Creedence Clearwater Revival: C or D?

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Come on, rockists! The most consistently great American band of the 20th century? Righteous roots-rock populists or preachy flannel-wearing poseurs? I say indisputably classic - four fabulously gritty albums in less than 12 months, packed with great singles and an undercurrent of "everyman" despair. Searched ILM and found no CCR-specific thread, so here it is...

― Shakey Mo Collier, Tuesday, 28 January 2003 17:10 (10 years ago) Permalink

Fogerty was out of his mind in terms of writing great 3 minute singles those couple of years-an incredibly gifted and prolific songwriter at the time. After Creedence I don't really pay attention but definitely classic during late 60s early 70s. The more I think about it though, they aren't the sort of band I ever actually put on. But if I hear them on the radio I usually crank it

― Colin O, Tuesday, 28 January 2003 17:23 (10 years ago) Permalink

Who will answer the ringing clarion call to the rockist standard?

― Roger Fascist (Roger Fascist), Tuesday, 28 January 2003 17:25 (10 years ago) Permalink

This rockist says classic, big time.

I'd say the first 5 albums are great, 'Cosmo's Factory' is no dud. Long 'Grapevine' guitar solo and all.

They are the bollocks. Rocked as hard as the Stones at their best. 'Green River' and 'Willie and the poor boys' can stand happily alongside the likes of 'Let it bleed' or 'Beggar's Banquet'.

And you're right about the great singles. I came across them through 'Chronicle' which is as good an introduction as any.

― James Ball (James Ball), Tuesday, 28 January 2003 17:29 (10 years ago) Permalink

everyone go put on Bayou Country NOW!! "CCR as sacred cow" - no qualms with that

were they the last time a southern accent was 'cool' in rock?

― the Creedence Cavalry (tracerhand), Tuesday, 28 January 2003 17:32 (10 years ago) Permalink

btw: "Dub Metal" !!!!!!!

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Tuesday, 28 January 2003 17:35 (10 years ago) Permalink

I love the way that when the rest of the band got shirty about their lack of royalties, just 'cos they didn't write any songs, JOhn Fogarty let them wrote the next incredibly shit album. Talk about giving them enough rope.

― tigerclawskank, Tuesday, 28 January 2003 17:36 (10 years ago) Permalink

John Fogerty confirmed his greatness in my eyes when I saw him a few years ago. He had a new album he was pushing (a decent one too), but when he hit the stage, he reeled off 7 or 8 Creedence classics bang bang bang bang before he did any new material. And he sounded like he still loved the songs, whether he owns them or not. The audience was his after that; he could've spent the next hour and a half playing show tunes and we still would have loved him. But of course, he didn't. It was a terrific show. Classic in all the right ways.

― Jesse Fox (Jesse Fox), Tuesday, 28 January 2003 17:43 (10 years ago) Permalink

Fuckin' classic. Sporters of the flannel way prior to anyone in Seattle. "Fortunate Son," "Born on the Bayou," "Run Through the Jungle,"....? C'mon, they farkin' rocked!

― Alex in NYC (vassifer), Tuesday, 28 January 2003 17:45 (10 years ago) Permalink

I especially love how the rather non-patriotic Fortunate Son is routinely used/referenced as a flag-waiving ode to Thomas "B" Jefferson...

― christoff (christoff), Tuesday, 28 January 2003 18:24 (10 years ago) Permalink

Yes, yes, yes, indeed. The best American group of the 60's,
IMO, and a truly righteous band that deserves homage for it's
achievements. CCR was one of my first bands, actually, and
as I delved into music I realized how much they owed to
their influences. But funny thing is, they're still 100%
original, because NO one sings or picks like John C. Fogerty.
He plays mean sax & organ, too.

― Squirlplise, Tuesday, 28 January 2003 19:00 (10 years ago) Permalink

Their radio singles are awesome. Some also have the bonus of being easy to play on the guitar. Certain songs in my life turn into a Mad Libs template for phrasing: I want to know, have you ever seen my keys? To come up with such a song, they are super!

― Fivvy, Tuesday, 28 January 2003 19:05 (10 years ago) Permalink

C! could this be the elusive ILM unanimity we've searched so long and hard for?

― Al (sitcom), Tuesday, 28 January 2003 19:07 (10 years ago) Permalink

classic! fogerty rules the school. that voice! wow. ccr was my fave band as a kid. i thought they totally rocked, and still do. "lodi" was one of the first songs that ever touched me. it's tacky, but true.

― cecilia, Tuesday, 28 January 2003 19:10 (10 years ago) Permalink

"C! could this be the elusive ILM unanimity we've searched so long and hard for? "

Wouldn't that be great? Part of me suspects that something about CCR doesn't translate well for the British ILMers tho... someone prove me wrong!

― Shakey Mo Collier, Tuesday, 28 January 2003 19:21 (10 years ago) Permalink

Sporters of the flannel way prior to anyone in Seattle.

Along with half of Canada.

Still CCR are klassik, rockist or not.

― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Tuesday, 28 January 2003 19:29 (10 years ago) Permalink

I'll certainly give 'em a classic. The thing is, though normally thought of as a singles band, they had so many great and enduring singles (and album tracks in heavy rotation on rock radio) that you might as well buy all their albums. Not really any bum tracks to be heard up until Mardi Gras.

