really complacent, just that you’d joined another club, that no, you were a real pro. I mean, I always felt like a fuckin’ amateur.

That’s a good sign, though, when successful people feel like they’re still getting away with it.

I mean, I knew I was pretty good, but I had no idea about any of this shit, and suddenly at 19, I’m a fucking star. That’s never changed.

Another thing I thought the film communicated well was a genuine joy in the act of playing music.

You can’t fake that. Pretend to be happy, forget about it. It might be a movie, but we ain’t acting.

Has anyone ever floated the idea of the full-blown Keith Richards biopic?

There’s all sorts of things going about, but I don’t take them seriously. The story I could tell couldn’t be told.

So you’ve not given any thought to who’d get the lead role.

No, I’ve no idea. There’s not a punk out there that could do it.

Has there been any discussion of the next Stones project?

No. At the moment, I think we’re all still getting off that tour. It takes about four or five months to come down off all that adrenalin.

Really? Still?

It’s really only in the last two or three weeks that I’ve stopped waking up wondering if it’s a play day or a travelling day. It takes that long, yeah. I always expect it, but still you’ve got to go through it. It’s like a long withdrawal. When you finish, you want to start again. Especially after two years, you get so used to that adrenalin punch, and when it gets cut off, well… it’s not as bad as smack, but it’s pretty bad.

How does your post-tour comedown go?

I went straight down to Sussex and spent two months down in old Redlands, hunkering down in my decompression chamber with my mates, and my kids and my grandkids – my family all live around there now, and I lie there and they feed me.

Which of those two states – the adrenalised life on the road or domestic tranquillity – seems normal to you now?

Normal life is a good idea. Is there such a thing for anybody?

Fair question. Do you think that hyperactivity of Mick’s you mentioned is his way of coping with it?

I don’t know. Maybe that’s his way of getting over it. We all handle it in different ways. I go comatose. Mick has to be interfering with this or that. I don’t know, man, I’ve never got to the bottom of that.

Do you spend time together outside the band context?

Usually we ignore each other for several months, and then there’s a phone call saying, “I’ve got this song.” Someone gets itchy or antsy. That’s how it always starts.

How would you say you get on now, measured against the past?

All of this Richards and Jagger fighting stuff; sure we have some spats, but who hasn’t? Have you had a brother that long? So of course we’re gonna have fights, but they get blown out of all proportion. I think we’re over all that sort of shit right now. Michael is a very, very closed chapter and I let him keep the book closed unless he wants to open up. I love to work with him whenever he wants to work. I’d never provoke him, but at the same time… what are you going to do with a guy like that? I guess the secret is that we all leave each other a certain amount of space. We’re used to each other’s foibles, and we can live with them.

What did you think of your portrayal in Ronnie Wood’s autobiography?

About 50 percent off. I read some of the serialisation in the papers last year. It stands up, ah, not very well against Bill Wyman’s book. I don’t wanna listen to that crap. Ronnie is a bigmouth. I love him dearly, but he’s a flap-flap. I mean, I can never remember Ronnie pulling a gun on me. Some of these stories were so out of the picture that I just gave up and laughed. He wouldn’t know which end to point.

What’s your favourite Keith Richards story?

I didn’t mind the monkey glands, because I planted that. I was going to Heathrow on my way to Switzerland. I was going to a clinic, by the way, to get myself cleaned up, but I threw out blood changes and monkey glands because I was being followed to the plane by the Street of Shame. Lovely how they stick, isn’t it? Like the one about snorting my dad. You buggers will fall for anything.

What are you listening to at the moment?

I like blues. Some country music. I don’t listen to what’s going on. I don’t like CDs, quite honestly. They sound tinny, to me. I’ve not even heard The Arctic Monkeys. I know of them, but I don’t know anything they’ve done. I didn’t like Oasis, I didn’t like the Sex Pistols, I don’t like any of those English rock’n’roll bands. They’re all fucking crap.

So you weren’t at the Led Zeppelin reunion…

They had one? Well, well done Jimmy and Robert. Fuck off. “Stairway To Heaven” don’t make it for me, baby. I’d rather have “Honey Bee”, by Muddy Waters. And Jimmy will know what I mean.

What are your immediate plans, then?

As much kicking back in the islands as I can. I’m lying on a beach here in 85°. I’ve got my dogs and a couple of mates with me, and we’re just hanging. Bit of fishing, and letting the weather go by.

