Doors LA Woman grossly overrated

Peter Rideout wrote:  Hmmmm... I wonder if the whole "overrated" thing (at least in regard to older albums, like LA Woman) often breaks down along generational lines.   For those of us "of a certain age," we "were there" to experience the impact some of these ground-breaking, "important" albums and artists (ITCOTCK, SEBTP, Foxtrot, Brain Salad Surgery, Sgt. Pepper's, etc.) made at the time, and we may thus often treat the albums with a certain nostalgic reverence. (We rate with a view to the album's place in rock/prog history, and our own lengthy, happy, youthful history with it.)   With NO disrespect intended, I often find myself assuming, when I read some post saying how this or that widely-loved classic is "overrated"  (still hate that word because of what it implies about the album's fans), that the writer must be much younger than I, and just wasn't there to feel what we did when the music was fresh and new, and really stood out from the prevailing norm. (Thus, I tend to take such disparaging, counter to the majority statements with a HUGE "grain of salt.")   I also think,  when classic albums inevitably garner a lot of gushing praise, that new listeners may approach them with the unrealistic expectation of being "blown away" (you'll see that a lot in their subsequent reviews: "from all of the previous reviews, I was expecting to be blown away, but I wasn't), or of having some sort of revelatory, life-altering, quasi-religious experience.   What do others think? Is there a generational, "you had to be there" kind of phenomenon at work in these cases? we see it time and again: 40-something reviewer gives top rating, teen reviewer knocks it down because 'it didn't blow me away."   Or is it just the innate cynicism of youth? Yes, I was a teen, and I have a teenage daughter, so I have some experience with the "everything sucks, especially what you like, Pops) mindset. (I'm not saying this is necessarily a factor here.)   Waddaya say?   (Just checked -- according to his profile, our Mr. Mouse is a youthful 26. He was born well after the Doors' groovy, far-out heyday.)

Peter Rideout wrote:   If future generations ever study Jim's lyrics, I think it will be in history or political science (perhaps psychology) classes, not English literature or poetry classes.

I was actually encouraged to read Jim Morrison's lyrics and to do a project on them for the poetry part of my English course (of course it was from a bad English teacher who got fired that  year). I decided to do something more worthwhile and chose Lewis Carroll, Jabborwocky being one of my favorite poems.

Uroboros wrote:   Haha, I don't know, about ten thousand other things probably. From the old guys, for instance Baudelaire, Rimbaud, Blake, just to name those who probably influenced Morrison and his generation to a various extents. Or Walt Whitman, I don't know... Then T.S. Eliott in the first half of the past century, Dylan Thomas of course - if I were to try and follow some kind of logical path... or maybe not so logical. And then there was Ginsberg, whom I'm not familiar with, but knowing he was more or less the mentor of the so-called "beat" generation, I would guess he was more than his disciples managed to be. There were many individual voices following valid literary currents in the twentieth century - modernism, surrealism (from which sprang all kinds of strange experiments with form and language like dadaism), later various deconstruction techniques began to be employed, and literature was transformed heavily with the arrival of postmodernism. In a picture of the twentieth century, Morrison didn't create poetry that was historically valid (yes, he was representative of his time and his generation's ideology to a certain extent, but not relevant to the history of literature). His language was not his own and was not up to par with his contemporaries.

Edited by Peter Rideout - March 21 2007 at 15:11

Uroboros wrote: progismylife wrote: So you are basically saying that The Doors are a bad band because Ray Manzarek made sure Jim was in his band because of Jim's poetry and thats wh THe Doors started - becasue of Jim's poetry. Jim quoted part of a poem he wrote (which later became Moonlight Drive I think) and Ray was amazed. And have you read his lyrics? Those are great poetry. And he kept on bringing up shamans and native Americans and stuff because events he had a traumatic event in his childhood (He saw a car crash that involved a truck with a bunch of Native Americans, who that died - "Indians scattered on dawn's highway bleeding") And the lizards have to do with the few acid trips he had (I think - its what is put in the few biographies I've read)   Yes, Ray Manzarek's literary taste is most definitely a warranty for great poetry. Of course I know the lyrics, I'm not talking about things I'm not familiar with. There is the occasional nice metaphor, of course (after all, the guy was trying), but there is nothing truly personal in there, he didn't have a poetic voice of his own. And, besides that, writing symbolism in the 1960's wasn't exactly keeping in time with the progress of literature. Actually, you know, if you want to think he wrote great stuff, go ahead - who am I to try to make you think differently?

So what (to go slightly off topic here) is considered good poetry if Jim Morrison isn't considered a poet (in your point of view)?

