Not swinging with a vengeance: Robert Christgau on new wave disco and hard bop, 1978

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (117 of them)
I dunno, did anyone ever say the Stones (or Zep etc) were reviving blues verities? Thought they were noted more for updating/expanding on/modernizing/fusing them?

Sundar (sundar), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 21:37 (eighteen years ago) link

updating, expanding, modernizing and fusing all imply a certain degree of continuity, though.

ZR (teenagequiet), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 21:44 (eighteen years ago) link

>all three of these examples still loved / honored / mimicked the "truths" of their original sources.<

And James Chance didn't?

xhuxk, Tuesday, 20 December 2005 21:46 (eighteen years ago) link

You're right, Chance loved classic R&B and funk and that's tangible in his music (tho filtered through downtown sensibilities). That was a sloppy choice of a no wave act on my part.

So let's exculde Chance and substitute instead DNA, Mars, Teenage Jesus, Red Transistor. Now we're talking forced / frantic with a definite disconnect from any verities, rock 'n' roll or otherwise. Even Devo covering "Satisfaction" was more involved with fucking the corpse than honoring the past.

Edward III (edward iii), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 22:09 (eighteen years ago) link

Are these musics really any more "forced" than their forebearers?

Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 22:16 (eighteen years ago) link

Maybe "deliberate" is a better term. "Forced" has a negative connotation.

Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 22:18 (eighteen years ago) link

Tim, I think I understand what Christgau means by "forced" - it's not so much "deliberate" - rather, many new wave rhythms sound artificial, jagged, alienating. Unnatural. So that translates into being "forced." This concept of the "unnatural rhythm" is something new wave does share with bebop. Again, my perception of this derives from the herky-jerk spaz school of new wave (Ubu / no wave / Devo) moreso than from the rock school of punk (Blondie, Ramones, Patti Smith, Heartbreakers). I don't get the connotation of "faked," which I assume is the negative one you're thinking of, although that may be in there somewhere as well.

Side note; part of why Christgau never liked hardcore may have to do with its jacking up of punk / new wave rhythms to blinding speed, losing any sort of connection to a "natural" (read: danceable) rhythm. After Minor Threat or Bad Brains, The Ramones sound like they're playing in slow motion.

What's interesting is how the herky-jerk merged with dance / funk and produced the likes of Gang of Four, Au Pairs, Bush Tetras, and Killing Joke. Which I think points up the difficulty of breaking things down into white rhythm / black rhythm. Even during the disco era, electro-dance music became both very white (Kraftwerk, Moroder, Depeche Mode) and very black (Afrika Baambata, Cameo, hiphop) and cross-pollinated all over the place, even grafting with hardcore to form the nadir of Atari Teenage Riot (who I once saw open for the Wu-Tang Clan). So where does this leave LCD Soundsystem (aside from Grammy nominated)?

I'd also like to throw in that The Ramones, Patti Smith, The Clash, Talking Heads, and Elvis Costello get played on classic rock stations. Granted, not as much as Neil Young, Rolling Stones, and The Beatles, but they get played without much notice by the freedom rock brethren. Matter of fact, I've known construction workers jamming on Crue and Bad Company to crank up the radio when "I Wanna Be Sedated" comes on. Now, if DNA or Mars came on (or even James Chance) the radio would probably go "out da freakin' windah," as we used to say in Jersey. The bands' acceptance is a long-term populist perspective, and one that Christgau didn't have in '78 because of the market's unwillingness to embrace punk at the time it was actually happening.

Edward III (edward iii), Wednesday, 21 December 2005 02:44 (eighteen years ago) link

Er, during and after the disco era... brain getting ahead of fingers...

Edward III (edward iii), Wednesday, 21 December 2005 02:49 (eighteen years ago) link

Which brings me back to this point: Chuck's original question was, was he right? History would say no if you can't hear the great sea that time has placed between James Chance and The Ramones.

Edward III (edward iii), Wednesday, 21 December 2005 03:12 (eighteen years ago) link

Conciously or not, we were all reacting against the idea of 'the groove', which at the time connotated everything from Pablo Cruise to Linda Ronstadt to any laid back musical notions, which most found grossly self-indulgent in assorted ways.

There were extremes like Suicide or the Screamers. But The Ramones' approach was more typical. I recall most everyone I knew in these very loosely, later-described 'scenes' as liking The Commodores and soul groups with that James Brown sort of discipline. And everyone loved disco--no matter how much they publicly bitched about lifestyle issues--for the same reasons--mainly, the robotic pulse that could be reapplied to other situations.