Was there a particular highlight of the A Bigger Bang tour that sticks in the memory?

That’s hard, after so many shows. We really liked the Dome, the wotsit Dome in London [he means the 02]. Great acoustics. Really enjoyed playing the room, really nice to play to London crowds again.

You spoke earlier about advising younger musicians to give the dope a miss. But do you ever worry that you – especially that younger version of you, who did look pretty cool and made some great records – rather serves as an enticement to take it up?

Woah. That’s hard. I’m an example both ways. There’s nothing you can do about that. You can’t set yourself up as an example. The only example is that I’m still here. I went through there, and I came out the other end, and blah blah. Every generation is going to go through the same thing, one way or the other. They just change the flavour of the drug. I don’t feel any responsibility for it. I think we’ve been absolutely an example of propriety. All we did was get busted a few times and piss against a garage wall, but that was then and this is now and it’s a whole different ball game for them.

That’s also a point the film reinforces, that there aren’t going to be any more careers like yours, that there won’t be any more bands lasting decades.

I don’t know about that, but I know what you mean – the flightiness and fleetness of communication and music, it’s a ball of confusion.

I mean more that notion of a benchmark, like the fact that everyone with an electric guitar can play “…Satisfaction”, or “Jumpin’ Jack Flash”. It’s hard to imagine that any songs being written now are going to endure like that.

It depends if they can stick. There’s been very few bands who’ve been able to do that. I think we’re up there with Count Basie and Duke Ellington, and even those kept changing their membership. I suppose the astounding thing – not to us, but from outside – is still this idea that rock’n’roll is supposed to be for people from 18 to 25, and then you’re out. We never felt that way about it, although when we started, we were looking at that first record contract and thinking, ‘Oh, Christ, two years at the most.’ But things happened that made it possible to keep on keeping on, and none of us are very good at anything else. It’s a matter of hanging onto your job, you know.

When you first went to America, more than 40 years ago, you were regarded as marauding barbarians presaging the collapse of civilisation as we knew it, especially in the South…

You could get arrested for being girls, down there.

And in 2007, you’re being introduced onstage by a former president from Arkansas.

A great influence I’ve had.

Indeed. So who won in the end? Rock’n’roll or

the establishment?

I don’t know. Is there really a fight between the two of them?

Didn’t it seem that way in the ’60s, at least?

Nobody set up rock’n’roll to fight an establishment. Tell it to Little Richard. Tell it to Elvis, tell it to Jerry Lee Lewis. Fight the establishment? Fuck it, we just wanted to be free. We wanted a job where we didn’t have to say ,“Yes Sir, No Sir.”

So what did you think of people who did think you were foot soldiers in some cultural crusade?

We just thought they were manipulating us, or spin whatever we did their way. I wasn’t so interested in rebellion as a political thing. I just wanted space to move.

And finally, on the subject of saying “Yes Sir”…

It surprised me, it still does. London School of Economics, I thought he’d disdain such a small, paltry gift. But then Charlie says to me, “You know, he’s wanted one for years…” I had no fuckin’ idea. No, I thought Mick would be the sternest against anything like that, but there you go, they all crumble in the end, don’t they?

_______________________________

The day after taking to Keith Richards, I’m on the phone to Mick Jagger and the experience of interviewing him so soon after talking to Keith confirms nothing more emphatically than the stereotype of their characters. Where Richards chunters away cheerfully for nearly an hour, and seems willing to participate in actual conversation about almost anything, time on the phone with Jagger is brief, clearly snatched en route between other appointments, and nigh-on impossible to get much out of on subjects he doesn’t wish to discuss.

Jagger is in cheerful enough form today, but still unreceptive to anything beyond the most superficial probing, and always giving the impression that he urgently needs to be elsewhere – after about 10 minutes, all the answers start ending with “Are we done yet?” or “Is that enough?”

It also becomes swiftly clear – again conforming to popular image – that where Richards has yet to see the completed film, Jagger has been hovering behind Scorsese through every edit, permanently watchful, scrupulously vigilant.

“I’ve seen it in all its various stages,” he confirms. “From the roughest cut onwards.”

