|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Nov 21, 2008 21:53:54 GMT -5
Lewisohn has, as has George Martin. Neither gave it a rave review. Revolution #9 was weird 40 years ago. I had to listen to my parents complain about it then. We see it in a different light after 40 years, but that doesn't make it any less unusual. You're right, Lewisohn and George Martin have heard it. And all the Beatles, and the recording engineers, and - and- lotsa folks. Clearly, when I said no-one had heard it, I meant "ordinary folks" like you and me. It doesn't matter whether neither Lewisohn or Martin gave it a "rave" review. I will make up MY mind if/when I hear it. And you are dead-set wrong about Rev9 being "weird" 40 years ago. It is a sound collage. It is a musical genre. Weird? No. It was "unusual" only in the sense that a popular music group did one. And isn't that what makes the Beatles such a great and interesting group - that they pushed the envelope for a "pop/rock" band so often? And THAT'S why I'd love to hear Carnival of Light: what did that wonderful band produce that day? It may be good, may be bad; I might like it or might not. But I've got a feeling it will be ... cool! I guarantee you that if you surveyed the public in 1968, "Revolution #9" would have been voted weird. I was referring to that, not how we look at it. It makes sense to us after all this time. It didn't to most people who listened to it back then. And I speak from experience on that one.
|
|
Joseph McCabe
Very Clean
A rebel to his last breath ...
Posts: 912
|
Post by Joseph McCabe on Nov 22, 2008 0:54:20 GMT -5
I guarantee you that if you surveyed the public in 1968, "Revolution #9" would have been voted weird. I was referring to that, not how we look at it. It makes sense to us after all this time. It didn't to most people who listened to it back then. And I speak from experience on that one. And I speak from experience too (I was 20 in 1968): it made total sense on first listen. It was obvious what it was. A sound collage, a portrayal of revolution. If one didn't get that, of course one would think it was weird. And that's quite OK. Those folk can go hum Michelle.
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Nov 22, 2008 5:44:57 GMT -5
I knew what it was. alright. But I thought it was weird and had no place on a Beatles album back in 68 and, gies what? That's exactly what I think now, too.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Nov 22, 2008 5:53:49 GMT -5
--------------------------------------- I guess for me the difference with CARNIVAL OF LIGHT is that -------- this montage doesn't appear (reading from Lewisohn's account) to have anything but random banging around and screaming to it. -------------- -----------------but from all accounts it sounds like something rather expendable, no matter how you look at it. Why don't you wait until you hear it? Why use the judgement of others ["it doesn't appear (reading from ...)", "from all accounts"]? Basically, you are just falling for a variation on a "hype" theme. Of course I'd have to wait until I hear it for myself until I can make an official or final judgement on the "track" itself; as it stands now, I can have no opinion of the actual finished product. But I am saying right here and now that I have no desire to hear it. I just don't. What were you on?
|
|
|
Post by superhans on Nov 22, 2008 6:05:08 GMT -5
I guarantee you that if you surveyed the public in 1968, "Revolution #9" would have been voted weird. I was referring to that, not how we look at it. It makes sense to us after all this time. It didn't to most people who listened to it back then. And I speak from experience on that one. And I speak from experience too (I was 20 in 1968): it made total sense on first listen. It was obvious what it was. A sound collage, a portrayal of revolution. If one didn't get that, of course one would think it was weird. And that's quite OK. Those folk can go hum Michelle. What's so good about making a 'sound collage' anyway? Give me a bottle of Jack Daniels and a tray of light refreshments and send me into Studio Two for the night and I'll knock you up a quick sound collage... ...I'll even give it a daft title and make it go on for eight minutes, if you want.
|
|
|
Post by OldFred on Nov 22, 2008 6:35:59 GMT -5
Even though it received a group vote, George Harrison might not have been that pleased to have 'Revolution 9' included on the White Album since it bumped 'Not Guilty' from the albums' line-up. It took years before we heard 'Not Guilty', first on the 1979 'George Harrison' album and finally the Beatles' version on 'Anthology 3'.
Besides 'Not Guilty', what other song recorded during the White Album sessions might have been included in lieu of 'Revolution 9'?
|
|
JMG
Very Clean
Posts: 412
|
Post by JMG on Nov 22, 2008 8:35:01 GMT -5
When I first heard Revolution 9 back in late November 1968 (I was 15), I thought it was weird. I knew it was a sound collage but my reaction was 'what is this doing on a Beatles album?' It still sounds weird to me today but it's part of the 'White Album' and I wouldn't have it any other way. One of the great things about CDs is you can hit the skip button and go right on to 'Good Night.'