Ian in Brooklyn, Wednesday, 21 December 2005 05:30 (eighteen years ago) link

As for swing, it wasn't like Tom Verlaine walked up to the drummer in the Au Pairs and said, 'Okay, so it's decided--we're going to subtract the millisecond temporal shifts between kick and snare because they signify a swing mode which we stand fore-sqaure against for complex, racially-inflected reasons.' But again, there *was* a sense of instinctively not swinging, for the aforementioned associative reasons.

In general, I distrust any notions of 'authenticity' and think arguing for it seems kind of anti-rock. I loved The Ramones for their great songs and brilliant intuitive sense of theater.

I don't think nearly enough people compare [name rock act] with, say, Liza Minelli. Depeche Mode comes to mind.

Ian in Brooklyn, Wednesday, 21 December 2005 05:31 (eighteen years ago) link

"Blank Generation" by Richard Hell is in swing rhythm, fwiw.

Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Wednesday, 21 December 2005 05:42 (eighteen years ago) link

Ian, there is something robotic about funk / disco, and it can be hard to parse exactly where it differentiates from the robotic rhythm of new wave as you get into the 80s - Cameo, Prince, etc. As someone who was there, what's your take on the "rock n roll verities" angle?

Tim, interesting you should bring up Hell. I put together "The Evolution of 'Love Comes in Spurts'" for another thread, but it's germane here. A zip file with 4 versions of "Love Comes In Spurts":

http://s54.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=20VZ6UBWDIKOA24HRKA7V7NW15

1973 - Neon Boys (beta version of Television) - At this point the song has a Velvet Underground feel to it. I guess "the groove" was still cool, nothing frantic here.

1975 - The Heartbreakers - From a demo session when Hell was in the group. The song's punkier, it demonstrates the distance that had been traveled in just 2 years, and it's much more accomplished rhythmically than say, oh, anything off the first Ramones album.

1977 - The Voidoids - By the time Hell committed this to vinyl for posterity, he had updated it, ostensibly to keep up with these new wave whippersnappers with their herky-jerk rhythms. Same song but Quine / Julian's staccato guitar interplay ensures you'd sprain something while dancing to it.

1977 - Heartbreakers again - The song was so good Thunders kept playing it (as "One Track Mind") even after Hell left. This version from L.A.M.F. sounds practically traditional after The Voidoids' bravura disco roboto.

Edward III (edward iii), Wednesday, 21 December 2005 15:11 (eighteen years ago) link

"the distance that had been traveled in just 2 years"

2 years is an eternity! i have no argument. just wanted to point that out.

scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 21 December 2005 15:32 (eighteen years ago) link

>Ian, there is something robotic about funk / disco, and it can be hard to parse exactly where it differentiates from the robotic rhythm of new wave as you get into the 80s - Cameo, Prince, etc. As someone who was there, what's your take on the "rock n roll verities" angle?

What created a neat friction was the way people were simultaneously reacting against those verities in terms of style and, for lack of a less pretentious word, puilisophy, they were also very much in thrall to certain aspects of those verities.

My group, The Quick (now available on inTunes!) and Blondie and The Jam in particular were utterly obsessed with mod Brit pop. And of course The Ramones were all about the Brill Building aesthetic.

Ian in Brooklyn, Wednesday, 21 December 2005 17:13 (eighteen years ago) link

I think part of the way Cameo and Prince negotiated the stiffness of Linn and Oberheim machines simply came from increasing familiarity. Especially with "Word Up" and "When Doves Fly", where the simple distance between one kick hit and another created holes of air that worked as a sort of 'swing.'

This may be too tangential, but as A&R guys were freaked by all this music, as tame as it seems now, the goal became to find ways to control it--which often meant bringing in producers, who brought in their click tracks and time code generators which already somewhat technically challenged drummers struggled to play in time to. (The idea of BPM as marketing tool was new.) Which added more stiffness to performances.


Ian in Brooklyn, Wednesday, 21 December 2005 17:13 (eighteen years ago) link

I remember someone on here was in the Quick! Are you in that "It Won't Be Long" video, Ian (the one Danny Benair posted on his website)? We've linked to that numerous times on here.

Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Wednesday, 21 December 2005 17:25 (eighteen years ago) link

And of course The Ramones were all about the Brill Building aesthetic.
-- Ian in Brooklyn (igre...), December 21st, 2005.

Which is why I say they had more in common with The Beach Boys than The Theoretical Girls. The Ramones were about reviving the verities of sub three minute pure pop bliss. Their style was aggressive but the form was very much classic rock 'n' roll, bubblegum pop even. It wasn't their franticness, or emotional vacuity, or whiteness, that isolated them from success in '78 - the market (not to mention the music industry) just plain wasn't ready, for reasons no clearer today than in 1978 when Christgau was (soul-)searching for answers.

