Category Archives: Music

Bands, albums and live reviews

Oblivious Living Part 1.4: "Kids In America" by Kim Wilde

MP3 – “Kids in America” by Kim Wilde
Lyrics – “Kids in America” by Kim Wilde

About as rock-oriented as any female singer was allowed to get in 1981 unless her last name Harry or Benatar, Kim Wilde’s performance here is something akin to Che Guevara with hairspray.

I was six when the song was originally released, but at some point in my pre-adolescent life, it drifted into my consciousness. Whoever this Kim Wilde was, she was the girl for me. At turns both sexy and gentle, she seemed like the kind of trouble that would have been acceptable to my parents. She was a pied piper of youth empowerment, destined to lead me out of my put-upon existence of cartoon-watching and riding bikes.

“YES! We ARE the kids in America! We live for the music-go-round! Whatever that is!”

But until I started writing this post, I had no idea what she looked like, which is mostly attributable to living in a cable-free (and therefore MTV-less) household. But I was pretty sure she wore day-glo bangle bracelets, a sweatshirt with the collar ripped off a la Flashdance, and legwarmers. Possibly tights. Tights and legwarmers.

“Kids In America” suggested that it was a sociological imperative that Kim and her intended have sex, since there was a wave of change approaching. Oddly enough this sort of reminds me of that scene from Grease II with DiMucci and his girlfriend Sharon in the air raid bunker.

Unfortunately for Kim, his interest in revolution was fleeting. The boy she found in clubland had commitment issues and would later keep her hanging on.* Unfortunately, the listener is also left hanging by three unresolved questions:

1. What was it about the “new wave” that was going to prevent it from spreading to the western portions of California?
2. If kind hearts alone aren’t enough to grab any glory, does the addition of coronets change the equation at all?
3. Did Kim Wilde have dual citizenship in the U.S. that allowed her claim to be one of the kids in America?

Without looking it up, how many albums would you say Kim Wilde recorded between her debut, and her 2006 comeback album, Never Say Never? Eight, for a total of ten in her career. Much like Hasselhoff and Lowenbrau, Kim Wilde is apparently still big in Germany though she does not sell very well here. So apparently the kids here in America have stopped listening, which is a shame as Ms. Wilde still has a lot to say.

Confidential to Avril: Sweetie, it’s not too late to get Kim’s people to put something like this together for you.

Final crazy fact about Kim Wilde: She is a professional gardener. This is amazing to me. Next thing you know, Stacey Q is going to turn out to be a champion shuffleboard player.

* I know it’s a cover. Shut up. You like to tell people the endings of movies before they’ve seen them, don’t you?

Oblivious Living Part 1.3: "Talk Talk" by Talk Talk

This is the third entry chronicling the first two volumes of the now out-of-print 80s music collection, Living in Oblivion, which will proceed in track order. Sadly, the third time is not at all the charm.

MP3 – “Talk Talk” by Talk Talk
Lyrics – “Talk Talk” by Talk Talk

Yet another case of a song by a band who’s done much better (in this case “It’s My Life”), Talk Talk (the band, not the song) distinguishes itself by performing an even less interesting Duran Duran imitation than Kajagoogoo. I don’t think I’ve ever said anything so insulting.

A quick by-the-numbers on Talk Talk (the song, not the band):

Time spent on verses: 53 seconds
(14 seconds of which are sort of a gimme since the first half of the third verse sounds a little like it’s supposed to be a bridge but the band wasn’t imaginative to come up with different chords)

Time spent on choruses: 1:42

Number of times the word “talk” is said in the song not counting the weird echo-y voice in the background during the third chorus that kinda sounds like it’s saying “talk talk” but after several repetitions sounds more like the Swedish Chef saying “nog”: 86


Those 53 seconds of lyrics aren’t much to write home about. It’s the usual grab bag of loss of identity ascribed to possible romantic infidelity, inflamed by resulting paranoia and a smattering of manic depression right at the end. Or as I like to call it, high school.

