Monday, July 22, 2019

From Burning Incense To Burning Kaftans

When groups got hip to the fact that psychedelic music was not so hip no more, they ditched the effects that had made everything so much fun like they were infected. The rattle of love beads and headbands being fed into garbage disposal units was heard the length of the Left Coast. Windchimes were savagely torn down. Discarded finger-cymbals littered the streets. Kaftans and Afghan coats were cremated in secret backyard ceremonies. Frustratingly, incense could not be burned, but fishermen in the San Francisco bay were injured in the storm of sticks hurled from the bridge. A similar ethnic cleansing occurred in the studio; phasers and wah-wah pedals got kicked into the closet. Sitars and tablas were shipped to Goodwill stores in numbers too great to cope with.

The Great Psychedelic Purge of Psixty-Nine© heralded a back-to-basics movement that saw the momentarily Beautiful People struggling into Amish work-clothes like there was no tomorrow. The Beatles were as usual quick to spot the trend - never the originators they are claimed to be, they acted as a cultural weathervane for those at street level - and the dreary (well, it is) White Album is a bellwether of sorts, although its desperate lack of direction influenced no-one (well, it didn't).

Other bands accomplished the transition with a clarity of purpose the Fab Four had lost, taking Bob as their guide. Dylan was about as lysergic as a square dance, but in retrospect Nashville Skyline represents the sea-change as well as anything.

One of the many minor-league acts making the transition with grace and creativity was Bo Grumpus. Kudos if you've heard of them. Their Before The War from '68 is one of the treasures psychonauts bring from their expeditions into the dark, fetid hinterlands of old vinyl stores. It's a genuinely great album, and I'm not going to qualify that with the usual patronizing critical prefix of "little". It has a swimmy, almost-but-not-quite melancholia to it, a dreamy consistency that encapsulates the highs of the times and hints at the lows. Sales could not have been helped by a combination of shit name and shit cover, though. I mean ... bleeeuuugh.

Realizing they'd made a grievous marketing mistake, they cannily changed their old, shit, name to a new shit name (Jolliver Arkansaw - that banging sound you hear is my head on the desk) and got a new shit album cover for their second album from the following year, Home. It's every bit as good, but with no lingering aftertaste of psychedelia, and thus nicely represents the theme of this piece, visually - check out their threads - as well as musically. The superfine, excellent, blisteringly good rhythm section is heard to advantage without the effects, and as on the first album, Felix Pappalardi's skills are an asset. Leslie West delivers a fat solo, too. [No, he doesn't - you're getting confused with another Pappalardi helmed project, Bangor Flying Circus, linked in the comments to Give The Drummer Some More - Ed.]

More on this subject later - including the Blossom Toes' unexpected embrace of heavy metal and other delights.








13 comments:

  1. Er...excuse me, but didn't the 'Shite Album' influence one Charles M. Manson to try his level best to be an apalling asshole of unrivalled proportions?...i like the word unrivalled,but sadly he had many rivals for the crown of 'Most Apalling Asshole of the Sixties'.Now that's 'back to basics' comment making for ya.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'd be surprised if Manson was inspired by anything. He just had dreadful taste, and it maybe appealed to him to try to shift the blame for his actions onto the Fabs. But HEL-TAH SKEL-TAHHH is rubbish. Yeh-yer-yeah-uh-year.

      Delete
  2. Bo Grumpus. Was this a play on Bog Rumpus? A band named after a commotion on the loo. So the war of the title must be the Turd World War?

    Liking the new direction Señor Farq. A great deal to enjoy and learn here.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We welcome Hairnets In Space! A nice theory - but the name derived from an old funny pages character.



      Delete
  3. I'm still waiting for Revolution Number Ten myself.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bill, don't forget to listen to listen to Revolution in the context of the "missing" Beatles album (Hello Goodbye - the first post in the blog, from the days when it was good). I'm surprised that this post didn't get as many hits as the later Compleat Beetles - Hello Goodbye is one of the only three Fabs albums I listen to (the others are Compleat), from the period when they were as great as people say they were.

