Did Jim Morrison reach his peak with LA Woman? Sometimes, I think so - the writing is very focussed, ain't it?

I came across a book of Lester Bang's reviews and musings on rock in general, and my impression is fairly positive (by which I suppose I mean that I can relate to most of his views, and that his writing of a good quality; or something along these lines). I only became aware of this legendary critic through his praise of VU, specifically White Light/White Heat, and at the time it struck me that he was the sort of person who'd embrace the rawer sounds of say the Stooges and the Ramones, but reject new friends like Eno. After all, I remember hearing WL/WH and thinking it to be near unbearable - I still can't believe I sat through all of "Sister Ray"...painful! It was of course quite rash of me to make such judgements, for he seems to like them all with equal discretion; Another Green World he says is too "becalmed", but he still digs it. I also thought that he'd be another vitriolic Doors-hater, judging by the exchange in Almost Famous (where Morrison is called a "drunken buffoon"), but his view is far more measured (though Morrison's still a "Dionysian bozo"!), and in fact about as close to my own view as I've seen.

He doesn't always read my mind though, as with his scathing review of Desire. As I have mellowed, I have to come to see the merits in such criticisms of later Dylan efforts, regardless of my own sentimental attachments (Desire was the first Dylan album I heard, doncha know). I've read before critique of Dylan's idealization in "Joey" and "Hurricane", and I don't doubt the validity of such arguments. But it strikes me also that there are..different ways to view things? My way of listening and appreciating Desire was cemented four years ago, and I doubt very much it will change now, no matter how persuasive the writing is. I suppose when I listened to "Hurricane" all those years ago, what I was drawn to was the passion and anger that I felt the song conveyed - the story was put across (I thought) effectively, with a truly moody violin providing quite an atypical sound for a Dylan album (at that stage of course, I had no idea what a typical Dylan sound was). Having said this, I do of course confess that such a thing is not alway enough to obviate onesself from responsibility; after all, writing convincingly does not mean one can write about anything, true or false! But like I said, my view has already been cemented, and that view (unfortunately) totally disregards the points made by critics of the song. In some sense, it does not bode well, for it is a very severe case of close-mindedness! Of course with such matters, it does not matter all that much, and indeed even if it did, this is one of those things where I simply don't care. With this made perfectly clear, it's probably a very good thing that there aren't more people like me, the world would be far too messed up to be remotely functional.

Oh, right, I was talking about Lester Bangs - well, another thing I found interesting was that he also predicted the death of rock circa '76, a bold statement to make, but it's easy to see such a motivation. He was a little premature (but I have the gift of hindsight!), but I guess that's the stage when most of the rockers from the golden age started showing signs of being jaded. Of course, it was also the start of the punk-rock movement, and I'm interested as to what Bangs thought about it. John Peel certainly took to it, I believe in fact going so far as to call The Fall the best band he'd ever heard (it's strange to think that the same person could lend his voice to Tyrannosaurus Rex's "Romany Soup" back in '69, ain't it!!). The Fall, now there's a crafty bunch. I'm interested in their catalogue, but frankly I'm a little scared - this is the problem with reading one too many reviews without listening to anything, they can create these outlandish (sometimes garish) images of things that are completely far from the truth (or, at least, from one's personal reaction to something). I'd wager that by this time next year I'd have acquired (probably through fraternal means) one of the 40-odd albums Mark E. Smith put his name to, so let us see what time makes of this curious band; with such high praise, they're bound to disappoint at least a little (or maybe not!?).

Again I am drawn to George Starostin's essay about rock being dead, and whether or not it matters; considering it was written six or so years ago, where (presuming the lack of inclusion on the site implies lack of listening to said artist; which may be flawed) he hadn't heard a fair amount of post '60s material that's now featured on his site, so I wonder whether his views have changed. I suspect that he might have changed his view a little, to the extent of admitting that rock did have a few tricks up its sleeve in the late '70s (he sure loves Before And After Science!), but I think he'd still be pretty adamant about rock being dead; not that I can blame him. Dead, of course, meaning not that every melody in the world has been used up, or every chord change or what have you, but rather the broader ideas surrounding rock. I don't think that rock is necessarily dead, but it's probably dying (this whole area is rather subjective, because one would have to properly define what innovation really means in this context). I think that I fall into the camp of "Well, rock may be dying, but it doesn't matter..too much", in that I can deal with the fact that most artists today aren't bravely ploughing ahead into unchartered waters. For instance, Cave (really the only post-1980 artist I'm moderately familiar with) may not have produced any sort of true innovation since his Birthday Party days, but these things don't seem to matter all that much to me. I don't think George necessarily disagrees that there is still good music being made, rather it's that this music is not providing something that hasn't been done before, only in a slightly tweaked way. All I can hope for is that I don't run out of interesting artists in my lifetime - though it seems like "the future's uncertain and the end is always near"!