The opening sequences of Shine A Light emphasise the idea of Jagger as an obsessive control freak – we see him on a plane, sifting through lists of songs, quibbling about arcane details of the backdrop and obdurately refusing to share the setlist with a despairing Scorsese until seconds before curtain-up. Which is where we pick up the conversation.

_______________________________

UNCUT: Those early scenes with you buggering Scorsese about do rather reinforce the idea of you as a micro-managing whipcracker.

JAGGER: It is a movie.

So there’s no truth in that idea?

I don’t think I micromanage, but someone has to do the setlist, and who else is going to? Marty had certain numbers in mind, but a lot of the stuff he wanted we never played, nor ever wanted to.

It’s a very intimate portrait of people on stage, and the way they interact with each other while performing. Given your band’s history in particular, did placing those relationships under such scrutiny worry you at all?

Not really.

What also comes across, between the principal four of you, is a pleasure in performance, which is quite heartening after all this time.

I’m glad that comes across. And it was a good show. I mean, it could have been a terrible night, with everyone slagging each other off. And then we wouldn’t have put it out, but those are very rare. I think that was a good typical night in a theatre.

Have the relationships in the band changed much since those early moments shown in the film, or do you think there’s an essentially constant dynamic that has kept you together all this time?

I’m sure it’s not the same at all.

How has it changed?

Well, you’ve got different people, for a start. Some people are dead, some people aren’t there any more. So it’s a different dynamic – you don’t have Bill, you don’t have Brian. There are a few things that are the same from what you see from 1964, but that was so long ago you can’t expect me to remember.

What do you think when you see yourself, 45 years younger?

‘So good-looking. No wonder they were successful.’ Well, there’s a striking resemblance to my own son, James. It’s fantastic. My younger son thought it was James, when he saw a picture.

What would you say to the teenage you?

That’s a funny one. I’d just warn him to watch out for what was coming. There’s an incredible naïveté there, and the charm of it is that naïveté. I’ve seen all those very early cuts before, of course, and we spent quite a lot of time picking those, as I was trying to find some that haven’t been seen too much, but still said all the things we wanted to say about the different time zones. So they’re quite fun to review. Marty and I had a lot of discussions about those.

There’s also the naïveté of the media trying to understand you. That World In Action footage in particular is a hoot.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. Well, it was a very different time. You see those press conferences, with the guys all winding up their cameras. And slightly more deferential – but not. Just a whole different attitude. I don’t really know.

They didn’t really know what to do with you.

No, they didn’t know. It was all new. They had The Beatles, I suppose, but it was all the same time. Before that pop singers… well, they hadn’t said anything. I don’t think they’d ever done press conferences before.

When I asked Keith, he said that idea of the Stones as avatars of rebellion always kind of baffled him.

I think Keith’s right about that. We didn’t set out to do that, but we had rebellion thrust upon us, so to speak.

Was that hard?

Yeah. Between the reaction of people, which we didn’t expect – their shock and horror, plus of course the fact that the press loved that, so they built it up even more. We weren’t ready for that. We just played. We didn’t have opinions. But suddenly we had to acquire opinions about everything, and deal with the fact that we’d been set up to play this role.

What was the worst of it?

We got insulted a lot. People made fun of us. In America especially. You had to build this shell, a bit, because a lot of it was hurtful as we weren’t ready for it, because that wasn’t what we set out to do.

Do you still feel protective of the band’s reputation. Or, put another way, do you still care what anyone thinks of you?

Er – no.

You didn’t feel tempted, then, to countersign Keith’s letter to that Swedish newspaper.

I didn’t care about that personally, but Keith for some reason seemed to take that on board rather a lot. I dunno.

Do you feel more comfortable being the kind of band that gets introduced by former presidents?

You can’t have it both ways. Now we’re kind of respectable. I guess if you’re around long enough, you acquire that kind of patina.

Notwithstanding the fact that you’re the frontman, was it your intention that the film become such a celebration of your physical presence?

I can’t really see it like that, even though I’ve seen it so many times, from tiny editing rooms to the Ziegfeld Theater, I don’t think I can really look at it objectively. I mean, I do my best to be objective in my cutting suggestions and stuff, but the big picture of it probably eludes me.

The detail is quite merciless, though – every wrinkle, every curl of lip.

I think that’s what Marty wanted, and obviously I see that. And I think it’s interesting.

Are you always conscious of what you’re doing out there? Is it always a calculated performance, or are you ever transported?