I'm still dreaming of some to-be-discovered bootleg recording of like a 20 minute live freakout jam on "Keep On Chooglin'"....

― Mr. Diamond (diamond), Tuesday, 28 January 2003 19:29 (10 years ago) Permalink

Their albums are a bit light. All very short. Don't really have the depth past the singles.

― Ben Williams, Tuesday, 28 January 2003 19:36 (10 years ago) Permalink

Yes, but the point is they've got so many damn good songs, you end up with about 6 or 7 songs that you know and one or two that you don't. I wouldn't live without the albums, and without tracks like "Ramble Tamble", "Porterville", "Effigy" and "Keep On Chooglin'" ... Jesus Christ, just reading that list ... depth?! Whatever, I guess I'm just an unreconstructed rockist.

― Mr. Diamond (diamond), Tuesday, 28 January 2003 19:41 (10 years ago) Permalink

I want to hate them on principle but, really, they sound OK when the radio plays them. I used to think they were boring but I don't mind them now. I'm not about to buy a CD or anything but they seem all right.

― sundar subramanian (sundar), Tuesday, 28 January 2003 19:42 (10 years ago) Permalink

I want to hate them on principle

On principle of what, disliking good music?

― Mr. Diamond (diamond), Tuesday, 28 January 2003 19:43 (10 years ago) Permalink

Total classic. Great songs (often a real and worthy antidote/counterweight to the more soft-headed bourgie impulses of '60s pop/rock), a great singer, and one of the best--and definitely most undersung--rhythm sections in all of rock music. Just cause it sounds simple doesn't mean it's easy.

― Lee G (Lee G), Tuesday, 28 January 2003 19:49 (10 years ago) Permalink

I'm not saying they're bad albums, I love Creedence too... but you know, comparing to Beggars Banquet and Let It Bleed... I don't think so...

Take Willy and the Poor Boys--Poorboy Shuffle and Side O' the Road are throwaways.

Green River--same goes for Cross Tie Walker, Sinister Purpose, Night Time is the Right Time.

I just remember really really loving the greatest hits when I was a kid. And then buying all the albums, and liking them, but being slightly disappointed that there weren't any real amazing finds beyond the singles.

― Ben Williams, Tuesday, 28 January 2003 19:52 (10 years ago) Permalink

I have the singles comp and I like it. Rock was pretty good in the 60s.

― Tom (Groke), Tuesday, 28 January 2003 19:56 (10 years ago) Permalink

"Green River--same goes for Cross Tie Walker, Sinister Purpose, Night Time is the Right Time."

No way, I think all those songs are great, just as strong as the singles. The harmonies on "Night Time" are this really strong, deep thing. "Sinister Purpose" is totally creepy, it's like a prelude to a murder down by the river or something.

― Shakey Mo Collier, Tuesday, 28 January 2003 19:59 (10 years ago) Permalink

Not much more to say than classic.

― hstencil, Tuesday, 28 January 2003 20:04 (10 years ago) Permalink

Sinister Purpose I don't remember too well, to be honest. The good ones stick in my head ;) For me, Night Time was just too trad, dad. Actually, that's probably my problem with the album stuff in general--they seemed to just be doing straight knock-offs of older forms there in order to prove some kind of country authenticity, whereas the singles were like proper rock 'n' roll and although they had the old time flavor, they were also something different. A fusion, rather than a pastiche... or something.

― Ben Williams, Tuesday, 28 January 2003 20:05 (10 years ago) Permalink

Take Willy and the Poor Boys--Poorboy Shuffle and Side O' the Road are throwaways

you could say the same of "Factory Girl" and "Dear Doctor," too, though I agree that CCR's albums aren't as good as the Stones'. oh, and the answer is TOTAL CLASSIC.

― M Matos (M Matos), Tuesday, 28 January 2003 20:06 (10 years ago) Permalink

No, you couldn't say the same!

― Ben Williams, Tuesday, 28 January 2003 20:07 (10 years ago) Permalink

(Actually you have an easier case with Beggars anyway... try knocking anything off Let It Bleed... now if only they'd put the single version of Honky Tonk Women on there instead of Country Honk)

― Ben Williams, Tuesday, 28 January 2003 20:07 (10 years ago) Permalink

Classic. Their best cuts: "Lodi," "Wrote a Song for Everyone," "Fortunate Son," "Have You Ever Seen the Rain" and "Effigy."

― Yanc3y (ystrickler), Tuesday, 28 January 2003 20:11 (10 years ago) Permalink

I hear your point Ben, and I'd agree that there are a couple filler type tracks in the catalog (but not awful ones, i.e. not ones to make you hit the skip button). I just think that the album cuts that are strong, argue for reconsidering them as more of an album band rather than a singles band.

And I was going to make the point about the Stones, but Matos made it for me. Except that I would have mentioned "Country Honk", and that he is TOTALLY wrong about "Factory Girl". That is one of the high points of that lp! It was great when they dug it up for the Steel Wheels tour...

― Mr. Diamond (diamond), Tuesday, 28 January 2003 20:26 (10 years ago) Permalink

Agreed, it's not like I don't like the albums, I just like arguing...