As initially sympathetic as the singer sounds here, if you give this a solid listen, you have to end up siding with the unheard from partner on this one. If you engender the ire of your beloved merely for crying when he or she is sad or laughing when he or she is happy, you have to know you’re in a damned if you do/don’t scenario. Congrats to Talk Talk for flipping the script, I suppose, but the end result means you’re looking at the least sympathetic protagonist since Lolita or, more recently, My Best Friend’s Wedding.

Other than the moment at about 1:50 when the drums are actually so loud in the mix that they completely overwhelm the lyrics (which in light of the above isn’t such a bad thing), the only other notable thing I can say about this work is that it completes a trilogy of songs appearing on albums of the same name, and named after the bands that performed them, thereby following in the footsteps of Bad Company’s “Bad Company” off of Bad Company and Living in a Box’s “Living In A Box” off of Living in a Box*, which coincidentally shows up on Volume 2 of the Living in Oblivion series, so I’ll end up getting to it and it’s New-Jack-Swing-by-way-of-Rick-Astley grooves sometime around Thanksgiving.

I realize this project is still in its infancy, but this one was tough to get through. I even did laundry while I was writing it. Let me make this clear: I procrastinated writing a blog post about music by DOING LAUNDRY. It was especially tough since there’s a good spate of songs after this one, which made writing this entry something akin to being told “You can’t have dessert until you eat three more bites of those beets on your plate.”

I never had a problem with this song before, but man I sure as hell do now.

* Are these the only three examples of this? If not, drop some knowledge in comments.

UPDATE: Immediately after writing this, I realized if I put the other two songs into a Google search, I’d come up with others. Sure enough, I found this site and this one which clued me into a few examples, some of which are so obvious that I am ashamed of myself. Only metal can top 80s music for self-referentiality. And I should have expected the inevitable Wikipedia entry, which lists so many examples that I’m actually ashamed of music.

This is an authentic blog post

Authenticity in a musical performance is a tricky thing to parse out. Probably because there’s no good working definition of it. You could come up with a list of criteria for measuring authenticity, but that would be self-defeating since a performer could do nothing more than hit his or her marks and bingo! Instant authenticity.

So I imagine, for most people, authenticity is like Justice Potter Stewart’s definition of pornography in that they know it when they see it (Milli Vanilli aside). But when it comes to music, two people can see the same show or hear the same piece, and see and hear two very different things. So the whole notion of authenticity in music might just be moot. I’ve yet to read the book mentioned in this feature, but the accompanying text seems to suggest I’m right.

Therefore, I should probably stop obsessing over whether Amy Winehouse* is the real deal or not. But it would be a lot easier to do so if the business of music weren’t what it is today.

Winehouse is basically a pop singer working in a particular idiom that’s a mix of Brill Building songcraft, Motown soul and a touch of blues. Perhaps because those genres are seen as being more “real” than your average top 40 single, there’s more suspicion about her than there either Nelly Furtado – whose transformation from hippie neo-soulster to freak-hopper didn’t have anyone batting an eye – or Nellie McKay, whose first album of piano pop, rap and jazz had critics salivating for a follow-up before she was even old enough to drink (or so went the line at the time, which turned out to be not exactly true).

I haven’t delved into Winehouse’s personal history enough to know whether or not what she’s singing about is autobiographical. None of that matters though, since some of the greatest singers gave voice to thoughts and feelings that weren’t their own. Randy Newman’s not racist stupid and bigoted, but his characters certainly are. But no one would call his songs or performances inauthentic.

For me, Winehouse’s Back To Black album resonates with the same kind of power. You won’t find a more verisimilitudinous couplet in pop music than line than What kind of fuckery is this/You made me miss the Slick Rick gig from “Me and Mr. Jones.”

Even still, the whole notion of pop music involves at least a little artifice. It’s all just a question of how much an audience is willing to tolerate. A few manufactured feuds? Meh. Fudging your age? No big. Hooking up with a mega-producer to snag some chart success after your second album stiffs? Just bring the beats.

So if none of this matters – and if I’m essentially saying Winehouse is the real deal – then why the hesitation?

Well, I think it’s probably the package is just a little too precise. It goes without saying that Winehouse is easy on the eyes, but plenty of pop singers are both talented and hot. But things start to seem fishy when I know hear more about her drugging, partying feuding ways that I do about her music. All that ancillary crap is usually trotted out when the label feels their “product” doesn’t have the chops to make it without a compelling backstory.