Some of my friends still don't like 'Within You Without You' on 'Sgt. Pepper's' but I loved it when I first heard it and still love it today. There's no accounting for taste.
|
|
|
Post by rockstar2866 on Nov 22, 2008 14:19:33 GMT -5
[quote author=mccabe board=general thread=430 post=4773 If one didn't get that, of course one would think it was weird. And that's quite OK. Those folk can go hum Michelle.[/quote]
Will you let it go with Michelle? Lennon helped pen some of it. It's a fun song...all that it is meant to be. And there is NOTHING wrong with that.
|
|
Joseph McCabe
Very Clean
A rebel to his last breath ...
Posts: 912
|
Post by Joseph McCabe on Nov 22, 2008 15:48:52 GMT -5
|
|
Joseph McCabe
Very Clean
A rebel to his last breath ...
Posts: 912
|
Post by Joseph McCabe on Nov 22, 2008 15:55:12 GMT -5
Will you let it go with Michelle? Lennon helped pen some of it. It's a fun song...all that it is meant to be. And there is NOTHING wrong with that. What has the fact that Lennon contributed strongly to Michelle got to do with anything at all? I don't think Michelle was meant to be a "fun" song at all. I think it was meant to be a serious ballad. But if you like it, great. Sont les mots ... sorry, but those lyrics ... school French. Shudder.
|
|
Joseph McCabe
Very Clean
A rebel to his last breath ...
Posts: 912
|
Post by Joseph McCabe on Nov 22, 2008 16:05:27 GMT -5
All these quotes are from superhans.
It's not a matter of "so good". It just is. It would be just as silly to ask "What's so good about a melody anyway?".
Yes, but it would probably be atrocious. Just as there are good and bad, tasteful and untasteful, competent and incompetent in every sphere of human endeavor, attempts at sound collage vary in these ways too.
The Jack Daniels may or may not help. Why do I say your attempt would be atrocious? Because you don't think much of the genre. Ya gotta have respect!
What has the title and length got to do with anything?
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Nov 22, 2008 16:46:51 GMT -5
Yes, but it would probably be atrocious. Just as there are good and bad, tasteful and untasteful, competent and incompetent in every sphere of human endeavor, attempts at sound collage vary in these ways too. The Jack Daniels may or may not help. Why do I say your attempt would be atrocious? Because you don't think much of the genre. Ya gotta have respect! You never know, you might still like it and feel it wasn't atrocious. Have an open mind!
|
|
Joseph McCabe
Very Clean
A rebel to his last breath ...
Posts: 912
|
Post by Joseph McCabe on Nov 22, 2008 17:43:40 GMT -5
Yes, but it would probably be atrocious. Just as there are good and bad, tasteful and untasteful, competent and incompetent in every sphere of human endeavor, attempts at sound collage vary in these ways too. The Jack Daniels may or may not help. Why do I say your attempt would be atrocious? Because you don't think much of the genre. Ya gotta have respect! You never know, you might still like it and feel it wasn't atrocious. Have an open mind! Why do you always miss the point?
|
|
Joseph McCabe
Very Clean
A rebel to his last breath ...
Posts: 912
|
Post by Joseph McCabe on Nov 22, 2008 17:51:52 GMT -5
Just one other point that I could bother to pick up on, Joe:
No one is claiming - well, I'm certainly not - that Rev 9 is deep. If it has a fault, it's that it's rather obvious.
The thing that's annoying whenever people discuss Rev 9 is its nearly instant dismissal by many many people. And that's got nothing to do with whether you like it or not (for example, I don't personally like Yesterday, but I do admire the tune, the lyrics, and the arrangement). Few people are prepared to acknowledge the merits of something if they don't like it.
Other Beatle tracks that attract the same attitude by many are: Love You To Within You Without You Only A Northern Song Rain (I have seen this called "atonal": how is that for braindead?) I Am The Walrus
You get the idea.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Nov 22, 2008 17:53:11 GMT -5
I haven't missed any "point". But I think you've missed mine here - that being, even if you fully expect to find his collage atrocious (for the very reasons you've cited in advance) you still wouldn't "know" if you enjoyed a collage made "by someone who didn't think much of the genre" unless you actually tried it and opened your mind to that possibility.
|
|
Joseph McCabe
Very Clean
A rebel to his last breath ...
Posts: 912
|
Post by Joseph McCabe on Nov 22, 2008 17:56:33 GMT -5
I haven't missed any "point". But I think you've missed mine here - that being, even if you fully expect to find his collage atrocious (for the very reasons you've cited in advance) you still wouldn't "know" if you enjoyed a collage made "by someone who didn't think much of the genre" unless you actually tried it and opened your mind to that possibility. You silly sap: I did not "fully expect" to find it atrocious; read what I said again. My use of the word probably, backed by a reason, shows you're wrong.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Nov 22, 2008 17:58:57 GMT -5
No one is claiming - well, I'm certainly not - that Rev 9 is deep. Interpreting a bunch of wacky sound effects, an engineer saying "Number Nine" repeatedly, and tape loops where words like "watusi", "twist" and "Hold that Line!" are used as "obviously being about revolution" -- well, that's pretty deep, man.
|
|
Joseph McCabe
Very Clean
A rebel to his last breath ...