(Also, the thing that makes songs like Dear Doctor et al more interesting to me is that they are not done straight--Jagger always has a distance from the material, and the lyrics themselves are somewhat ambiguous/parodistic, which makes the songs a bit more interesting since you don't know how seriously to take them)

― Ben Williams, Tuesday, 28 January 2003 20:38 (10 years ago) Permalink

here's an argument: CCR kicks the Stones six ways from Saturday because they took mountain and country music as their stepping-off point AS WELL as Chicago blues - I am Southern and raised on a diet of Hazel Dickens and etc so this goes a long way with me - CCR annealed it all into a singular, totally unmistakable, champion sound. agreed that Jagger was surely one of the most mythological characters in all rock - CCR never had that mystique, if that's the kind of thing you go for - but i mean seriously, the Stones sound like copyists next to them (Brian Jones: "no other group is as close to the Negro sound as us"). particularly good and interesting copyists, sure, "it's what the Stones got WRONG just as much as what they got RIGHT" etc but with CCR it's totally about what they got right, full stop.

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Tuesday, 28 January 2003 20:47 (10 years ago) Permalink

I used to think they were the most boring 60's band ever. Then something changed and now I think they're not bad... who knows why. I like "Have You Ever Seen the Rain?" a lot.

― Vinnie (vprabhu), Tuesday, 28 January 2003 20:52 (10 years ago) Permalink

good points Tracer.

― christoff (christoff), Tuesday, 28 January 2003 20:59 (10 years ago) Permalink

I dunno man, I just hear it the other way 'round. I think Fogarty is just as much a copyist as the Stones are--difference is, he's playing one role, country boy, whereas for Jagger that's one mask among others (an approach which admittedly over the course of far too long has gotten really tiresome, but paid serious dividends back in the day). I'm not from the South, but I sure can't take Fogerty seriously when he's howling in that affected voice about riding the ol' riverboat queen, or posing on album covers busking with Willy and the Poor Boys on the side of the street. So I don't find Creedence any more authentic than the Stones, really--difference is that the Stones are honest about their lack of authenticity, and they make use of that as an aesthetic strategy (also, they drew on plenty more sources than just Chicago blues).

― Ben Williams, Tuesday, 28 January 2003 21:03 (10 years ago) Permalink

Well Brian Jones can make such a declaration as he could supposedly play slide on "Dust My Broom" as well as Elmore James could.

As to yr main point -- I agree that the influx of country and mountain music is more important and successful with CCR than it is the Stones (although the Stones' double country whammy of "Dead Flowers" and "Sweet Virginia" kicks all of CCR's ass halfway to Modesto), but CCR's blues infusion feels kinda weak to me. I'm thinking of the middle bits of Willy & the Poor Boys here, and while Johnny can do a fair sharecropper impression with that yelp of his, it falls flat. It just seems that the Stones wanted to get the Negro strut down more than anything (which Mick still works at but Keith was born with), to get the style and the feel, while CCR went for the sound, but not the emotion. Maybe this is why CCR is so commonly identified as a very "white" band? (I'm thinking of the Big Lebowski and White Men Can't Jump (Snipes hassles Woody for them, doesn't he?) in particular)

― Yanc3y (ystrickler), Tuesday, 28 January 2003 21:06 (10 years ago) Permalink

(I was going to say, kind of speaking to the same thing, Mick had a great guitarist and drummer behind him... Fogarty is kind of a one-man band, unfortunately.)

― Ben Williams, Tuesday, 28 January 2003 21:08 (10 years ago) Permalink

On principle of what, disliking good music?

On principle of not relating to rootsy Americana trad-rock boredom, which then gets shoved in your face as real authentic 'good' music. The whole rough-and-ready meat-and-potatoes-ness of it all. Of hating country music like any well-adjusted person. Like I said, though, they don't actually sound that bad. It's all pettiness.

― sundar subramanian (sundar), Tuesday, 28 January 2003 21:26 (10 years ago) Permalink

They don't do it for me; sorry to break up the consensus. Fogerty's earnest growl grates, and the backing music is dull dull dull. I mean, if you're going to have a backing band that sounds like session hacks, you might as well have 'em play something interesting. There's something else, too. I even like a few of their singles pretty okay, but there's something about the aura that surrounds them that turns me off big-time.

― Clarke B., Tuesday, 28 January 2003 21:27 (10 years ago) Permalink

Like, I relate to what Vinnie said except I still don't have any specific song I can point to and say that I love it. But they're all not that bad now.

Clarke just butted in but I know what he means about the aura.

― sundar subramanian (sundar), Tuesday, 28 January 2003 21:28 (10 years ago) Permalink

Oh jesus christ, why even ask. Fucking classic.

― mosurock (mosurock), Tuesday, 28 January 2003 21:29 (10 years ago) Permalink

I like the songs I singled out, too, as well as the Willy ones Ben pointed out. I just think that each pair filled the same function on each album.

Tracer roxor as always, even if I do think the Stones were ultimately a...not "better" but greater band, if you see what I mean--wider ranging (counts for a lot w/me, Prince was my formative listening) and more chance-taking. CCR's more perfect but the Stones had greater outreach. love 'em both about equally in that way

― M Matos (M Matos), Tuesday, 28 January 2003 21:34 (10 years ago) Permalink

It's all pettiness

You can't say something like "I dislike them on principle", on this board of all places, and not expect to be called out on the meaninglessness of the statement unless you define your terms.

Of hating country music like any well-adjusted person

Color me ill-adjusted.

