Skip to main content

Reacting in sneering befuddlement to another SoulBoogieAlex post, I for one am tired of reading over-analytical posts by second-generation fans about Springsteen. I don't buy The Ten Who Made Springsteen or 'Bruce's every note of music builds historical bridges to other genre's and idols.'

Bruce is patently original. He may not be cool, but he is original.
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Originally Posted By: SoulBoogieAlex
I was still in diapers when Bruce hit the Hammersmith stage for the first time, you do the math wink

Bruce certainly is an original, but nothing is created in a vacuum. Nobody can deny that Springsteen draws heavily on R&R's past. Tracing that past can be interesting even though it takes just a tad more effort than coming up the next cynical remark.


Good post. I can read you better at under 100 words.

I think Bruce was less influenced at critical points in his direction by the artists and performers that he liked, but more by the ballads and jams of the time, which he transformed into drug-free shore rock and roll. Later on, the emotional pain of his lawsuit was a big influence, which gave us Darkness. After that, Mr. Krabs Jon Landau influenced his career and not much else.
Originally Posted By: SoulBoogieAlex
I was still in diapers when Bruce hit the Hammersmith stage for the first time, you do the math wink


Hammersmith was '76 right? Due to bedwetting brought on by being continuously bullied at school, I'm guessing you were in diapers up to the age of 14. That makes you 2nd generation.
- 7 = - 41
I'm curious to what ballads and jams you are referring to. Seems to me the early seventies had little to offer for an artist that's just oozing the classics of the genre.

I think people in general give Landau too much credit, much of Born To Run had taken shape before Landau even stepped to the plate. Landau was never credited as a co-author, as a producer his role was naturally limited to being a critical ear.
Three acts who were past their prime or dead when Springsteen had yet to set foot in the studio, I'd take that as a stretch to call to call them current. Besides Pink Floyd and the Dead making music of a totally different nature of course. Even though Floyd had a short resurgence when Springsteen released his first album, he never had much to do with acid rock. The first two albums were Dylan, Van and Chuck stirred together. I wonder if Bruce was even aware of the Dead at the time.
Originally Posted By: paulc
Originally Posted By: SoulBoogieAlex
I was still in diapers when Bruce hit the Hammersmith stage for the first time, you do the math wink


Hammersmith was '76 right? Due to bedwetting brought on by being continuously bullied at school, I'm guessing you were in diapers up to the age of 14. That makes you 2nd generation.


All to easy, but I think old age is slowly eating away your memory wink
Originally Posted By: SoulBoogieAlex
Three acts who were past their prime or dead when Springsteen had yet to set foot in the studio, I'd take that as a stretch to call to call them current. Besides Pink Floyd and the Dead making music of a totally different nature of course. Even though Floyd had a short resurgence when Springsteen released his first album, he never had much to do with acid rock. The first two albums were Dylan, Van and Chuck stirred together. I wonder if Bruce was even aware of the Dead at the time.


Oh, and Zeppelin was doing the acid rock thing at the same time too. And the first two albums were pure Bruce, nobody else.
Originally Posted By: el_jefe
Originally Posted By: SoulBoogieAlex
Three acts who were past their prime or dead when Springsteen had yet to set foot in the studio, I'd take that as a stretch to call to call them current. Besides Pink Floyd and the Dead making music of a totally different nature of course. Even though Floyd had a short resurgence when Springsteen released his first album, he never had much to do with acid rock. The first two albums were Dylan, Van and Chuck stirred together. I wonder if Bruce was even aware of the Dead at the time.


Oh, and Zeppelin was doing the acid rock thing at the same time too. And the first two albums were pure Bruce, nobody else.


I gotta say that the first two were rather "Dylan". And BTR was rather "Phil Spector" (wall o sound).

I think Bruce found his "voice" (whathaveyou) with Darkness. In no other time was Bruce so sure of who he was, and what he wanted to be. It shaped him personally and his music down to the core (bless that nasty lawsuit).

Voted "Most Likely To Be Called Asshole on an On-line Forum"

Originally Posted By: el_jefe
Originally Posted By: SoulBoogieAlex
Three acts who were past their prime or dead when Springsteen had yet to set foot in the studio, I'd take that as a stretch to call to call them current. Besides Pink Floyd and the Dead making music of a totally different nature of course. Even though Floyd had a short resurgence when Springsteen released his first album, he never had much to do with acid rock. The first two albums were Dylan, Van and Chuck stirred together. I wonder if Bruce was even aware of the Dead at the time.