Uroboros wrote: TheProgtologist wrote: Uroboros wrote: TheProgtologist wrote: he was a brilliant lyricist and poet.   No, he was not. He was a kid who had probably read some Rimbaud and most definitely some Blake and thought it would be cool to mumble something in a similar style as lyrics for his songs. He built up some kind of childish, incoherent imagery with lizards and stuff and he probably also thought shamans were cool or something, cause he kept bringing that up if I recall well. Like the Mercury Rev guys nicely put it in a song some time ago, "I'm alive! she cried - but I don't know what it means". He was not a poet, and I wouldn't call him an inspired lyricist either, although you might argue that some things sounded decent enough in the context of one song or another.   "He was a kid who had probably read some Rimbaud and most definitely some Blake"   Do you know anything about the man?He was a voracious reader with a near genius level IQ,so don't insult his intelligence.   What you think of any of his work is all a matter of taste and opinon,isn't it?I like his poetry and his lyrics,and the imagery he used.   I'm a blue collar guy,I guess my tastes aren't as "refined" as yours.   I'm not insulting his intelligence, I'm just trying to say that he wasn't the "poet" that many consider him. I think it's the result of all the media hype surrounding the band and everything about it, praising the guy to sometimes ridiculous extents. Yes, I happen to know a few things about poetry, and no literary critic in their right mind (and sober) would take his poetry seriously. Of course you can like the lyrics, of course they can offer you a compelling scene or a moving image, there's nothing wrong with that. But don't mistake it for serious poetry. I don't know very much about him (although it's impossible not to know at least a few things when everybody talks about the same guy even after fourty years, as if little had happened in the meantime), so I may be wrong about his reading habits. But his influences are few and generally unfiltered/obvious. Reading does not make you a good writer (not even a good reader for that matter), and neither does a high IQ, so your argument doesn't hold. Please don't take any of this as an offense; I am simply tired of people making icons out of certain characters for the most inappropriate reasons and on no reasonable grounds. Of course there is more to these things for the people who directly experienced them (like Peter said), but even they should be able to judge objectively after a while.

So you are basically saying that The Doors are a bad band because Ray Manzarek made sure Jim was in his band because of Jim's poetry and thats wh THe Doors started - becasue of Jim's poetry. Jim quoted part of a poem he wrote (which later became Moonlight Drive I think) and Ray was amazed. And have you read his lyrics? Those are great poetry. And he kept on bringing up shamans and native Americans and stuff because events he had a traumatic event in his childhood (He saw a car crash that involved a truck with a bunch of Native Americans, who that died - "Indians scattered on dawn's highway bleeding") And the lizards have to do with the few acid trips he had (I think - its what is put in the few biographies I've read)


Edited by progismylife - March 21 2007 at 13:58

TheProgtologist wrote: Uroboros wrote: TheProgtologist wrote: he was a brilliant lyricist and poet.   No, he was not. He was a kid who had probably read some Rimbaud and most definitely some Blake and thought it would be cool to mumble something in a similar style as lyrics for his songs. He built up some kind of childish, incoherent imagery with lizards and stuff and he probably also thought shamans were cool or something, cause he kept bringing that up if I recall well. Like the Mercury Rev guys nicely put it in a song some time ago, "I'm alive! she cried - but I don't know what it means". He was not a poet, and I wouldn't call him an inspired lyricist either, although you might argue that some things sounded decent enough in the context of one song or another.   "He was a kid who had probably read some Rimbaud and most definitely some Blake"   Do you know anything about the man?He was a voracious reader with a near genius level IQ,so don't insult his intelligence.   What you think of any of his work is all a matter of taste and opinon,isn't it?I like his poetry and his lyrics,and the imagery he used.   I'm a blue collar guy,I guess my tastes aren't as "refined" as yours.

Uroboros wrote: TheProgtologist wrote: he was a brilliant lyricist and poet.   No, he was not. He was a kid who had probably read some Rimbaud and most definitely some Blake and thought it would be cool to mumble something in a similar style as lyrics for his songs. He built up some kind of childish, incoherent imagery with lizards and stuff and he probably also thought shamans were cool or something, cause he kept bringing that up if I recall well. Like the Mercury Rev guys nicely put it in a song some time ago, "I'm alive! she cried - but I don't know what it means". He was not a poet, and I wouldn't call him an inspired lyricist either, although you might argue that some things sounded decent enough in the context of one song or another.

Nope, LA Woman is an exceptional album, maybe The Doors best.

Cheesecakemouse wrote: I bought LA Women this record a couple of  days ago on an impulse when I saw it at a cheap price. Boy was I dissappointed with it when I gave it a listen last night, to me the whole album is flat, firstly Jim Morrison just doesn't seem to care about the audience ( I know he was deterioating at this point), secoundly this album is so behind with what had as was happening musically this album was made in 1971 but it sounded more like 1967. Musically speaking it sounded like it had not paid attention to the innovations of the the past by such albums as theBeatles album Abbey Road, Jimmy Hendrix Electric Ladyland, Miles Davis Bitches Brew. Nor does it appear were the musicians aware of the innovations that occured in 1971, that year albums Can's Tago Mago, the Yes Album, Van derr Graaf Generator H to He, these albums are light years ahead of LA Woman. To me the album falls completely flat, it sounds like it came out just after the release of the song 'Wild Thing' (by the troggs if i'm correct). In My opinion the only reason people bother with the Doors is firstly Jim Morrison was good looking, lived the wild rock n' roll lifestyle and died young. According to the rulwes of pop culture matrydom if you look good, live hard and die young you are an immortal legend. Also to reinforce that was Oliver Stone's movie, which resulted in Morrison's sanctification to a devine musical authority, and the resulting pop culture magazines eg the Rolling Stone Magazine. So in the end I think LA Woman was a dud, it was a Turkey when it was released and still is a Turkey today. But because of Morrison's sainthood decleared by the pop culture authrities many people do not question the quality (or lack of) on this album. After all Saint Morrison is on posters and tee shirts at your local music store. In my opinion if Jim Morrison was still alive today , the Doors would not have the high status today, and Jim Morrison like Tom Jones wuold be now singing in Las Vegas and considered at the same level as Tom Jone, not the rock 'God' who died young. As a result I give this LA Woman 2 stars. Thankyou for your time.

Edited by Cristi - March 21 2007 at 09:17