And there’s the problem. Here you’ve got someone who’s proven (Winehouse already had one accomplished album under her belt before anyone here ever heard of her), hotter than sauce, and with a compelling – if sometimes absent – stage presence. Yet her record company is putting across Back to Black as if it’s Lindsay Lohan’s third album.

If you can’t sell someone with talent, shouldn’t you just get out of the business altogether?

* Is it me or is the streaming version of “Back to Black” on her website slower than it sounds on the album? See, this is the kind of stuff that makes me get all suspicious that I’m being duped into thinking she’s the Billie Holliday of the aughts.

Oblivious Living Part 1.2: "(There's) Always Something There To Remind Me" by Naked Eyes

This is the second in a series of musings on the first two volumes of the now out-of-print 80s music collection, Living in Oblivion, which will proceed in track order.

MP3 – “(There’s) Always Something There To Remind Me” by Naked Eyes
Lyrics – “(There’s) Always Something There To Remind Me” by Naked Eyes

While not the greatest song in the Naked Eyes canon (that honor goes to “Promises, Promises”), “(There’s) Always Something There To Remind Me” still impresses thanks to quality source material courtesy of Mr. Burt Bacharach, who’s written some of the greatest pop standards of the last fifty years. It clocks in at 3:40, which is about the same length as “Too Shy” but unlike that opus, it somehow manages to leave the listener wanting more.

Bacharach said he preferred to write for female voices, so the duo of Naked Eyes is good enough in a pinch. Frankly, Sadie Shaw’s original version in 1964 did the song only rough justice. She sings as if she’s in a hurry, and her voice reminds me a bit too much of Michael Jackson’s early works. Plus, the background vocalists make Benny Hill’s Ladybirds* sound like classically-trained vocalists, by comparison.

Pete Byrne isn’t quite the crooner the song needs here, but what he lacks in phrasing, he makes up for in longing. It’s almost as if you can hear him creating the template for Colin Meloy’s timorous mewling about sailor’s wives crying about their husbands being eaten by sea monsters or whatever.



Wikipedia says
Naked Eyes was “the very first band to make significant use of the Fairlight CMI on a pop recording,” before contradicting itself by saying Kate Bush and Peter Gabriel used it a couple years before. This is one of the things I love about Wikipedia: no fact is not fungible. If you didn’t know it was used primarily in the 80s, you’d have only to have heard the words “light pen interface” to get a clue. In any case, much like key parties, the Fairlight CMI’s time has come and gone though I bet it was secretly used on that one Andrew WK album that’s only available as a Japanese-import.

To capture the proper amount of bombast, the song sounds as if it was recorded in a studio on the same block as a Catholic church. Each verse after an instrumental break is preceded by more (synthesized) pealing bells than your average Easter celebration in Rome.

Oddly enough, that church must be on the industrial end of town. The sounds of those faux hammers in the second verse make me think of that one Simpsons episode where the steel mill turns into a gay disco called The Anvil, and I’m pretty sure this song breaks the record for “most drum fills.”

Outside of a few Elvis Costello songs, “Always” might be the best example of a song whose music is in direct conflict with its lyrics. Though what Fisher’s intoning is really depressing, heartbreak never sounded so happy. Everywhere he goes, he’s reminded of this woman he was “born to love,” as he pines for her while walking the streets. He “will never be free” from thoughts of her. All this over someone with whom he didn’t even get to first base (note the lack of kissing or holding tight at the cafe with the nighttime dancing). God, no wonder everyone I went to junior high with still loves this song.

So all that having been said, it rightly stands as the definitive version of the song, even if the drum intro always makes me picture Adam Sandler in The Wedding Singer.

Naked Eyes would revisit parenthetical titles with its single “(What) In The Name of Love” off its second, and last, album though Byrne is apparently still making noise about a third, even though keyboardist Rob Fisher died in 1999. If he had a sense of humor, Fisher would bill himself as “Naked Eye” even though people might mistake him for a Luscious Jackson cover band.

* After writing this, I discovered via IMDB that The Ladybirds actually sang on one of Shaw’s later hits. So apparently, I’m not the only one to think this.