The click track stuff is not tangential, it's a really interesting wrinkle. Perhaps why, for all their rep as fast players, the first Ramones album sounds positively plodding?

Edward III (edward iii), Wednesday, 21 December 2005 18:25 (eighteen years ago) link

I think The Ramones were just seeing how much they could push the velocity thing. I cannot imagine Johnny in particular putting up with that, although one could assume he put up with worse indignities with the Phil Spector record.

But yeah--click tracks = sheer hell (until you get used to learning how to play around them.)

Ian in Brooklyn, Wednesday, 21 December 2005 19:12 (eighteen years ago) link

This article was mere months before "Pop Muzik" and "Heart of Glass," wasn't it?

Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Wednesday, 28 December 2005 18:27 (eighteen years ago) link

"Heart of Glass" was out as an album cut in the fall of '78.

Rickey Wright (Rrrickey), Wednesday, 28 December 2005 18:34 (eighteen years ago) link

two years pass...

revive.

xhuxk, Friday, 8 August 2008 20:25 (fifteen years ago) link

Sorry if I'm repeating anything on here, but in the 70s Guide, he quoted John Piccarella's definition of "forcebeat," something like "...faster than your body thinks it should": a bit against the grain, and reasons for that might well include renewing the vows, "the rock 'n' roll verities," by renewing the thrilling encounter and re-adjustment, rather than just rocking along in a complacent way, incl complacent boredom or even/especially misery, with auto-responses, pos and neg, wearing down the same way. So, even if we just go back to Jazz Appreciation verities like "swing was more for dancing, bop was more for listening"--we still run into all these dicey terms (which were always mostly for the convenience of us retailers, 'preciate it!)And once you teach or provide the possible possibilty of a new/re-newed way to dance, or swing or thrill (incl electric Miles, and later Dancing In Your Head/Body Meta-era Ornette,at the same time as no wave and early post-punk)then that begins to be taken for granted too, even as its thrill falls into its own kind of k-hole, followed sometimes by the automatic response of collectors like me (thanked again by retailers like me)But mainly the previous idea goes with the more idealistic side of punk-new-no-wave-post-punk etc, and there's also harshness, rigor for its own sake, or for a gnostic, spirit vs. body ideal, or blasting your glare through a world of assholes, or for "I've suffered for my music--now it's your turn," as Neil Innes summed it up. Not that all of these can't be honed as ideals, against the grain

dow, Saturday, 9 August 2008 05:45 (fifteen years ago) link

But anyway I think that's what xgau, coming from the rock 'n' roll/rhythm 'n' blues, retail-race code/cultural filteration of the 50s and early 60s, and then seeing both things used, along with blues, early electronic experiments, etc in the Woodstock-to-the-Garden-to-Vegas Age of Rock, yknow Classic Rock, and wanting the thrill renewed, but still feeling it as against the grain, had in mind (and young Reynolds in Blissed Out, when he asks us and himself to abstain from listening to good ol' r&b for a while, although he's more into roiling atmosphere and texture, even/especially when he gets to MBV and Daydream Nation-era SY, much less ECM albums of the waterbed-in-the-monastery persuasion--so either way still a head. But also it's his path to renewal)

dow, Saturday, 9 August 2008 06:08 (fifteen years ago) link

In other words, he bought it after all, even if/as he resists it, that's at least part of the point of going against the grain, to get people to do that, to go through that (and I say that having read [and bought the retail hell out of] the aforementioned 70s Guide)

dow, Saturday, 9 August 2008 06:13 (fifteen years ago) link

And you do have to have some amount of experience to see or feel it as renewal rather than something new, becoming more problematic getting into the very post-50/60s experience of growing up with your parents' rock collection ("Pattern recognition gets us all in the end," observed Jane Dark, before jumping from the deadline train of Real reviewing, I think)

dow, Saturday, 9 August 2008 06:29 (fifteen years ago) link

even if we just go back to Jazz Appreciation verities like "swing was more for dancing, bop was more for listening"

To what extent to fans use those musics for the reverse reasons, I wonder? I assume people listened to swing way more than they danced to bop, but who knows? (Free jazz musicians like Ornette later incorporated funk rhythms, as Don alludes, but did people even ever dance to Dancing In My Head?)

only Rockpile sound like good ol' rock'n'roll to him

And even they didn't, all the time. (Well, I never heard them live. But the Dave Edmunds LPs sound more like good ol' rock'n'roll than Pure Pop For Now People does. Or at least than most of it does -- by '78, it was the only Nick Lowe solo album, and the Rockpile LP had yet to come out either. But I'd say Nick, at that point, was more using old-style rock'n'roll -- in the same sense the Ramones, or Springsteen, were using it - than "reviving" it.)