― Mr. Diamond (diamond), Tuesday, 28 January 2003 21:34 (10 years ago) Permalink

I meant that my reasons are petty. I said that I want to dislike them not that I actually do.

― sundar subramanian (sundar), Tuesday, 28 January 2003 21:37 (10 years ago) Permalink

For the purposes of the authenticity debate, I gotta say that CCR is definitely more "authentic" than the Stones. That can be a positive or negative thing depending on what side of the fence you're on, but I don't think there can be any argument that the Stones were actors, pure and simple (very good ones at their peak) - whereas Fogerty and Co. really *were* blue-collar nobodies from the sticks. I can tell you exactly where the market on the Willie and the Poorboys cover is (it's right next to their warehouse studio). California from San Francisco to the Oregon border *does* have a lot of green rivers, even a swamp or two, and country music, etc. The Stones couldn't have been farther removed from American country/black r&b (had Jagger and Richards even *been* to America when they started up their schtick?), whereas Fogerty grew up with it in the Central California Valley. That shit is THERE, it was something they soaked up playing up and down the state for 10 years prior to "making it".

― Shakey Mo Collier, Tuesday, 28 January 2003 21:39 (10 years ago) Permalink

I hate all the authenticity talk that goes on about them too.

― sundar subramanian (sundar), Tuesday, 28 January 2003 21:43 (10 years ago) Permalink

Was it in Stanley Booth's Stones book that he says that the photos of war-ravaged British children from WW2 could easily have been McCartney or Lennon or Jagger or Richards and this is why they identified so strongly with U.S. blues music?

― Yanc3y (ystrickler), Tuesday, 28 January 2003 21:45 (10 years ago) Permalink

CCR much more of a SINGLES act than the Stones (or rather, the Stones became much better at making full, complete albs around the same time that CCR first started releasing albs themselves) - their 'Best Of' (or whatever) CD is a pretty flawless nugget of country-pop-rock, but it's prob. all you really 'need' for everyday listening purposes. I can never make up my mind if the long versh of 'I Heard It Through The Grapevine' is godawful or not. I KNOW their versh of 'Suzy Q' isn't a patch on the orig. I like their ballads as much as their rockers, but am notso into their swamp rock side ('Run Through The Jungle', the done-to-death 'Proud Mary'.)

― Andrew L (Andrew L), Tuesday, 28 January 2003 21:45 (10 years ago) Permalink

Skipping 66 messages at this point... Click here if you want to load them all.

put on "Born on the Bayou" in your car v v loud while you're moving, it sounds really good (the other albums might too, but that's the only one i have)

are you saying your assumption about them was true?

Curnow & Brasch = ?

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Monday, 3 February 2003 02:26 (10 years ago) Permalink

I listened to Willy the other day. Two filler instrumentals ("Poorboy Shuffle," "Side O' the Road), one po-faced cover ("Cotton Fields") and one failed attempt at moodiness ("Effigy") to set against one decent cover ("Midnight Special," it's the way he sings it), one original that sounds like a cover ("Don't Look Now," this is a compliment), one successful attempt at moodiness ("Feelin' Blue") and one amusing spoof of country backwardness ("It Came Out of the Sky," maybe the only time he had fun with it?)

― Ben Williams, Monday, 3 February 2003 14:12 (10 years ago) Permalink

(Not including the singles, which are of course great, though come to think of it "Down on the Corner" is kind of hokey)

― Ben Williams, Monday, 3 February 2003 14:13 (10 years ago) Permalink

I'm curious what people mean when they say CCR was "sexless". Is the implication that the band was unattractive sexually? Or that they were not suggestive of sex? Or that they in fact did not have sex? I see nothing to suggest that. As far as I can tell, Fogerty and co. exuded a typically masculine image. So is the implication that their music is "sexless"? What does that mean exactly? Apart from the well-known (on ILM at least) example of "feminized noise", how exactly can music be "sexed"? Or does it simply mean, that with a few notable exceptions (for example, "Suzie Q"), they rarely sang about sexual matters? If it's the last, then I think this criticism misses the point. CCR were aiming to evoke an objective, universal Americana, of the kind typified in traditional folk songs. Sex as a topic is necessarily subjective. How many traditional folk songs are about sex? Few, if any. Love, yes - but not sex. So it followed naturally from their artistic aims that they would have few songs about sex. To criticize them for this is to apply a subjective aesthetic that is foreign to their approach.

― o. nate (onate), Monday, 3 February 2003 15:58 (10 years ago) Permalink

2 weeks pass...

Sexless as in not sexy, not exuding any sexual tension (lyric content not relevant to this, I don't think; Elvis was sexy singing "In the Ghetto").

"Subjective" is no good as a synonym for "value-laden." As a matter of fact it's no good as a word, period. (Nor is its twin "objective. Ban 'em both!)

Tracer: there are all sorts of ways to use the word "folk," but if you're using it anthropologically (folkways, folklore), I can't think of any other songs in modern America that are as folk as Xmas Carols, except maybe for "Happy Birthday" and "Rock 'N' Roll Part 2."

― Frank Kogan (Frank Kogan), Tuesday, 18 February 2003 02:27 (10 years ago) Permalink

Is the National Anthem folk?

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Tuesday, 18 February 2003 02:37 (10 years ago) Permalink

Don't know. I have to call my anthropologist and ask.

