[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: six degrees of Velvets (was: Every 80's song...)

this is pretty long, so if uninterested, move on.

---john davis <hellomynameisj at yahoo_com> wrote:

(i shouted)
> > eh? i have yet to read or see or hear ANYWHERE that the Velvets were
> > inspired by the Beatles.

john rebuttled:

> that's not true- you just read it *right here*....
>  my point was that the velvetshad a very anti-beatles stance- almost
> as if they were in a kind of rebellion against the pop sensebilities
> of the beatles.

the Velvets pretty much did whatever the hell they wanted to. they
were musical/lyrical experimentalists first and foremost. just listen
to "Murder Mystery."

>where you have a song by the fab four that focuses on
> the mystical side of drug use (the latter half of abbey road, or glass
> onion or strawberry fields) with the velvets, you get a very long,
> jangley sounding song focusing on the more destructive elemnets of
> drugs (heroin comes to mind...)


Reed just wasn't going to beat around the bush. he showed the drug
scene for what it was. (from first person point of view even) i don't
think he ever really glorified it, or intended to.


> the velvets certainly had to be aware of the beatles- and lou reed and
> john cale were definitely much more intellectual and arty than lennon
> and mccartney, who seemed to put on artiness as a costume-

i would agree with that, for the most part, although i think Lennon in
the long run developed a very intellectual feel underneath much of his
writing. imaging how crazy a Lennon/Reed collaboration would've been!

 lou reed
> and john cale were part of andy worhol's little clique and they used
> the "pop" medium as an art form much in the way warhol did- as a
> tongue-in-cheek half admiring, half critiquing pop culture.

the Velvets certainly were attached to Warhol at the beginning,
especially with the Exploding Plastic Inevitable, but eventually they
broke apart from all of that. i don't think Reed necessarilly wanted
to be known as Warhol's little band.  but no doubt the Velvets used
Warhol to get where they wanted to go.

as far as the toungue-in-cheek against pop culture, the funny thing is
that they usually told it as it was, all the tabboo and dirt included.
definitely a lot of sarcasm, though.


> remember- the matrix i drew out is very one-dimensional.
> so you can look at it something like this- 

> buddy holly> 
>             > beatles>
> r&b->------->     |    
>             > velvets> 
> classical >

> the matrix will get really complicated once you think about the
> stones, the beach boys, andy warhol, david bowie.... remember i
> compared it to six degrees of seperation.

yeah, i know, but i just had to be picky. ;{)}


> note- i am *not* saying either the velvets or the beatles were better
> than the other... just comparing.

oh, i realize that. i used to adore the Beatles some years ago. that's
not to say that i don't like them anymore, just that my tastes in
music have developed. besides, the Velvet Underground is an aquired
taste. and although i'm a die-hard VU fan, i still find it difficult
to sit through "Sister Ray" all at once. 

both bands are excellent in their own write.


> there's this sickening idea in "alternative" circles of
> authenticity... i'm not sure there is a "true" alternative "movement."

when they put a capital "A" in alternative around the turn of the
decade, i cried. i agree, there is no "real alternative movement,"
rather alternative to me is any music which is not necessarily
mainstream or top 40. i would consider good college radio of the late
70s and 80s as alternative radio, for you'd hear anything from Elvis
Costello to Gang of Four to Wall of Voodoo to They Might Be Giants to
Joy Division to whatever.... but you wouldn't get the usual play list
of the major radio stations.

it's like "Modern Art." huh? modern art is (or should be) whatever is
currently happening in the art scene. impressionism at one time was
modern art. so was cubism.


> who is "true" alternative and who isn't?

again (IMO) i like to consider "true" alternative to be the stuff
which hasn't the largest listening base--on the radio anyway. OtR i
would consider alternative, but i would not *brand* them as
"Alternative" if that makes sense. heck, by these standards, polka is
alternative.

Viva accordians!


bink
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com