he likes punk's "extremism, its honesty, its self-knowledge," but wishes it were less elitist and more inclusive. He feels it needs to mutate to survive, and lobbies for a punk / disco merger. Which, given the "disco sucks" sentiments of the rock crowd in 1977, is hardly as inevitable as it seems now. But it did happen, spawning what we *now* think of as "new wave," and also House, and Madonna, and post-punk, and electroclash, and millions of other things, including, for all I know, Ashlee Simpson

Ha ha, I just noticed this, from Sang Freud -- in 2005, no less, three years before Ashlee made her Lene Lovich album. Anyway, what I'm wondering is what punk-disco hybrids Xgau may have already been not noticing in late '78. Obviously, "Heart of Glass." I'm guessing on their second album Talking Heads were already taking tentative steps to incorporate disco (or at least soul -- they covered Al Green on it, after all.) There must be some obvious other examples I'm not thinking about. (I wonder where Bob thought Kraftwerk fit into this.)

xhuxk, Saturday, 9 August 2008 16:10 (fifteen years ago) link

Speaking of Lene Lovich, she had already worked with Cerrone and Chi Chi Faveles by the point, but as far as I know she had no punk/new wave credibility yet.

xhuxk, Saturday, 9 August 2008 16:15 (fifteen years ago) link

(From Ornette Coleman - Dancing In Your Head: Classic or Dud?:

I just remembered I'd BEEN to a party where everyone was dancing to this record.

-- Kris (aqueduct), Thursday, 6 February 2003 18:16 (5 years ago) Link)

Sundar, Saturday, 9 August 2008 16:27 (fifteen years ago) link

Anyway, what I'm wondering is what punk-disco hybrids Xgau may have already been not noticing in late '78.

Hmm, Ian Dury, maybe? B-52s? Sylvester had made a move from glam rock to disco. Dr. Buzzard perhaps was heading ZE-ward.

Thus Sang Freud, Saturday, 9 August 2008 17:01 (fifteen years ago) link

"Rock Lobster" 45 didn't come out until '79, even as a self-released 45, right? Which was the same year Dury put out "Hit Me With Your Rhythm Stick," "Reasons to Be Cheerful" and Do It Yourself, at least in the States (were any of them out by the end of '78 in the UK?); don't think there were any disco moves on New Boots and Panties.

Actually, it occurs to me that Roxy and Bowie (and maybe certain other glam acts?) had been sort of sonically doing a punk-disco fusion for a couple years by then, in a way, though not intentionally.

As for Darnell, even if you consider his Kid Creole stuff new wave (he did mention "Mr. James White" in one song), that didn't come til a couple years later. Not sure if any Dr. Buzzard stuff counts....

xhuxk, Saturday, 9 August 2008 17:16 (fifteen years ago) link

From the 9/4/78 CG:

But the most irresistible of the bunch is "Rock Lobster"/"B-52 Girls," by the B-52s boys and girls, offering these pearls of surrealistic-surfer wisdom: "Here comes the sting ray/There goes the Man Ray/Here comes the dogfish/Chased by the catfish." I'm proud to be an American. . . .

Thus Sang Freud, Saturday, 9 August 2008 17:23 (fifteen years ago) link

Wow. I hereby eat my words; here's what must have confused me:

Pazz & Jop 1979: Dean's List

Singles
The Brains: "Money Changes Everything" (Gray Matter)
Michael Jackson: "Don't Stop 'Til You Get Enough" (Epic)
The Clash: "1-2 Crush on You" (CBS import)
James Brown: "It's Too Funky in Here" (Polydor 12-inch)
Sister Sledge: "We Are Family" (Cotillion 12-inch)
McFadden & Whitehead: "Ain't No Stoppin' Us Now" (Philadelphia International 12-inch)
Kleenex: "Ain't You" (Rough Trade import)
B-52's: "Rock Lobster"/"52 Girls" (B-52's)
The Records: "Starry Eyes" (Virgin)
Machine: "There But for the Grace of God Go I" (RCA Victor)

xhuxk, Saturday, 9 August 2008 17:25 (fifteen years ago) link

And wikipedia says "Hit Me With Your Rhythm Stick" was first released as a 7" on 11-23-78, though there's no indication I can see that Christgau heard it then. It was number one in the UK in January '79.

My wife says we both need to get out more.

Thus Sang Freud, Saturday, 9 August 2008 17:35 (fifteen years ago) link


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