You go between one and the other. You obviously have to be conscious of what you’re doing. It’s not an out-of-body experience. But at the same time, Marty would say, “On the fourth number, where are you going to be on the stage?” and I just don’t work like that. I can be somewhere if you want me to, but I can’t tell you in advance. It’s all to do with stagecraft. If you know the steps of the dance really well, you can improvise within it. So you get these… strange moments, but most of the time you know exactly what you’re doing. It’s like playing football, and how can you explain that? You’re doing a lot of things at once, but as you’ve done it so much, it’s going on in the back of your mind, so it’s not an entirely conscious process.

This may seem a frivolous question…

Yeeeeeessssssssss?

… but how differently do you think things might be for the Stones if middle age hadn’t treated you so kindly – if you’d got fat or gone bald?

Well, I’m still wearing the wig, and it didn’t happen, did it? That’s a really seriously frivolous question.

Is there one thing in particular that has sustained the relationship between the members, allowing for the well-publicised hiccups?

Well, no. There’s many, many things. A willingness to compromise – if you’re in a band you have to do that a lot, and it’s a drag sometimes, but it has to be done. A willingness to slog on regardless. But also there’s a real love of what you do, and people liking what you do. That’s a really important part of it. If people didn’t like what you do, you wouldn’t do it.

Has the relationship between you and Keith got any easier?

No.

But you must have come to some understanding by now.

Well, all long relationships have their ups and downs. The thing is not to exaggerate the down times too much. We haven’t really had any arguments lately. I could dig some up from the past, but that’s a bit boring, really.

I know you’ve just come off a gigantic world tour, but have you started thinking about the next thing?

I’m always thinking about the next thing. I’ve got some ideas, but I don’t know if they’re going to work. Anyway, are we done?

Up to you, really.

Lovely to talk to you.

_______________________________

And with that, Mick’s gone – important things no doubt to do, business to attend dutifully to, crucial decisions to be made that only he in his opinion can make, people of influence to meet and possibly cajole, deals to be struck, the new film to talk up, a whole day before him of micro-management and whip-cracking.

Meanwhile, in the distant Caribbean, you can perhaps hear Keith chuckling, out there somewhere on an island to the north of Cuba with his dogs, thinking perhaps of Mick and ordering another drink, no calls to make, no-one to meet but his mates, just glad to have woken up to another day with not much more to do than what he’s doing and happy with that.

Yoko Ono to curate next year’s Meltdown Festival

0
Yoko Ono is set to direct and curate next year's Meltdown Festival at London's Southbank Centre. The 2013 festival will take place from June 14-23. The music and arts event has previously been helmed by David Bowie, Patti Smith and Jarvis Cocker. Of her involvement with Meltdown, musician and vis...

Yoko Ono is set to direct and curate next year’s Meltdown Festival at London’s Southbank Centre.

The 2013 festival will take place from June 14-23. The music and arts event has previously been helmed by David Bowie, Patti Smith and Jarvis Cocker.

Of her involvement with Meltdown, musician and visual artist Ono has said: “I am deeply honoured to curate the world-famous Meltdown Festival. In doing so I am aware of the great tradition of experimentalism mixed with classicism that has made the festival such an enduring part of the British arts landscape.”

She continued: “I am now starting to approach names from all over the world, some of whom you will know and some who might be new to your world. Let the fun begin!”

The full line-up for the festival will be announced next year. Ono has previously performed at the event as part of the Patti Smith curated Meltdown in 2005 and at Ornette Coleman’s Meltdown in 2009.