Zeppelin doesn't strike me as dated, while Hendrix and Cream and CCR do, though I don't have a quick explanation why. Punk and hair metal helped to switch the game again, maybe knocking Hendrix and Cream into the past, but since Stones-based punks like the Stooges, Dolls, and Pistols had all absorbed Clapton-Hendrix-Kaukonen guitar sustain, their changing the game didn't bring Stones '70 back to seeming retrospectively modern. (And the Stones themselves transformed from a song band to a groove band, though I don't think they pulled this off thoroughly until Emotional Rescue.) If "Brown Sugar" sounds not-so-dated now, this is because its style of riffing has a life in new country (though it hadn't back in the day). "Brown Sugar" is all over the place in recent Brooks & Dunn. Strangely, given that CCR was admired so much in country land, CCR doesn't live in modern country, while Skynyrd, Charlie Daniels, and the Eagles all do.

― Frank Kogan (Frank Kogan), Tuesday, 18 February 2003 02:46 (10 years ago) Permalink

By the way, I like CCR a lot, but I don't play them much.

They were both of and not of the counterculture, which was one of the interesting things about them.

Mark, I still doubt that the term "rockist" helps people to communicate or think through their ideas, but I won't make that argument here. I want to point out, though, that in using "rockist," Shakey is raising the question as to whether it's rockist to like Creedence now, not whether Creedence was rockist back in their day. For instance, staking one's allegiance to the Ramones makes you butt-plug reactionary now but didn't in 1977, at least didn't for most people. Depends how you deployed your allegiance to the band. Note, that there's a difference between liking the Ramones and staking your allegiance to them. I still like 'em. I think.

― Frank Kogan (Frank Kogan), Tuesday, 18 February 2003 03:03 (10 years ago) Permalink

And even now it depends on what you do with your allegiance. (E.g., not impossible that Eminem listened to a lot of Ramones and got persona manipulation ideas from them, but that doesn't make him close to "rockism.")

― Frank Kogan (Frank Kogan), Tuesday, 18 February 2003 03:05 (10 years ago) Permalink

They were both of and not of the counterculture, which was one of the interesting things about them.

Funny that you mention this, 'cause I was thinking the same thing after I re-read my comment about "Lodi" after this thread sprang back to life. That tension -- being both of and not of the counterculture -- is what makes that (and other) CCR songs work. Lyrically, it's about the American Dream -- staking out on yer own to "make it," the singer working hard for and having "success" dangled in front of him. Musically (at least at the beginning), it's meat-and-potatoes American rock (or CCR-type "chooglin'"). Then comes the last verse, with the key change and the singer's epiphany that his version of the "American Dream" might be being stuck in shitty bars sinking to drunks for the rest of his life. At least to me, it seems very much of its time -- a counter-cultural Sixties twist on a common American archetype which may still resonate because of its craft and sublety, but also because of how cynical we've become since the Sixties.

my two cents anyway.

― Tad (llamasfur), Tuesday, 18 February 2003 03:20 (10 years ago) Permalink

Wow--some strange and groovy takes on American music up the thread.

Hendrix, "dated"? I don't think it's ever going to date, that stuff is as audacious as the day he made it. I've come to the conclusion that, as much as I like rock and roll, and as instinctively hostile I can be toward "rockism" or whatever you call it, Hendrix is in a whole different class than anybody else who ever made "rock." I'm sure this opinion is not shared by everyone.

CCR, though...it is stiff, stiff. Bad rhythm section. Mechanical. Great songs performed with a kind of caution, a really bad reverence for some "past" which consistently hobbles the whole project. Ben Williams up the thread hit it, "Let it Bleed" contains some "eerie" moments where the bullshit of Jagger's lyrics sorta gets hijacked by something altogether more mystical...as in the slide-guitar/piano/vibes bit in "Monkey Man." Which is all Keith. Whereas CCR never once hit a note like that.

That said, I still kind of like them, as superior radio music, and I think "Willy and the Poor Boys" is a fine record, I always liked "Effigy." I mean explain to me how "Effigy" is all that different from "Mod Lang" or something...once you get past the limberness of the Big Star rhythm section and the stiffness of CCR's. But the basic conception is similar...

So, a classic, but even more dated than the Band, who had some of the same problems of over-thinking everything and self-conscious mythologizing...the Band were far superior musicians, and they sounded like they had been having a better time out on the road than CCR had...

― frank p. jones (frank p. jones), Tuesday, 18 February 2003 13:43 (10 years ago) Permalink

No, they never improved on (or equaled) Mystery Train. But my ill-informed instincts say Elvis wouldn't have known to sing Lodi like Fogerty did, and wouldn't have done Fortunate Son, period.
-- gabbneb

Dan Penn does "Lodi" on his early '70s "Nobody's Fool" album, quite well.

― frank p. jones (frank p. jones), Tuesday, 18 February 2003 13:49 (10 years ago) Permalink

Christmas Carols are "folk music" almost certainly, but they've become static and by themselves are almost empty. Lullabyes are similar. You can fill them up with whatever memories you've got of the other times you've sung them. You can sing them with a folk attitude - an irreverance that fills up the meaning based on contingencies; making them "the news" like hip hop does with the empty skeletons of today's pop songs; for instance my family always does ALL the verses of Good King Wenceslas because we're convinced that it's basically a socialist manifesto, and we roll our eyes when it's not done this way, convinced that the organizers are in league with the Republicans (of course this attitude, too, has become traditional and ossified in its own way with us, but you see what I mean) - or you can sing them with an uncomplicated reverence. I think the Band leaned more towards the latter, and CCR the former, but it's just a feeling, really.