On pimps and hos

Tomorrow brings another installment of “Oblivious Living” wherein I examine the joie de vivre behind Track 2 of Living in Oblivion: “Always Something There To Remind Me” by Naked Eyes. But today, some seriousness.

Last night, I was rolling around town and flipping around on the radio in search of a song that would get me psyched up for the evening. I settled on this song that near as I could tell was called “Flirt” and sounded a lot like R. Kelly due to a “Trapped in the Closet”-style flow.

I thought the song toed the line between ridiculous and sublime, like all great pop esongs. The lyrics I heard had a fun, playful tone…

Soon as I see her walk up in the club I’ma flirt
Winkin’ eyes at me when I roll up on dem dubs I’ma flirt
Sometimes when I’m wit my chick on the low I’ma flirt
And when she’s wit her man lookin’ at me damn right I’ma flirt
So homie don’t bring your girl to me to meet cause I’ma flirt

…and the beat was hot. “If this song had come out a month later, it would be a candidate for song of the summer,” I thought. I told my girlfriend this was going to be my jam, and she replied that the song was terrible and if I was going to be adding it to my repertoire of Songs I Start Singing With No Prompting Whatsoever, then I better get used to loneliness. Clearly, she was a hater.

Then this morning I got a look at the full lyrics and realized something that a lot of other people realized this week: if we’re really serious about attacking misogyny in our societal dialogue, we’re going to have to look closer, and realize that we’re all complicit if we don’t.

Turns out it WAS a song called “Flirt” by R. Kelly (with T.I. and T-Pain). I won’t waste space here detailing the lyrics, but you can view them in full here. I will say that I’m pretty sure there ought to be a ban on the use of the phrase “the moral of the story is” if what follows involves the words “cuff” or “bitch.” Because a moral of a particular story is supposed to be, you know, moral.

If I’d heard those lyrics in my first brief listen, I would not have given it “jam” status, nor would I have come home last night and spent 99 cents on the damn thing thanks to iTunes and too many Old Styles. (This act also made me realize that if one were to inadvertently purchase offensive material, you used to be able to let the retailer know your feelings by returning it to the store and voting against such things with your dollar(s). You can’t do that anymore. There’s nothing that keeps track of which songs, books or movies end up as digital bits in someone’s Recycle Bin).

Anyway, whether I heard these lyrics or not (I might not have since it was early enough in the evening that I was probably hearing the clean radio version) isn’t the point. The point is that all of us need to look past the surface, and examine our own usage of words like “bitch,” “ho” and “pimpin’”.


From pimp cups to Pimp My Ride to Snoop Dogg’s appearances in Chrysler commercials and in the movie Old School (where he’s joined by the self-styled Archbishop Don “Magic” Juan), it’s all over. We’ve become so anesthetized to it that we don’t even stop to think, “Hey, a guy who talks about selling a woman on a street corner like she is his property is in a commercial selling automobiles with the head of a Fortune 500 company.”

Clearly, I’ve been complicit in the spread of this kind of casual misogyny. Last night’s “Flirt” purchase aside, I used to have a picture of myself on my MySpace page* in a pimp costume. It was taken at a “Pimps and ‘Hos” party my friends and I threw in college. Last year, after attending a seminar on prostitution and a discussion of the of “pimp culture,” I took it down.

The argument usually given in defense of “Pimp and Ho” parties, or the kind of lyrics in a song like “Flirt” is that it’s “just about having a good time” and that you (or the vocalist) doesn’t really mean it. In Chris Rock’s HBO special Never Scared, he riffs on women who dismiss misogyny in hip-hop by saying “Girl, he ain’t talking about me.”

Well, yes. He is. There’s nothing to suggest you’d be treated any differently. And while there might be a contextual difference between what a bunch of silly, drunk college students do on a Saturday night, and what happens down on the west side of North Avenue on a Saturday night, it’s all an assent to the same type of behavior with similar language and affectations.