I suppose I was asking for trouble when I posted something nice about the Velvet Underground a few days ago; it always seems that whenever I give them credit, for some reason "they" do something to irk me. In this case, it was the contents of a book of writings on the group that I came across. I should've known better, what with my experience with some of the stuff Reed and Morrison have said about Dylan and Morrison (uhh Jim Morrison, that is, not Sterling, although Reed probably put down Sterling at some point!!), two artists I know and love. It seems that a lot of fans of VU share a dislike of Dylan and the Doors, which makes me wonder why this trend seems to be largely prevalent among hardcore fans of the group (the type who regard them to be the fathers of modern rock, not just a cool little avant-garde group). I think certainly part of the reason is quite simply because they feel that such artists are renowned unjustly. (Then again, it seems like everyone hates the Doors these days, so...) Dylan nowadays receives virtually all credit for making literate rock lyrics, and I think the VU fan reaction is, to some extent at least, one of envy. I've read that people maintain that Reed's lyrics were more "honest", and that Dylan's were somehow through a veneer of some sort. (Of course I disagree, but I only bring these things up out of interest). There certainly is a world of difference between say "Visions Of Johanna" and "Venus In Furs", and I can certainly see the motivation for comments about the "reality" of Reed's lyrics.

It seems to me then that it's a different view of what is important/what is good in rock lyrics which prompts the anti-Dylan sentiment. The fact that Dylan is heralded as being the greatest lyricist ever and what have you no doubt irks some VU fans who see Reed as being a revolutionary before his time. I'm not intrepid enough to try and compared the two; there are areas where both shine, and the true high points are rather distinct I think. Reed can be completely honest and truly break down the barrier between listener and singer, be it when musing over his life ("My House"), or startling confession ("Heroin"), but on the other hand. It's obvious to me that he is a gifted lyricist, but one should consider also that Dylan mastered the art of making the bizarre make sense ("Stuck Inside Of Mobile"), and his imagery is darn-near unparalleled ("Visions Of Johanna"). And Blood On The Tracks, I think, is one of the most powerful rock-albums ever. When I talked about Plastic Ono Band, I mentioned how it was far more direct, and that's true; BOTT doesn't start off with "Mother, you had me, but I never had you". But it doesn't seem right to compare the two, because POB doesn't have anything like "Simple Twist Of Fate", say. Much like the Reed/Dylan divide, I think some things just can't be put side by side and critically contrasted, with a "winner" being determined.

And of course when one mentions The Doors, one of the first things bandied around is that they introduced the dark side of rock. I actually traced "Heroin" to as early as 1964, and Jim was actually influenced by VU after seeing them play once (imagine that!! What are the odds?), so it's true that the whole dark side of life thing wasn't entirely new. The Doors seem to be universally reviled now, so it's probably not just the VU fans who hate them. I suspect most of this animosity is directed squarely at Morrison, rather than at the actual band. I think with the Doors, it is very much a philosophical objection in the most part - I think many feel the band's whole atmosphere is fake, primarily because they find Morrison's lyrics to be derivative and phoney. I disagree, of course, but again I can certainly see adequate motivation for such sentiments. Even if you enter the world of Morrison with an open mind, there's a good chance that you'll feel disgusted with what you see (or hear), and join the ever-growing (it would seem) conclave of Doors-haters (or at least Doors-dislikers, who think the band is overrated).

I don't think it's as easy to try to compare Morrison and Reed in any objective sense, but it confounds me if it's the music itself turns people off. Starostin says "Anyone who thinks the Doors are unlistenable has a hearing disorder", and although I wouldn't go that far, it seems to have the right idea. I again suspect that it's probably Morrison who gets in the way of the music sometimes for the Jim-haters - a shame, because "Peace Frog" would still be great even without Jim's little digression (which I find rather good, but anyway) in the middle.

Yet again, it truly amazes me how people can have such different points of view, and how there are so many things which can affect this!

