Author |
Topic Search Topic Options
|
Dick Heath
Special Collaborator
Jazz-Rock Specialist
Joined: April 19 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 12818
|
Topic: John Peel Week Posted: October 27 2005 at 05:39 |
This is John Peel Week for the various BBC radio and TV services, and I reckon John is whirling in his grave about most of it. An album has been released of successful bands first promoted by Peel - but no Nice, no Soft Machine (NOTE: Peel fully cooperated in interviews with Graham Bennett for the new Soft Machine biography - the book is even dedicated to him), just the obvious from the 60's and 70's plus the post punk bands. I really feel uncomfortable that 10 years of Peel's pioneering work introducing the likes of me to a very broad range of burgeoning rock bands from the mid 60s to 75, boils down to representation by T Rex, Rod Stewart and Jimi Hendrix, on this opportunist CD.
There was disappointment to hear Peel called Progressive Rock, 'Complete Bollocks' on at least a couple of documentaries made in a few years before his death - but tempered by my amazement that somebody could fairly independently support the music and its artists for many years; something doesn't ring true. (And one reason the Pope shouldn't make him a saint ). But the respect shown to Peel still allows the media to continue to attack or more commonly, completely ignore prog. The very worst of music magazines NME (actually the lowest standard of journalism and some complete pig ignorism about music, is really what I feel - just try to read a dire, recent interview with Carlos Santana) , listed tribute music events skewed to recent music only. Mr Emerson should get back again with forward colleagues of Nice, for a tribute.......................
Personally I believe Peel introduced a lot of great bands to the world, and quite a bit of new music. But he was most certainly fallible, and made at least one remarkable change of face. But the Mark E Smith TV documentary (replayed last night on BBC 4?) was full convoluted descriptions (including Peel's)of the Fall's music, which if didn't know the band you would swear were being employed to explain Gentle Giant or some other prog band. Pretentiousness abounds.
|
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/87e8d/87e8df83ce72662bbb416676070d3558b4ba7267" alt="Back to Top Back to Top" |
Blacksword
Prog Reviewer
Joined: June 22 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 16130
|
Posted: October 27 2005 at 05:52 |
Peels relationship with prog was strange. He once said that one of his most memorable experiences was hearing Floyd do 'Set the Controls for the Heart of the Sun' in some small theatre venue. He said it was the beginning of something 'great' He also loved Tull, pursuaded Doug Smith to Sign Hawkwind and had enormous admiration for VDGG and believe it or not Queen!!!
According to Ian Anderson, Peel stopped supporting any band as soon as they hit the big time. He couldn't get enough of Tull, but as soon as Aqualung sold big, he would literally cross the road to avoid having to speak to any of them. In fact he never spoke to them again.
That said, he extended the same courtesy/discourtesy to New Order and The Cure, one of his Indie 'babies'
The Peel album is bound to be comprised of the most popular of the 'wierd' artists he promoted. That way it sells the most copies. No one has heard of Soft Machine or the Nice. Certainly, not the sort of people who grew up with Peel in the 80's and beyond, and this is probably aimed at them. It's a shame I agree, but quite predictable.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3dc52/3dc5225420198e1be8bd6427d5db42b10fe275da" alt=""
|
Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy!
|
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/87e8d/87e8df83ce72662bbb416676070d3558b4ba7267" alt="Back to Top Back to Top" |
Phil
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 17 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 1881
|
Posted: October 27 2005 at 06:10 |
He was a great character but the term "inverted snobbery" springs to my
mind - if it was successful then he started to bash it. Some of the
"music" he played on his late evening show was real cr*p.
Maybe it was other people that set him up as an arbiter of good taste.
I got the impression he didn't look to be known as a sage on music, it
just happened to him. At least he managed to be the only DJ on Radio 1
that, to my knowledge, chose the music he played rather than following
a playlist.
His comment about ELP being a "total waste of electricity" though was funny......
|
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/87e8d/87e8df83ce72662bbb416676070d3558b4ba7267" alt="Back to Top Back to Top" |
Syzygy
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: December 16 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 7003
|
Posted: October 27 2005 at 06:51 |
I think John Peel was generally referring to the likes of Yes, Tull, Genesis and ELP when he referred to progressive rock, and I think that with the exception of Tull (who he championed in their very early career) he never had much time for any of them. He also championed Henry Cow, Tangerine Dream, Can and Faust along with many other avant prog and krautrock bands. It's true that he tended to lose interest in artists who became successful, but this meant that his show always featured something new. Quite a lot of the artists he gave airtime to were rubbish, but the list of acts across all genres that received their first break on his show is highly impressive. For all his show's faults, it's a good example of of public broadcasting at its best; no commercial station would ever have given so much airtime over so many years to music with no obvious commercial potential.