If we had football chants in America they'd probably be the ultimate successful example of folk attitude in this country. The Pinefox mentioned on a war thread that he feels the art of chanting is DOA. Maybe he could expand on that here? I think if he's right it has serious implications for democracy!

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Tuesday, 18 February 2003 17:38 (10 years ago) Permalink

(i mean, if we can't master the dynamics of group chanting, how can we be expected to seize the reins of power? just a question. i doubt the Pinefox meant his pronouncement to be read so dramatically)

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Tuesday, 18 February 2003 18:05 (10 years ago) Permalink

incidentally, search if you can the Puncture w/Creedence (or at least Fogerty) on the cover and appreciations by Camden Joy (reprinted in Lost Joy, TNI Books) and especially Jay Ruttenberg

― M Matos (M Matos), Tuesday, 18 February 2003 18:11 (10 years ago) Permalink

Sexless as in not sexy, not exuding any sexual tension (lyric content not relevant to this, I don't think; Elvis was sexy singing "In the Ghetto").

I don't see how "sexy" by this definition is different from "makes me think about sex" - and as such it seems to be necessarily observer-dependent, ie., different strokes for different folks. For example, if I was to say that I don't find Elvis "sexy", how would you argue that I was wrong?

― o. nate (onate), Tuesday, 18 February 2003 19:48 (10 years ago) Permalink

I dig the "stiff" rhythm section. Always (at the best moments at least) makes me think of a sorta appalachian-kraut-boogie. "Bootleg" is a tight, tight song that I don't think has been mentioned yet, and a good example of what I'm spoutin.

And CCR did have an influence on mid-late 80s Seattle. Mark Arm and some pre-Pearl Jam dudes had that band Green River. And didn't the early incarnation of Nirvana do CCR covers? Or at least Kurt claimed to have played in a CCR cover band. Something like that.

― andrew m. (andrewmorgan), Tuesday, 18 February 2003 20:23 (10 years ago) Permalink

Mark - I like the way you describe their relationship to the greater rock counterculture (don't think "rockist" a good synonym for allegiance in 1969 to the greater rock counterculture, however), but their not second-guessing the future isn't what distinguishes them from the counterculture. A lot of '60s ra-ra went even further - and furthur! - in trying to exclude the future: happenings, fluxus, acid tests, live for today, etc., the art of living replacing the creation of artifacts. Hard especially to think of Janis Joplin and Jerry Garcia (or even Clapton in his in-concert improvisations) giving much thought to outguessing the future. One reason that Stones records "last" better than the Dead's is that the Stones paid a lot more attention to what was going down on tape.

― Frank Kogan (Frank Kogan), Tuesday, 18 February 2003 23:44 (10 years ago) Permalink

Andrew M., that is some interesting, uhmm, but have you ever been to "Appalachia" (pronounced correctly it rhymes with "appa-latch-a," not "appa-laytchi-a")? CCR has zero to do with any of that. They from California, man, and that's a long, long way from E. Ky./Tenn./W. Va., not to mention fucking Germany...personally, I used to dig Can when I was driving across, say, *Arkansas*, but otherwise, it's a bit honky for my taste...stiil, Applachian-Kraut boogie is a funny idea, someone out there in I Love Music-Land fire up the 4-track, we gonna have a part-ee!!

― frank p. jones (frank p. jones), Wednesday, 19 February 2003 02:22 (10 years ago) Permalink

1 year passes...

Fogerty's a bit of an odd bird, isn't he? His words and behavior show the same
strange, doomed obsessiveness that inform his jeremiad-like songs. Crack
guitarist though; he knows how to massage those strings just right. Sure,
he's trying to imitate rockabilly pickers like Chet Atkins and Scotty Moore,
but he also has a fluidity and grace comparable with the great rockers:
Clapton, Page, and dare I say, Hendrix. In truth, his soloing ranks
far below masterful, but his songwriting, arrangement, and multi-instrumental
skills (he always plays his own keyboards and horns) outshine any other
figure I can think of. CCR may not have been the American Beatles,
but the Beatles were four stellar talents. Fogerty had to work with a very
limited group of bashers.

Lest I sound like an overly gushing fanboy, I'll admit that his solo albums have
been VERY inconsistent. The best songs are great, but nearly all of it sounds
like unecessary backtracking. Of course, it's hard to keep writing great songs
when you only release an average of 10 new songs per decade. These
things take practice.

― Squirrel_Police (Squirrel_Police), Wednesday, 28 April 2004 05:08 (9 years ago) Permalink

Fogerty has probably the coolest voice that rock has ever seen.

― Mr. Snrub (Mr. Snrub), Wednesday, 28 April 2004 05:28 (9 years ago) Permalink

I bought one of the singles/greatest hits comps recently. Something about growing up where and when I did (or at least w/ my ex-hippie-redneck father), I was so overexposed to ZZ Top/Skynrd/CCR/Allman Bros. that I've never been able to pay attention to them.