Aside: I don't much like these posts, because there's no proper opinion being expressed. I sometimes think that I hate writing, because I find now that I have no will to write down anything about what I feel about VU in comparison to Dylan and Morrison. What is happening to me!?!

Doors fans will love this video of a young Jim Morrison in a very uncharacteristic role back in his university days! From memory, Morrison was doing film studies before getting into music, but I have to say, he doesn't seem to be the best actor in the world!

I saw a Doors 30th anniversary celebration DVD today, where there were several live performances and videos of Doors songs, all of varying quality. Most of the live performances were interesting, as were the videos, but there were some where they obviously overdubbed the vocals, which was a trifle annoying. Still can't get enough of Morrison screaming "Save us! Jesus!", though. And he was either high in most of the live performances, or really in a trance and truly in touch with the music. Actually, it could well be both.

They also chose to have quotes from "The Ghost Song" (which is on An Amercian Prayer) in between songs, and it struck me as very suiting to the mood of some of them (such as "Wild Child"). It is not a bad piece of writing, so I may as well quote it here so that there is some writing which doesn't look like it was picked out of a trashcan (really, what was I thinking with some of the stuff I've written here?).

Shake dreams from your hair
My pretty child, my sweet one.
Choose the day and choose the sign of your day
The day's divinity
First thing you see.

A vast radiant beach in a cool jeweled moon
Couples naked race down by it's quiet side
And we laugh like soft, mad children
Smug in the wooly cotton brains of infancy
The music and voices are all around us.
"Choose", they croon, the Ancient Ones
The time has come again
"Choose now", they croon
Beneath the moon
Beside an ancient lake
Enter again the sweet forest
Enter the hot dream
Come with us
Everything is broken up and dances.

-- The Ghost Song, Jim Morrison

Ahh what a crazy fella.

Another thing I learnt from the clips is that "The Soft Parade" is supposed to be almost a religious experience. Morrison says on camera that the albums are only half of what they were trying to do, I don't know whether that's mystical nonsense or whether there is merit to what he was saying. It was good to see that "The Soft Parade" didn't lose too much from the lack of vocal overdubs, just one Jim was good enough to make it clear that it is indeed an epic. "Catacombs, nursery bones, winter women, growing stones", priceless.

Another realization is that when Jim had a short haircut, he looked suspiciously similar to Van. Morrison, that is. Mere coincidence that they share the same surname? Jim also covered "Gloria" I think. Hmm, methinks there is more afoot.

As I looked outside the window today, it was with a sense of disappointment that I realized that I cannot achieve immortality with words. "The children are all insane / Waiting for the summer rain", "And if my thought-dreams could be seen /
They'd probably put my head in a guillotine / But it's alright, Ma, it's life, and life only", "Help me find my proper place / Because I'm falling out of grace", I can't hope to write anything like that. I look up to them, seek inspiration from them, but alas, it is depressing when everytime you find yourself falling short! I suppose that when you look at greater minds than yours, you realize how small you really are. In many ways, I guess I am but a shallow reflection of these greater writers, consciously or not using their techniques to try to give words to my ideas. I suppose it is a long struggle ahead, but at least one day I would like to write something really resonant which I can look at sometime in the future and just sigh with satisfaction.

Yes, I don't know what I would have given to write any of those lines. My right arm, perhaps!? Perhaps it's just the weather - the rain has always brought out the brooding artistic part of me - but right now I feel like I ought to leave my mark on this world using the power of the word. It may well be the only real way that we can become immortal, and maybe it's the answer to all the questions I've had about my worries about the pointlessness of it all? Then again, there is no universal panacea, but I'm one of the hazy half-asleep states right now, where my idealism seems to know no bounds.

I think part of the problem is that Jim Morrison. As I predicted a month or so ago, it seems like I'm having that period where I am getting taken with this image I have somehow created of him as a dark, brooding poet, the kind that I guess fascinates me. Plus, that deep voice, ooh now that can send chills down your spine. I can see the similarity to Nick Cave, actually. Anyway, it looks like I'll be spending this summer swooning over Crystal Ship.

Speaking of Morrison, of all people Amma said she played The Doors at full volume in her room when she was 16. For some reason, it strikes me as a very...how to explain it? No, impossible, I can't explain, suffice to say it's a remark I think I shall remember for a while now. Maybe someday I can tell youngsters of the time I played Black Dog on a cold winter morning?