      Delete
  4. Fortunately here in the far future we don't have to choose between these two ways of thinking; I love both.
    As for trashing the Beatles? Well.....I suppose that's charmingly eccentric but they really were pretty good you know.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's not possible to "trash" the Beatles. It's like "trashing" the universe. They're there, they will always be there, and no amount of opinion will alter that. My feelings toward them are complex. They're the first band I saw live (in '63), and they changed my life for the good, right up to Pepper. They are the most culturally significant white pop group ever, and their influence and inspiration cannot be overstated. But (and it's a big one), I don't enjoy most of their records. Pre-Revolver, their music sounds quaint and thin to me now, and post-Pepper (post-Hello Goodbye, actually) I fell out of love with them completely.

      The problem is that most people - at least Beatle fans - can't separate the group as a social phenomenon from the records they made. It's an "I love the Beatles" thing - and they were loveable in a way no other group was - funny, charming, whip-smart, and great to look at.

      Reacting to criticism of the White Album, McCartney said "Come on! It's THE BEATLES!" And that's the whole deal right there - because it's a record by the Beatles, it's good. Not only good, but better than any other record by anybody else. Psychfan, you did this yourself - I was "trashing the Beatles". I'm not. I'm absolutely aware of their importance and talent, but this doesn't blind me to the fact that they made a lot of records that just aren't that great. I have the right to trash those, and I could, if pressed, make a long and detailed critical argument explaining why I feel that way. But ultimately, who cares?

      Delete
    2. Interesting. I embrace the conventional wisdom that Revolver is their best album (touches all the bases, etc) as well as the idea that there was something magic when the four were together that's mostly missing from the solo records.
      Part of it is that people who share a regional accent seem to blend well vocally.
      I was 12 in 1964 and I thought they were way more exciting than the teen pop crap that dominated Top 40 AM at the time; they may have been the first real Rock'N'Roll band I had ever heard at length. There are too many moments of sheer beauty on those pre-66 records for me to see them as merely quaint (and even the clunkers like Little Child have some of that energy people loved so much).
      As befits my name I like most of the later stuff just fine. I never liked She's Leaving Home or When I'm 64 but I love Blue Jay Way and It's All Too Much.
      I guess everything is subjective after all.

      Delete
    3. Thanks for the great comment, Mr. Fan. It's not that everything is subjective - how could it be otherwise? - it's that most people - certainly on the internet - don't make the effort to voice their opinions beyond a binary "sucks/rocks". Twitter like/dislikes are of equal - rather, no - value.

      Delete
  5. Great post (and blog!)! That said Bo Grumpus and Jolliver Arkansaw are exactly the kind of daft band names that piques my curiosity - and I sort of love the cover art on both as well. I'm predisposed to enjoy dreamy psych/baroque pop (+sitars, tablas & finger cymbals) to back to basics workmanlike rock and predictably I much preferred their 1968-incarnation to '69. Discovering an old, unheard tune such as "Travelin' in the Dark" is why I'll never stop searching. Thanks!

    I didn't think I'd be interested in a(nother) Beatles-discussion, but I enjoyed reading the comments and all. My english isn't working today, but regarding influence, S. Victor Aaron's says something accurately about "Honey Pie" - and I blame The Beatles for inspiring countless bands and artists to include that one, fun oldtimey vaudeville-tune that has ruined the flow if so many near classics (I'm aware it wasn't the fab four/Paul's first trip down memory lane).

    "More of Paul’s granny shit. That “sweet” dance band music was real cool when Paul Whiteman was doing it in the ’20s, but comes off as painfully mawkish in the hands of a rock band in the late ’60s. During this time, Paul was raiding his parent’s record collection while John was shooting heroin. Somehow, I think the two events were related"

    ReplyDelete
  6. Moahaha, are you related to the Maui Moahahas, or the Mahaloha Moahahas? I take it there's no bloodline to the Hoo-Hah Moahahas?

    Thanks for your lengthy and very worthwhile comment. There's a couple of obscuros similar to these coming up tomorrow!

    ReplyDelete