I was surprised at how much I still loved some tracks (good god "Fortunate Son" might be the most ferocious song of the Vietnam era), but so many kind of filtered out into blandness. I really wanted to like it/them more than I do.

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Wednesday, 28 April 2004 05:50 (9 years ago) Permalink

I'm a bit tired of VOL. 1 of the greatest hits. You need to
start listening to VOL. 2 and digging soulseek for album tracks,
like Ramble Tamble, Chameleon, and Penthouse Pauper.

― Squirrel_Police (Squirrel_Police), Wednesday, 28 April 2004 15:44 (9 years ago) Permalink

Oh, and Effigy, possibly his creepiest apocalyptic dirge.

― Squirrel_Police (Squirrel_Police), Wednesday, 28 April 2004 15:45 (9 years ago) Permalink

Oh, and believe it or not, Milo, his live version of "Fortunate
Son," from just a few years ago, is even more ferocious than
the original.

― Squirrel_Police (Squirrel_Police), Wednesday, 28 April 2004 15:48 (9 years ago) Permalink

There are a ton of hidden gems on the albums that paint a much fuller picture of Fogerty's range than just the Greatest Hits. Ramble Tamble, Rude Awakening #2, Penthouse Pauper, Tombstone Shadow, Wrote a Song for Everyone... actually the entire Green River album is amazing from start to finish.

― Shakey Mo Collier, Wednesday, 28 April 2004 17:06 (9 years ago) Permalink

Oh, and believe it or not, Milo, his live version of "Fortunate
Son," from just a few years ago, is even more ferocious than
the original.

more info plz

― gygax! (gygax!), Wednesday, 28 April 2004 17:17 (9 years ago) Permalink

It's on his _Premonition_ CD. He plays it at a noticably faster
tempo than the studio version, and his voice is rawer than
ever.

― Squirrel_Police (Squirrel_Police), Wednesday, 28 April 2004 20:34 (9 years ago) Permalink

Classic, sure. "Willy and Poorboys" is a great LP--"It Came out of the Sky" and of course "Effigy," which I think is their greatest moment.

That said, I find them incredibly boring and samey. There's something so mechanical about them, and JF's voice grates. Prototype of all the back-to-roots groups (the Band too, of course), and they lack the glamour I need from rock and roll. I know, I know--they weren't after glamour.

When something like "Fortunate Son" comes on the radio, I dig; but they're a group (I feel the same way about REM) whose records I don't own any more and have no desire to play. Nice on the radio. Fogerty's solo records are horrendous, I have always hated "Center Field" with a passion, what a stupid song. But sure, classic. And no way are they a patch on the Stones, give me a break.

― chesteraburnett (ddduncan), Wednesday, 28 April 2004 22:19 (9 years ago) Permalink

What the... "Centerfield" equals anything he released in the 60s/70s.
And they're probably samey only because you're heard them a million
times. What I wouldn't give to have been around when these classics
first hit.

― Squirrel_Police (Squirrel_Police), Wednesday, 28 April 2004 23:11 (9 years ago) Permalink

Stu, Doug, Tom and John. Hey, I can still remember their names. I can't say the same for more than a dozen or so other bands.

SP: They were crankin' back in the day, I can attest.

― jim wentworth (wench), Thursday, 29 April 2004 00:44 (9 years ago) Permalink

"Centerfield" is a beer commercial.

― coach (ddduncan), Thursday, 29 April 2004 01:14 (9 years ago) Permalink

i don't mind "centerfield", it's pretty sad when you think about it

― gygax! (gygax!), Thursday, 29 April 2004 04:35 (9 years ago) Permalink

Sure it is. It's about the damn bench warmer, just sitting there
dreaming about his "moment in the sun."

― Squirrel_Police (Squirrel_Police), Thursday, 29 April 2004 04:41 (9 years ago) Permalink

The Stones would have probably surpassed CCR if they hadn't included so many ballads. Sure, some of them were really great, but there were just too damn many.

― Squirrel_Police (Squirrel_Police), Thursday, 29 April 2004 04:44 (9 years ago) Permalink

2 months pass...

I just want to say that I really admire Tracer Hand for his seriousness and thoughtfulness and insight.

― amateur!st (amateurist), Friday, 23 July 2004 04:04 (8 years ago) Permalink

Total dud.

― djdee2005, Friday, 23 July 2004 05:22 (8 years ago) Permalink

I'm kidding, absolute classic obv.

― djdee2005, Friday, 23 July 2004 05:22 (8 years ago) Permalink

the fact that "fortunate son" is on heavy rotation on every classic-rock station in america and there's STILL a good chance that we're going to reelect george w. bush really puts the last nail in the coffin of that "...the city shakes" canard. doesn't it?

― amateur!st (amateurist), Friday, 23 July 2004 06:16 (8 years ago) Permalink

when i hear songs like "fortunate son"/"who'll stop the rain"/"someday never comes"/"lodi"/etc. my admiration and awe is mixed with a sense that no one in their 20s should be able to write songs like this--not for their greatness or "sophistication" or anything like that but for their bitterness and remorse and moral clarity and lack of sentiment. i can't help thinking that fogerty paid some kind of psychic price (or had already paid it) for his insight, which might explain why he seems to have burned out (as a songwriter at least) rather quickly after he reached success.