Kris Kristofferson – Feeling Mortal

0

More death, Vicar? Aged 76, KK faces down the Reaper... When Dos Was penned the sleeve notes for Kris Kristofferson’s 1996 album A Moment Of Forever, he didn’t shrink from the superlatives. Kristofferson, he suggested, offered the emotional directness of Hank Williams, and the poetic artistry and intellect of Bob Dylan circa Blonde on Blonde. Well, no one could live up to that, and A Moment Of Forever didn’t, quite. Perhaps Was misstated his case, because Kristofferson’s gift has always been to blend the conventions of the best country music – the cask-conditioned hard stuff – with narrative. He is poetic, but he’s a storyteller. Since then Was’s role as a producer has evolved almost to the point of invisibility. For 2006’s This Old Road, the sound was stripped back, and the songs were left unvarnished, a process which continued on 2009’s Closer To The Bone, prompting comparisons with Johnny Cash’s spartan Rick Rubin recordings. Equally, the release in 2010 of Please Don’t Tell Me How the Story Ends, a brilliant compendium of early publishing demos, showed that Kristofferson has always had this stuff in him. But intimacy has a different purpose when you’re 76 years old. “Feeling Mortal” is as good a song as Kristofferson has written; a beautifully weary country strum which contemplates death (or, if you allow the pun, drunkenness) in a way that combines a bit of self-pity with awe and thankfulness. True, it borders on self-parody; you could imagine it being delivered by Jeff Bridges’ Bad Blake in the film Crazy Heart, but Blake was almost a Kristofferson tribute act. In sentiment and execution, “Feeling Mortal” is more Hank than Dylan, yet there’s a subtle poetry in the way the lyric flits between life and death, dreams and wakefulness. Kristofferson is certainly aware of the architecture and grammar of a maudlin country song, and there’s not a syllable out of place as Was allows the suggestion of Mexican borderland to bleed into the melody. The performance is understated; the cracks in the vocal are left unrepaired. It’s funny, beautiful, and heartbreakingly sad. The mood is maintained on “Mama Stewart”, a deathbed narrative about a 94 year-old blind woman who regains her sight through “the miracle of medicine and good old time religion”. It may be about the grandmother of Kristofferson’s ex-wife, Rita Coolidge. Whatever, it’s a perilously sad composition illuminated by the faintest flicker of optimism, and a tune so slow it’s almost in reverse. More death, vicar? “Bread For The Body” comes from the perspective of a life nearing completion, but it’s a spirited anti-materialist folk song. “Life is a song for the dying to sing,” Kristofferson suggests, over ribald fiddles and twanging guitars, “it’s got to have feeling to mean anything.” “You Don’t Tell Me What To Do” is a road song about “losing myself in the soul of a song”. It sounds ready-made for Willie Nelson, but there’s a bit of Bob in the harmonica. “Stairway To The Bottom” and “Just Suppose” are classic dark night of the soul numbers, both employing the trick of a narrator describing himself in the third person. “Castaway” has Kristofferson identifying with a “lost abandoned vessel” adrift in the Caribbean, rudderless and sinking. “My Heart Was The Last One To Know” has the feeling of a 3am confessional, with Sara Watkins offering Emmylou-ish vocal support. It’s not all desperation. “The One You Chose” is an impish love song, and the closing song “Ramblin’ Jack” is a playful tribute to – we may assume – Mr Elliott, though there’s a bit of self-portraiture at work in a tale of a singer who enjoys risky nights and wasted days. “I know he ain’t afraid of where he’s goin’/and I’m sure he ain’t ashamed of where’s he’s been,” Kristofferson offers, before ending the song in a way that suggests he’s forgotten where the exit is. Just before the disc stops spinning, there’s a ghost of a chuckle. Is Kristofferson laughing at death? Probably, a bit. Alastair McKay Q&A KRIS KRISTOFFERSON The album title says a lot… Yeah! Saying it straight! The whole album is more reflective of me now, but also reflecting on different parts of my whole life. What does Don Was bring to the party? Oh, Don keeps me going! He’s great. I know he works with a lot of other people too, but I’ve been working with him for about 30 years and he has always brought the right creative inspiration for me. On this album I was recording just with him and a couple of musicians he had, and we really were on the same page all along. “My Heart Was The Last One To Know” is an old co-write with Shel Silverstein. Were many of these songs written a while ago? I’m not writing much at all these days. I write some, but I like going over a lot of songs that I haven’t necessarily performed in public that I’m getting reacquainted with and that I think are really good. That was one of them. People like Shel and Mickey Newbury were so much a part of my life. Probably the best part of my career is that I found a place where my heroes turned out to be my friends. INTERVIEW: GRAEME THOMSON

More death, Vicar? Aged 76, KK faces down the Reaper…

When Dos Was penned the sleeve notes for Kris Kristofferson’s 1996 album A Moment Of Forever, he didn’t shrink from the superlatives. Kristofferson, he suggested, offered the emotional directness of Hank Williams, and the poetic artistry and intellect of Bob Dylan circa Blonde on Blonde.