Posts: 912
|
Post by Joseph McCabe on Nov 22, 2008 18:48:25 GMT -5
OK Joe, one more time:
No, No - you don't get it (again!). "Watusi", "Twist", "No 9, No 9, ... are not about revolution. The whole thing is about revolution. The individual bits lose their original identity, and become part of a new whole. That's how a collage works!! Amazing what you learn on the internet these days: land-o'-goshen, who would've thunk it?
Oh, btw, I thought the "No 9" was from a language oral exam tape (it was a question number), but I'm hazy on that. Is my memory correct, or is Joe right when he said it was an engineer saying it? I know what Lewisohn says: it's from an exam tape, but ...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2008 20:06:32 GMT -5
There is only one Beatle track i don't care for and thats Revolution#9.If Carnival of Light is released by revisionist McCartney then i'm almost positive it'll be my dont care for Beatles track No.2.....I will confirm this when i hear it,just to satisfy the pedantic.....
I have the White Album on cd in my car,it's one ive ripped and burnt minus Rev #9,the album is much the better for it....
In fact John should have put that amateurish noise on something like 2 Virgins,it would have blended in quite well....
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Nov 22, 2008 21:34:58 GMT -5
When it comes to art, there seems to be two kinds of people. Those who are open to non-figurative and non-literal art (eg. Jackson Pollack's drip paintings, Revolution #9, John Cage . . . ) and those who are not and prefer their art to be realistic, figurative, and literal (the Mona Lisa, Beethoven's symphonies, Frank Sinatra, Hey Jude . . .). I can understand people not liking the avant garde, but as I said in our discussion in another thread about radical politics, society needs the outsiders. They move the agenda. They help prevent societies from stagnating. Maybe we need the "Revolution #9"s to make sure we don't have decades of "Mandy."
|
|
|
Post by superhans on Nov 23, 2008 4:40:30 GMT -5
Yes, but it would probably be atrocious. Just as there are good and bad, tasteful and untasteful, competent and incompetent in every sphere of human endeavor, attempts at sound collage vary in these ways too. The Superhans version would actually be pretty similar to 'Revolution 9' -- just a load of stuff chucked together more or less at random, sounding like a load of silly, pretentious twaddle. The only difference is that my name isn't John Lennon, so I wouldn't have a load of people all desperately trying to make sense out of my effort in an attempt to 'get the meaning'.
|
|
|
Post by superhans on Nov 23, 2008 4:43:12 GMT -5
In fact, the SuperHans masterwork would be entitled 'The felt hat and the toast-rack - parts 1-11'. It would include a kazoo and a banjo played backwards together with a heavily distorted Welsh male voice choir singing the Hallelulja Chorus in Swahili. It would be the sound of total cobblers.
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Nov 23, 2008 5:41:31 GMT -5
The ursamajor version would start with the sound of a guy having his back cupped followed by the sound of balloons bursting one by one and a baby having a tantrum, this would go on for nearly 2 minutes until a Gregorian chant played backwards starts up from the loudest to the lowest decibel for 30 seconds until it reaches equilibrium and the sound of wall being drilled is layered on top only for 1 second every 9 seconds. All of a sudden a hundred different cell phone ring tones kick in and the sound of a light switch being turned on and off segues into a sample of Revolution 9 and the words "Who's going to win it' are played over and over.
The piece is entitled Equinox at 2254
|
|
|
Post by superhans on Nov 23, 2008 6:18:36 GMT -5
The ursamajor version would start with the sound of a guy having his back cupped followed by the sound of balloons bursting one by one and a baby having a tantrum, this would go on for nearly 2 minutes until a Gregorian chant played backwards starts up from the loudest to the lowest decibel for 30 seconds until it reaches equilibrium and the sound of wall being drilled is layered on top only for 1 second every 9 seconds. All of a sudden a hundred different cell phone ring tones kick in and the sound of a light switch being turned on and off segues into a sample of Revolution 9 and the words "Who's going to win it' are played over and over. The piece is entitled Equinox at 2254 I'm loving your concept. It's a sort of abstract piece - a fusion, if you will, of contemporary styles - all wrapped up in an oblique, heavily nuanced concept of complete and utter randomness. It's an existentialist quagmire. It is, of course, a critique of man's inhumanity to man. That and the credit crunch... ...isn't it?