He was a Liverpool supporter who played Henry Cow and Captain Beefheart on national radio, which may not qualify him for canonisation but puts him on the side of the angels.
|
'Like so many of you
I've got my doubts about how much to contribute
to the already rich among us...'
Robert Wyatt, Gloria Gloom
|
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/87e8d/87e8df83ce72662bbb416676070d3558b4ba7267" alt="Back to Top Back to Top" |
Blacksword
Prog Reviewer
Joined: June 22 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 16130
|
Posted: October 27 2005 at 07:28 |
I know he hated Yes!
It's true what you say, Syzygy, he was unique in that he played what he wanted. I think his argument was that there was no point in investing any energy/airtime to bands that had 'made it' simply because they had 'made it' and therefore no longer needed his supprt as they were being supported by the daytime radio DJ's.
He saw his job as promoting new and obscure music.
|
Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy!
|
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/87e8d/87e8df83ce72662bbb416676070d3558b4ba7267" alt="Back to Top Back to Top" |
Drachen Theaker
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 376
|
Posted: October 27 2005 at 10:22 |
You've got to give the man credit for giving airplay to lots of new bands and he was a major figure in UK music for sure, but the "Saint John" hagiography does get on my wick.
He probably ended up being too influential and his views on prog became a received wisdom. He helped entrench the attitude of "talented musicians being ambitious is boring, pretentious and contrary to the Spirit of Rock 'n' Roll" which still pervades today.
I think this sort of narrow-mindedness damaged the commercial success of British music post-1976 by dissing the culture of good musicianship - personified by the bands he hated such as Yes, ELP, Genesis, Purple, Zep etc who were huge around the world.
Yet now we have reached a stage where the US Top 100 sometimes features no UK albums and a small country like Sweden probably produces more interesting and adventurous bands. Obviously I'm not saying JP is solely responsible for this but he certainly contributed!
So RIP Mr Peel, but the sooner some of your negative attitudes are history the better.
|
"It's 1973, almost dinnertime and I'm 'aving 'oops!" - Gene Hunt
|
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/87e8d/87e8df83ce72662bbb416676070d3558b4ba7267" alt="Back to Top Back to Top" |
Dick Heath
Special Collaborator
Jazz-Rock Specialist
Joined: April 19 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 12818
|
Posted: October 29 2005 at 05:35 |
Our radio station receives NME free, so I mistakenly browse it.
For instance, a recent Carlos Santana interview (yes!) was dire.
Reviews are written to be contraversial - (poor Jamie Callem's latest
was savaged; clearly by somebody who has no idea) - unless the band is
the NME's darlings at that time (but they won't be in 12 months time) -
and that publication more than most seem to accept Peel as saint.
(Another discussion point: I've discussed the state of popular music
media with members of the radio station who are considerably younger
than me, ie. still in their late teens, and most too think NME is crap
as is Chris Moyes on Radio One - what a bollock up he did of the G8
Concert - so there is some assumption the NME and daytime Radio One is
aiming at the lowest). However, in the meanwhile with the publication
of John Peel's autobiography, more serious media are also reminding
folks of Peel's feet of clay - the nastiest I read was that, behind the
scenes his ego was much greater than portrayed by his public image*,
and he wrote begging letters to the controller of Radio One in the 80's
not to be sacked!.
However, I strongly agree with the idea that Peel introduced many
an interesting band who otherwise would have disappeared without trace
- but there were probably more who should have been allowed to drift
into the mists of obscurity but weren't. His support and promotion of
new bands should be Peel's memorial. Certainly with hindsight, there
was a continual casting off once fame and fortune greeted some bands.
For a man who claimed he never advertised anything or person he didn't
believe in, then ponder the ad for Nice included on their compilation: Here Come The Nice.
My main negative image of Pee, is him being in his way an established
figure in the pop/rock/avante world, who could always be called on or
refered to as demonstrating prog "was bollocks". (Tony Wilson
similarly). Too many of these secondhand critics never made the effort
to contemplated why prog was so successful at the end of 60's and
early 70's (and instead assume it was abberation - why?), and my bet is
they never made any effort to listen to the music.
Last Saturday's London Times book section quoted a section from the
Peel autobiography which described the early days of Peel's
Roadshow, and "pride" that he was once billed above Jimi Hendrix. I
know how he felt, but it appeals to my ego rather than being a matter
of pride, being placed above Peel in the acknowledgments in a
recent rock biography!