So let’s be clear. When you say you’re going to “pimp” your ride, you’re equating what you’re doing to the work of someone who sells women on the street like property. When you say you’re going to “pimp” something, you’re suggesting you’re going to do it with the forcefulness of a person who establishes control of a woman, and decides what she can do with her body. When you call a woman a “ho,” you are saying she sells herself on the street for money to men who will have sex with her.

We as a society need to start looking at things…um, holistically. We are the sum total of the things we say and do. We may say we’re not misogynists, but if we buy things that are, we’re contributing to a misogynist culture. We may say we decry the degradation of women, but if we don pimp clothes and wave around a pimp cup, we assent to the kinds of things that go on far from our eyes. We may say that it’s OK for certain kinds of lyrics, but it’s not OK to describe collegiate women using the words found in those lyrics, because they aren’t “the same thing.”

But they are.

Unfortunately, most of the debate about this kind of misogyny has concerned itself with hip-hop lyrics, which conveniently ignores the other aspects of (white) culture that allow casual misogyny to continue. It’s really easy to sit back and say that it’s not OK to call women ‘hos. But only by stepping back and taking a closer look are we able to see that listening to a political discussion about Iraq means you also give your blessing to someone who describes women as “nappy headed hos.” And by purchasing Girls Gone Wild videos, you give assent to this kind of thing.

Some questions are harder to answer. Does enjoying a story by Arthur C. Clarke in an old issue of Playboy mean you’re OK with something like this? It is OK for me to still enjoy “Hot For Teacher?”

I’m not sure. But it’s worth taking a closer look.

* Incidentally, I realize tha
t, for some, there’s a contradiction between what I’m saying here, and keeping a picture of me and Ludacris up on my page in light of lyrics like these. But that’s a whole other post.

Oblivious Living Part 1.1: "Too Shy" by Kajagoogoo

In an effort to get myself back on track with blogging, I’ve decided to create a few regularly occurring features here. This is the first: a series of musings on the first two volumes of the now out-of-print 80s music collection, Living in Oblivion, which will proceed in track order. Some will be short, serious and contemplative. Others, like the one below, will be overblown magnum opuses, befitting the pompous majesty of the songs themselves.

MP3 – “Too Shy” by Kajagoogoo
Lyrics – “Too Shy” by Kajagoogoo

Somehow, “Too Shy” manages to wring three minutes and forty-five seconds out of what amounts to no more than six lines of lyrics, two lines of non-ad-libbed ad libs, a chorus of five words that’s really only four since one of them is a homonym, and a series of come-hither “doo doo doos” stolen from Lou Reed, who promptly told them he could keep them, don’t bother giving them back, consider them a gift. How exactly did such a thing get composed. I have a few ideas.

This was Kajagoogoo’s debut single off their debut album. Already hampered with a name that sounds like the first words most infants hear from an elderly aunt, this was its chance to make its mark on a world that already had a Brit synth-pop band that it liked very much, thank you, so it could just take its flouncy hair and rude manners elsewhere.

But oh no, Kajagoogoo would not be denied. No, the world’s initial coyness only increased its desire to make the world its own. And so, Kajagoogoo began to seduce the world.

To do so, they’d need someone special, who personified style, charm, and sophistication, but with a playful insouciance. Limahl – whose looks suggested that genetic scientists in the early 1990s were attempting to recombine the DNA of John Cusack, Richard Grieco, and Billy Ray Cyrus’ old haircut when suddenly a rabid cockatiel burst in through the window and perched upon the large beaker in the center of the room for just a split second before lightning struck, bringing about disastrous results, as the scientists felt their hearts seize with fear at what they had done, and agreed amongst themselves that they would send the resultant man – dressed only in a denim boilermaker’s outfit – back in time to 1982 where he might be given a chance to live in peace – was that man.

Yes, “Too Shy” is a song of seduction, but it’s subtle in its intent. In fact, it’s so damn subtle that it’s limp, suggesting that any woman with earshot of the song has as much chance of being seduced by the singer as she did by the art teacher she had in junior high, who was often joined in the classroom by his “teacher’s assistant,” a strapping Cuban with shoulder-length curly hair named Estanislo.