― amateur!st (amateurist), Friday, 23 July 2004 06:24 (8 years ago) Permalink

Is this a joke?!

Rock music: C or D?
Music: C or D?
Sex: C or D?
Oxygen: C or D?

― Myonga Von Bontee (Myonga Von Bontee), Friday, 23 July 2004 06:58 (8 years ago) Permalink

"Bad Moon Rising" and "Lookin' Out My Back Door" made the 6-year old me bounce all around the living room and the back seat of the car (safety belts weren't mandatory back then), and I was a fan from then on. Spent a coupla years as a sullen teen resenting them and trying to dislike 'em (just 'cause they were my dad's favourite band), but resistance was futile. And so what if my dad was a fan - my octogenarian grampa liked 'em too! (Incidentally, the old guy also liked Dire Straits and even ZZ Top! RIP)

― Myonga Von Bontee (Myonga Von Bontee), Friday, 23 July 2004 07:38 (8 years ago) Permalink

6 years pass...

I was just listening to the debut w/ a bonus track "Call It Pretending", & learned that their first single was "Porterville" / "Call It Pretending". It occurs to me that those are amongst the band's most ~~60s-ish~~ songs, the former with SF-style backup vocals, the latter a Motown rip. I know it sounds silly to say that a 60s band sounded 60s-ish, esp. one featured in every movie about the 60s ever, but CCR always seemed more futuristic to me in their concision & stripped-down sound. But this single, both sides, isn't like that. "Call It Pretending", the more I think about it, would have been a good Stones cut in 1966, which is what I mean when I say it sounds 60s---Jagger & co wouldn't have tried to pull that off in 1972.

― Euler, Sunday, 30 January 2011 21:22 (2 years ago) Permalink

but CCR always seemed more futuristic to me in their concision & stripped-down sound

I know what you mean, insofar as there was no one else who really sounded like them in '68 and '69. (There's never been anyone who really sounds like them, actually, even if stuff like "Long Cool Woman" tried to.) I'm not sure if they were pointing the way to the future, or if they had just reached back so far that it seemed like they were. In general, moving towards a stripped-down sound was common in '68: The White Album, Beggars Banquet, John Wesley Harding, etc. I don't really have a point here. I don't have their first album, either, but I'm going to see if I can find the two songs you mention on Grooveshark. Seems to me I know "Porterville" from somewhere.

― clemenza, Sunday, 30 January 2011 23:07 (2 years ago) Permalink

Yeah--"Call It Pretending" is really good, and totally atypical. It's got a little bit of "Out of Time" in it.

― clemenza, Sunday, 30 January 2011 23:12 (2 years ago) Permalink

Yeah, "Out of Time"s a good comparison; for "Porterville" it's like a Dead song circa 66, out of time indeed.

The debut's really pretty light (in a good way!) compared to where they'd go next, into swampy doom. And it's interesting how Chronicle recontextualizes the songs from the debut ("Suzy Q" & "I Put A Spell On You"): they fit well there, more swampy doom. But the debut is overall more of a mishmash, more bluesy than the later records; which makes sense given its provenance from pre-CCR bands (Golliwogs mostly).

― Euler, Sunday, 30 January 2011 23:27 (2 years ago) Permalink

3 months pass...

heard creedence everywhere i went yesterday. there literally is no music more omnipresent than CCR. ~science~

― tylerw, Monday, 23 May 2011 21:36 (2 years ago) Permalink

10 months pass...

For John Fogerty’s next album, due this fall, the former Creedence Clearwater Revival frontman will revisit his old band’s deep catalog of hits in new collaborations with rock, pop and country duet partners including the Foo Fighters, Miranda Lambert, My Morning Jacket, Bob Seger, Keith Urban and Brad Paisley.

“Wrote a Song For Everyone” also is slated to include new Fogerty songs, set alongside Creedence touchstones such as “Fortunate Son” and “Who’ll Stop the Rain” from the band's most successful period in the late '60s and early '70s.

The new project shows Fogerty fully embracing his artistic legacy; for many years after Creedence disbanded in 1972, he refused to perform the group’s songs because of legal issues with his former record company. He famously refused to play with former band mates Doug Clifford and Stu Cook when Creedence was inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in 1993. The fourth original band member, guitarist Tom Fogerty, John's older brother, died in 1990.

Fogerty eventually began performing Creedence material again during his live shows, and last September in New York played Creedence’s albums “Green River” and “Cosmo’s Factory” in their entirety over the course of a two-night stand.

The new album, which also will include duets with Alan Jackson, Dawes and other artists still to be confirmed, draws its title from Fogerty’s song that originally appeared on “Green River” in 1969.

Most recently Fogerty made his acting debut portraying himself in an episode of the Fox TV series "The Finder," for which he wrote and sang the theme song "Swamp Water," at the invitation of the show's creator, Hart Hanson, a longtime Fogerty/Creedence fan.

― buzza, Tuesday, 3 April 2012 22:45 (1 year ago) Permalink

The new project shows Fogerty ~~fully embracing~~ taking a fat dump on his artistic legacy

― the penultimate prophets (upper mississippi sh@kedown), Tuesday, 3 April 2012 23:28 (1 year ago) Permalink

5 months pass...

CHOOGLE!

― Broney, Pt. 1 (Pillbox), Saturday, 29 September 2012 04:04 (8 months ago) Permalink

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.