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Nov 23, 2008 6:27:21 GMT -5
Sound collages we have come to love (compilation CD)
Revolution 9 The felt hat and the toast-rack - parts 1-11 Carnival of light Equinox at 2254
I'm queueing up for my copy now!
Incidentally, isn't "queueing" an interesting word? I can't think of any other English word which has 5 consecutive vowels. My own contribution would be a track featuring a recitation of interesting words like queueing, bookkeeping (3 consecutive sets of double letters), facetious (all the vowels in order), assorted palindromes etc., but with occasional non-interesting words dropped in at random ("transitory" leaps to mind), plus words like axolotl which are not so much interesting as unusual, and no explanations offered as to what is included and why. It would be called "Words (interesting and not interesting)".
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Nov 23, 2008 6:27:54 GMT -5
The ursamajor version would start with the sound of a guy having his back cupped followed by the sound of balloons bursting one by one and a baby having a tantrum, this would go on for nearly 2 minutes until a Gregorian chant played backwards starts up from the loudest to the lowest decibel for 30 seconds until it reaches equilibrium and the sound of wall being drilled is layered on top only for 1 second every 9 seconds. All of a sudden a hundred different cell phone ring tones kick in and the sound of a light switch being turned on and off segues into a sample of Revolution 9 and the words "Who's going to win it' are played over and over. The piece is entitled Equinox at 2254 I'm loving your concept. It's a sort of abstract piece - a fusion, if you will, of contemporary styles - all wrapped up in an oblique, heavily nuanced concept of complete and utter randomness. It's an existentialist quagmire. It is, of course, a critique of man's inhumanity to man. That and the credit crunch... ...isn't it? Wow, glad you like it and glad you noticed my vision for this piece. Interesting that you mentioned the credit " crunch " because the piece actually ends with the sound of me taking a bite of a Cadbury Crunch followed by a credit card being cut by a pair of scissors. Wanted to see if anyone picked up on that.
|
|
|
Post by superhans on Nov 23, 2008 8:17:04 GMT -5
It would be called "Words (interesting and not interesting)". Two of my favourite words are 'shenannigans' and 'rigmarole'. I make a point of trying to work them into most sentences during conversations. By the way, I think with the addition of 'Words (interesting and not interesting)' we almost have a double album on our hands. Almost.
|
|
|
Post by joeyself on Nov 23, 2008 8:28:40 GMT -5
Sound collages we have come to love (compilation CD) Revolution 9 The felt hat and the toast-rack - parts 1-11 Carnival of light Equinox at 2254 I'm queueing up for my copy now! Incidentally, isn't "queueing" an interesting word? I can't think of any other English word which has 5 consecutive vowels. My own contribution would be a track featuring a recitation of interesting words like queueing, bookkeeping (3 consecutive sets of double letters), facetious (all the vowels in order), assorted palindromes etc., but with occasional non-interesting words dropped in at random ("transitory" leaps to mind), plus words like axolotl which are not so much interesting as unusual, and no explanations offered as to what is included and why. It would be called "Words (interesting and not interesting)". Palindromes, you say? Well, check out this one: JcS
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Nov 23, 2008 11:07:44 GMT -5
Sound collages we have come to love (compilation CD) Revolution 9 The felt hat and the toast-rack - parts 1-11 Carnival of light Equinox at 2254 I'm queueing up for my copy now! Incidentally, isn't "queueing" an interesting word? I can't think of any other English word which has 5 consecutive vowels. My own contribution would be a track featuring a recitation of interesting words like queueing, bookkeeping (3 consecutive sets of double letters), facetious (all the vowels in order), assorted palindromes etc., but with occasional non-interesting words dropped in at random ("transitory" leaps to mind), plus words like axolotl which are not so much interesting as unusual, and no explanations offered as to what is included and why. It would be called "Words (interesting and not interesting)". JSD's Unfinished Music #26 would consist simply and solely of ultra-sound recordings made of vectisfabber's stomach and lower intestines while at the 1969 Isle Of Wight Festival. The climax of the piece would be the final explosive purge of contents. I have always been a minimalist as to my art.
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Nov 23, 2008 11:33:22 GMT -5
. . . Incidentally, isn't "queueing" an interesting word? I can't think of any other English word which has 5 consecutive vowels. My own contribution would be a track featuring a recitation of interesting words like queueing, bookkeeping (3 consecutive sets of double letters), facetious (all the vowels in order), assorted palindromes etc., but with occasional non-interesting words dropped in at random ("transitory" leaps to mind), plus words like axolotl which are not so much interesting as unusual, and no explanations offered as to what is included and why. It would be called "Words (interesting and not interesting)". Can I contribute? Words that do not have a "u" following the "q", eg. "qat". How about "nasty" words that can be said in public, eg. dick, pussy, prick, ass, screw, balls, hummer . . . ;D
|
|