The song begins with some synth noodling and bass work that together approximates the underwater sounds of whales communicating after swallowing Wookies. Limahl, already nervous over the immense responsibility resting on his narrow shoulders, starts singing Culture Club’s “Time (Clock of the Heart)” at 0:39 seconds in, before realizing his mistake after getting the stink-eye from bassist Nick Beggs, who lets him know that he’s still doing the whale/Wookie bass thing for six more seconds before drummer Stuart Neale stops ripping off Queen’s “Another One Bites The Dust,” and presses the button for the fill. Then and only then is he supposed to start singing.

Chastened, Limahl experiences a brief moment of schizophrenia, and turns the carefully constructed lyrical bedroom sonnet into a fractured dialogue between hunter and prey.

At about 0:54, keyboardist Stuart Crawford lets his niece practice the scales on an electic piano in the corner, and the song begins to build toward its climax. Shortly after, Limahl immediately regrets purchasing cut-rate synthesizers from a notoriously sketchy outdoor market in Lancashire, when they begin to malfunction at 1:07, causing him to completely forget the rest of the lyrics, which he had assured everyone else he had committed to memory, and are now impotently lying next to the producer’s console.

Barreling into the chorus several measures early, Limahl attempts to buy himself some time by repeating each word twice. Failing this, he skips over the instrumental bridge, earning another stink-eye from Beggs, and begins to recite highlights of his sister’s recent trip to the gynecologist, which had been told to him in excruciating detail the day before, and had obstinately lodged in his brain.

At 1:51, the synth begins malfunctioning again and Limahl muscles his way back into the chorus, but the rest of the group has had enough. Guitarist Steve Askew, the group instructs the recording engineer to remove Limahl from the room and the musicians begin a 35-second free-jazz interlude complete with scatting around 2:35.

Shortly after, Limahl bursts back into the room, seeking to save the song’s pop potential. He begins belting out the limited chorus, over the efforts of Crawford’s niece who has begun playing a slide whistle at 3:05, which she continues to play until the song ends.

It’s at this moment that bassist Beggs realizes that his instrument, which – despite its whale/Wookie tendencies – has, until now, kept the song from completely going off the rails, is completely turned down in the mix, thanks to a quick bribe by Limahl to the recording engineer. Throwing the stink-eye himself, Limahl mocks Beggs by continuing to repeat the five word chorus before the disturbed bassist leaves the studio in disgust, as the rest of the musicians turn up the treble on their respective instruments, and play their parts in-the-round style (the way they used to sing “Row, Row, Row Your Boat”) with each playing two measures behind the other until the fade-out.

Sometimes tomorrow is farther away than you think

I know this Sheryl Crow commercial’s been around since the Super Bowl, and I thought it was heinous then. But another thought struck me this week. Do the folks at Revlon realize that by enlisting the narrator from “Behind The Music,” they’ve missed verisimilitude and headed straight into full-on parody?

Admittedly, this one doesn’t play as badly as the one right now that purports to show her on Week 4. If you TIVO’ed this week’s 30 Rock, watch for it in the first break. If that doesn’t play like a Saturday Night Live sketch, I don’t know what doesn’t.

Decisions, decisions

First, a little housekeeping…

Blogging at Time Out Chicago (you are reading that Blog aren’t you?) has been both a blessing and a curse. It’s great to have the prestige of the magazine behind the posts I’m doing over there, but it’s often difficult to know where to draw the line between something that would make a good post for TOC and something that’s better left for this site. The rule of thumb I started using was “How long and rant-y is this?” If the answer to both questions is “kinda” then I e-mail the draft I’m working on to my home account, and save it for later.

Of course, “later” sometimes becomes “way later.” And sometimes what I end up wanting to write about changes too. The Ronny’s post was originally a straight-up review for TOC’s Blog with some anecdotal color thrown in, but that changed quite a bit (incidentally, The Ettes are very good, and you really ought to catch them next time they’re here). Ergo, a few back-dated posts just to keep continuity.

Also, you’ll notice that in the move to a new template, the categories in the ol’ blogroll got farked. It’ll get fixed one of these days, when I don’t have much to do. But those of you who are hooked on phonics can probably see where they divides are between News and Services, Music Blogs, Food Blogs, and People I Like.

Now that I’m caught up, I can get back to important matters, like what the hell is going on with Van Halen.