Well, no one could live up to that, and A Moment Of Forever didn’t, quite. Perhaps Was misstated his case, because Kristofferson’s gift has always been to blend the conventions of the best country music – the cask-conditioned hard stuff – with narrative. He is poetic, but he’s a storyteller.

Since then Was’s role as a producer has evolved almost to the point of invisibility. For 2006’s This Old Road, the sound was stripped back, and the songs were left unvarnished, a process which continued on 2009’s Closer To The Bone, prompting comparisons with Johnny Cash’s spartan Rick Rubin recordings. Equally, the release in 2010 of Please Don’t Tell Me How the Story Ends, a brilliant compendium of early publishing demos, showed that Kristofferson has always had this stuff in him.

But intimacy has a different purpose when you’re 76 years old. “Feeling Mortal” is as good a song as Kristofferson has written; a beautifully weary country strum which contemplates death (or, if you allow the pun, drunkenness) in a way that combines a bit of self-pity with awe and thankfulness. True, it borders on self-parody; you could imagine it being delivered by Jeff Bridges’ Bad Blake in the film Crazy Heart, but Blake was almost a Kristofferson tribute act. In sentiment and execution, “Feeling Mortal” is more Hank than Dylan, yet there’s a subtle poetry in the way the lyric flits between life and death, dreams and wakefulness. Kristofferson is certainly aware of the architecture and grammar of a maudlin country song, and there’s not a syllable out of place as Was allows the suggestion of Mexican borderland to bleed into the melody. The performance is understated; the cracks in the vocal are left unrepaired. It’s funny, beautiful, and heartbreakingly sad.

The mood is maintained on “Mama Stewart”, a deathbed narrative about a 94 year-old blind woman who regains her sight through “the miracle of medicine and good old time religion”. It may be about the grandmother of Kristofferson’s ex-wife, Rita Coolidge. Whatever, it’s a perilously sad composition illuminated by the faintest flicker of optimism, and a tune so slow it’s almost in reverse.

More death, vicar? “Bread For The Body” comes from the perspective of a life nearing completion, but it’s a spirited anti-materialist folk song. “Life is a song for the dying to sing,” Kristofferson suggests, over ribald fiddles and twanging guitars, “it’s got to have feeling to mean anything.” “You Don’t Tell Me What To Do” is a road song about “losing myself in the soul of a song”. It sounds ready-made for Willie Nelson, but there’s a bit of Bob in the harmonica. “Stairway To The Bottom” and “Just Suppose” are classic dark night of the soul numbers, both employing the trick of a narrator describing himself in the third person. “Castaway” has Kristofferson identifying with a “lost abandoned vessel” adrift in the Caribbean, rudderless and sinking. “My Heart Was The Last One To Know” has the feeling of a 3am confessional, with Sara Watkins offering Emmylou-ish vocal support.

It’s not all desperation. “The One You Chose” is an impish love song, and the closing song “Ramblin’ Jack” is a playful tribute to – we may assume – Mr Elliott, though there’s a bit of self-portraiture at work in a tale of a singer who enjoys risky nights and wasted days. “I know he ain’t afraid of where he’s goin’/and I’m sure he ain’t ashamed of where’s he’s been,” Kristofferson offers, before ending the song in a way that suggests he’s forgotten where the exit is.

Just before the disc stops spinning, there’s a ghost of a chuckle. Is Kristofferson laughing at death? Probably, a bit.

Alastair McKay

Q&A

KRIS KRISTOFFERSON

The album title says a lot…

Yeah! Saying it straight! The whole album is more reflective of me now, but also reflecting on different parts of my whole life.

What does Don Was bring to the party?

Oh, Don keeps me going! He’s great. I know he works with a lot of other people too, but I’ve been working with him for about 30 years and he has always brought the right creative inspiration for me. On this album I was recording just with him and a couple of musicians he had, and we really were on the same page all along. “My Heart Was The Last One To Know” is an old co-write with Shel Silverstein.

Were many of these songs written a while ago?

I’m not writing much at all these days. I write some, but I like going over a lot of songs that I haven’t necessarily performed in public that I’m getting reacquainted with and that I think are really good. That was one of them. People like Shel and Mickey Newbury were so much a part of my life. Probably the best part of my career is that I found a place where my heroes turned out to be my friends.

INTERVIEW: GRAEME THOMSON