BTW I've just ordered the Gentle Giant biography!
|
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/87e8d/87e8df83ce72662bbb416676070d3558b4ba7267" alt="Back to Top Back to Top" |
salmacis
Forum Senior Member
Content Addition
Joined: April 10 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 3928
|
Posted: October 29 2005 at 10:40 |
Blacksword wrote:
I know he hated Yes!
It's true what you say, Syzygy, he was unique in that he played what he wanted. I think his argument was that there was no point in investing any energy/airtime to bands that had 'made it' simply because they had 'made it' and therefore no longer needed his supprt as they were being supported by the daytime radio DJ's.
He saw his job as promoting new and obscure music.
|
Funny that he hated Yes, as on the 2cd set 'Something's Coming' from their early BBC sessions, there is music from 'Top Gear', which he hosted at the time I believe. He also claimed a few years ago 'Roxy Music and Genesis were the only bands in the early 70s that had anything new'; whether we agree with that or not it irrelevant, the point I'm making is that I am not convinced he hated prog or 70s rock as much as he claimed to; rather he was 'keeping up with the Joneses', so to speak, by joining in with the dissenters of prog that was undoubtedly rife in the late 70s. I also remember a few years ago hearing Peter Hammill on his show too....
Also, he actually ran one of the very earliest 'progressive' labels with Dandelion, which came about at about 1968/9. It was certainly a disparate collection of artists, including a has been Gene Vincent, Medicine Head, Stackwaddy and Bridget St John, plus housed Kevin Coyne and his band Siren and a pre fame Clifford T. Ward. Very few of these albums ever sold anything so I am led to believe, but he obviously was a pioneer in the 'progressive' record industry, as labels like Vertigo and Dawn all followed in Dandelion's wake.
By the way, there was a complete edition of Top Gear on BBC Radio 6- lots of great stuff, including Tomorrow, Amen Corner, Nirvana (the UK pop psych troop) plus Traffic and Pink Floyd in session.
Edited by salmacis
|
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/87e8d/87e8df83ce72662bbb416676070d3558b4ba7267" alt="Back to Top Back to Top" |
salmacis
Forum Senior Member
Content Addition
Joined: April 10 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 3928
|
Posted: October 29 2005 at 10:49 |
Dick Heath wrote:
This is John Peel Week for the various BBC radio and TV services, and I reckon John is whirling in his grave about most of it. An album has been released of successful bands first promoted by Peel - but no Nice, no Soft Machine (NOTE: Peel fully cooperated in interviews with Graham Bennett for the new Soft Machine biography - the book is even dedicated to him), just the obvious from the 60's and 70's plus the post punk bands. I really feel uncomfortable that 10 years of Peel's pioneering work introducing the likes of me to a very broad range of burgeoning rock bands from the mid 60s to 75, boils down to representation by T Rex, Rod Stewart and Jimi Hendrix, on this opportunist CD.
There was disappointment to hear Peel called Progressive Rock, 'Complete Bollocks' on at least a couple of documentaries made in a few years before his death - but tempered by my amazement that somebody could fairly independently support the music and its artists for many years; something doesn't ring true. (And one reason the Pope shouldn't make him a saint ). But the respect shown to Peel still allows the media to continue to attack or more commonly, completely ignore prog. The very worst of music magazines NME (actually the lowest standard of journalism and some complete pig ignorism about music, is really what I feel - just try to read a dire, recent interview with Carlos Santana) , listed tribute music events skewed to recent music only. Mr Emerson should get back again with forward colleagues of Nice, for a tribute.......................
Personally I believe Peel introduced a lot of great bands to the world, and quite a bit of new music. But he was most certainly fallible, and made at least one remarkable change of face. But the Mark E Smith TV documentary (replayed last night on BBC 4?) was full convoluted descriptions (including Peel's)of the Fall's music, which if didn't know the band you would swear were being employed to explain Gentle Giant or some other prog band. Pretentiousness abounds.
|
I 100% agree that NME is the worst music paper I have encountered as well- the writing is very bad, and they always seem to have selected a 'whipping boy' to give a bad review to, in order to provide 'comedy' for their audience. I remember them reviewing a Toploader album and giving it 0/10 (I'm not a fan, but 0/10??) and reviewing a Kula Shaker compilation just to say 'what do you expect? It's crap', plus also showing their mis-information by labelling a Meat Loaf album as 'overblown prog rock', or something along those lines!!
|
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/87e8d/87e8df83ce72662bbb416676070d3558b4ba7267" alt="Back to Top Back to Top" |
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.