Seriously, boys. Ya’ll need to make up your minds on this Rock Hall gig. And Velvet Revolver performing in their place? Wow. That’s like asking for a bike for Christmas and getting tube socks. The kind you buy from a guy selling them on the side of the road.

I’d say more on this, but Anthony Caroto at Associated Content echoes the sentiments of pretty much every Van Halen fan out there. He also writes what’s probably the funniest and most profound statement on the matter (“Brothers Eddie and Alex Van Halen maintain seclusion in their Van Halen bubble. It’s about 4 billion miles away from reality”) and is responsible for the graphic at right, which I’m posting here until he asks me to take it down.

Finally, I think Arcade Fire tickets going for $1000 (2nd item) is going to be one of those moments that turns out to be the straw that broke the camel’s back for scalpers, much like what happened with radio payola a few years back.

The Ettes – Reputation (mp3)

Same as it ever was?

If Jim DeRogatis at the Chicago Sun-Times is saying Pearl Jam is anchoring Lollapalooza, I’m inclined to believe him. He was the first to break the story, but when I heard the news this morning, it was credited to Billboard.com, which made me initially skeptical. Last year, Billboard said “Chicago media reports” indicated that a reunited Smashing Pumpkins (as opposed to the barely-there version Corgan’s working with now) were being eyed as a headliner. It was picked up all over the place, but after a little research, I discovered it turned out to be nothing more than a third-hand rumor passed on by an editor…the same editor who wrote up that Pearl Jam piece. Hence my skepticism.

But like I said, if DeRogatis is the original source for it, it’s probably true. But this leads to another question: why would the organizers of Lollapalooza want to continue booking headliners that only harken back to Lolla’s glory days, rather than acts that help the fest stake out a new identity as the barometer for the best in music?

Let’s get a couple givens out of the way first. Pearl Jam is a more interesting, challenging, and focused band now than they were when they first played Lolla back in 1992. You could easily argue that they’re as much in their prime now as they were back then. And in some instances, I have (which is funny, since I’m not a huge fan, and the only PJ album I have is the “bootleg” live album they recorded in Hamburg).

Also, Lolla’s identity now is different than it was during PJ’s first appearance there, but that’s not necessarily a bad thing. Looking back at the lineups of the old Lollapalooza is like reading notes from the underground of American rock music. I’m not here to eulogize that time, or suggest that the new Lolla should try and re-capture it. They’re clearly trying to establish themselves as the place where both the casual and hardcore music fan can find a reason to justify dropping $200 on tickets, and not have to spend days in the desert to hear lots of good music. I think that’s a good thing.

So why, if I’m not the same person I was when Lolla came to the World Music Theatre in the early 90s, does Lolla seem like it’s often content to book acts who were the soundtrack to my teenage fumblings? Maybe it’s because the arena concert industry makes the most money off of the artists who were most influential during the teenage years of those who are now in their 30s.

Look at the top 5 concert draws for 2006: The Stones, Madonna, Bon Jovi, U2, and Tim McGraw and Faith Hill. With the exception of Tim and Faith, those are all artists whose audiences are now well into adulthood, and had their most influential years in the 1980s (even the Stones were still a viable creative entity during that time).

Pitchfork and Intonation illustrate how music listening and buying patterns have become increasingly niche-oriented. They are for people who buy and listen to music regularly, and in some cases, religiously. Even Bonnaroo still operates as one really long, large-scale club show, as evidenced by the extensive camping opportunities (which is the festival version of going back to your friend’s house, drinking a few beers and passing out on his couch after a show).

But Lolla in the mid-aughts is the ultimate example of the arena concert as an adult theme park, where everyone plays Ultimate Music Fan for a weekend. You’re overcharged for everything, have to walk a lot, and stand in long lines. There’s more artifice than reality, but in the end, if you’re patient, there are still plenty of thrills to be had. Most arena tours are constructed that way, and Lolla is the 800 pound gorilla version of it. (Coachella splits the difference between Bonnaroo and Lolla, with tents available and Palm Springs a short drive away, and if you look at their lineup, that’s a pretty good description of it right there.)

So it makes sense that if Lolla wants to re-create the arena experience on a much larger scale, then they’re going to go with artists who speak to the teenager still living inside most adult music fans. A few newer, cutting-edge thrills are fine, but they have to deliver the goods, and that means tapping into what most of the attendees remember as their primo concert experience.

Or to put it another way, while people might ride Superman: Ultimate Flight when they go to Great America, they don’t leave without hitting either The Demon or The American Eagle.

In the garage

(Note: This is the second in a series of back-dated posts I’ve been working on for the last week, but have only now managed to add here, for reasons I’ll write about later. But it makes logistical sense to post these on the date I originally created them. Plus, later on it’ll make me look less lazy. Also, please bear with the crankiness. I promise there’s only one more Grumpy Old Man post after this one, and then I’ll go back to making jokes about hot girls).

A few months ago, a bar called Ronny’s started showing up on live show listings here, which I’m sure prompted some who live in the Logan Square neighborhood it resides in to wonder “Where the hell is Ronny’s?”

Turns out Ronny’s is a neighborhood bar around Armitage and California. According to the young woman working the door, the folks at MPShows.com approached the owner – the eponymous Ronny – about booking some shows into the bar’s side room, which is little more than a glorified garage, and so small, that you’d be hard pressed to fit any more than two cars in it. It’s definitely not a place that was built – or ever remodeled – for the purposes of hosting live bands.

The rectangular bar itself is probably large enough to handle the regulars who frequent the joint for cheap beer and a game of pool on weekdays, but at a show I went to last Friday, featuring The Ettes, the place was jammed up with the usual live music crowd, and a few others lured in by the multitude of press accolades the band’s received.

There’s no stage in the side room, so watching a show at Ronny’s is somewhat akin to seeing your friend’s band play in their basement, especially since the place holds less than 100 people. This, of course, encourages more heckling than usual, which meant one unnecessarily-sunglasses-adorned hipster was able to badger the opening band (a perfectly all right group of guys called The Singles) into playing “one more” by sheer force of proximity.

Ronny’s is a dive. Portions of it appear to be falling apart. There’s one bartender, and she’s both overworked and probably underpaid for the pleasure of dealing with the patrons’ demands, which is important to remember when she brings you drinks you didn’t order and confuses your change with the person next to you. The jukebox is about 90% Hispanic artists, and 10% top 40 (Gwen, Mariah, Dave Matthews), and is probably reflective of the community surrounding the place, and its music taste, though little of either was present in the bar that night.

During the show, The Ettes lead singer/guitarist/instigator – announced they were “from the road,” but later told me they’re currently based out of L.A. but keeps that piece of information quiet, since the band doesn’t identify much with the town (the drummer and bassist are from New York and the singer hails from Florida). They’re spending their pre-SXSW East Coast tour looking for a new place to call home, so roll out the red carpet Hoboken, New Jersey!

All of which got me thinking about something my friend Mark Anderson wrote in a comment about dive bars, that appeared on a local blog. The whole bit is worth reading, as is a longer piece he wrote on Chicago tap rooms, but the most apropos point is this:

“…the people who might count as regulars at a “dive” bar often frequent the place because they have no other choice if they want to participate in the same social interactions we younger and more prosperous members of the community take for granted.”

The Ettes are in a position (and a field, I’d say) where crafting an image is as important as crafting a song. They can choose how they define themselves, like choosing a different city to be “from.” Similarly, the people coming to their shows are lucky enough to have the freedom to decide how they’re going to spend their leisure hours, and privileged enough to not have to care whom they’re displacing.

While I’m sure the owner appreciates the increase in business on weekends, I felt a little like I was trespassing. Not because I felt unwelcome, mind you, as both Ronny and the bartender were quite cordial. No, it was more because I felt like I was taking up a seat from a guy who didn’t have as many choices as I do about where to spend a Friday night, and was really looking forward to a little tejano music and an MGD, but decided to stay home instead. It didn’t help that the jackass next to me kept calling Ronny by his first name, which really kind of struck me as entitlement, because he gave no indication that the proprietor ever spoke the words “Call me Ronny” to him.

I played a little Freddy Fender on the juke to even the score, but it didn’t quite do the job.