Oh, and Zeppelin was doing the acid rock thing at the same time too. And the first two albums were pure Bruce, nobody else.


Agree to some extent, Zep was a big influence on his career before the E-Street Band, but I'd say he only dabbled in that Supergroup stuff. If I'd want to call Zep acid rock, I doubt it.
Originally Posted By: Gerk

I think Bruce found his "voice" (whathaveyou) with Darkness. In no other time was Bruce so sure of who he was, and what he wanted to be. It shaped him personally and his music down to the core (bless that nasty lawsuit).


I agree, all though I do feel that Nebraska album is one other moment where everything just fell together, even though he wasn't sure enough of himself to take it on the road solo and acoustic.

Oddly enough the Recent Seeger Session comes close in terms of finding his voice. No other Springsteen album sounds quite so relaxed, part of the live recordings and minimum overdubs, and so diverse yet cohesive on an album. I would have loved to see that happen on an ESB album. The River came close to that feel, but no cigar.
Originally Posted By: SoulBoogieAlex
Originally Posted By: el_jefe
Originally Posted By: SoulBoogieAlex
Three acts who were past their prime or dead when Springsteen had yet to set foot in the studio, I'd take that as a stretch to call to call them current. Besides Pink Floyd and the Dead making music of a totally different nature of course. Even though Floyd had a short resurgence when Springsteen released his first album, he never had much to do with acid rock. The first two albums were Dylan, Van and Chuck stirred together. I wonder if Bruce was even aware of the Dead at the time.


Oh, and Zeppelin was doing the acid rock thing at the same time too. And the first two albums were pure Bruce, nobody else.


Agree to some extent, Zep was a big influence on his career before the E-Street Band, but I'd say he only dabbled in that Supergroup stuff. If I'd want to call Zep acid rock, I doubt it.



Cream was more of an influence than Zep.
Quote:
Oddly enough the Recent Seeger Session comes close in terms of finding his voice. No other Springsteen album sounds quite so relaxed, part of the live recordings and minimum overdubs, and so diverse yet cohesive on an album. I would have loved to see that happen on an ESB album. The River came close to that feel, but no cigar.


The Seeger Sessions was just a well produced "jam-session", not much more. It did showcase what a "loose" Bruce would be like on an album (as his recording history dictates, he was always quite anal during the process otherwise). Bruce just happened to collect a number of talented musicians, some light-hearted (yet meaningful) material (that he was not so personally attached to), a producer that brought it all together, and some incredible recording techniques, and just "threw it out there". I dont think he thought it was going to be a real commercial success, or that the fan-base would accept it as much as the Euros did. He just had him some fun.

Now, your comment on Nebraska...

I think what happened with that recording is that Bruce was conflicted with his direction for the very first time in his career. He had always been in a band up to that point, and yet there was this desire to do solo work (as he had done for his John Hammond demos). I figure he always looked back at that event and wondered "What if..." if he had taken Hammond's vision literally (solo act). Nebraska (even though it started out as a collection of demos for the next "band" album) was the start of him venturing out in that direction. Testing the waters, if you will.

The Ghost Of Tom Joad, and subsequently Devils & Dust, and to a lesser yet relevant extent Tunnel, support this "split Bruce" theory. Since Nebraska, Bruce has released a solo, then a band, then a solo, then a band, etc release. According to US magazine, when he was suffering from writers block (and subsequently fired the E Street Band, released Lucky & Human), he was also suffering from a "split personality disorder of some kind. (I dont know about that... consider the source). However, it would explain (to some extent) what my point is.

The River was a mess. It should never have been 2 albums. Bruce was a writing machine and that got in the way of the production of the project. It represents what an album would sound like when Bruce is distracted, or his attention span is that of a 5 year old. Judging by all the outtakes from those sessions (the ones circulating anyway), a much better, tighter album SHOULD have been released. Hidesight is 20/20, I guess.

My 2 cents.

Voted "Most Likely To Be Called Asshole on an On-line Forum"

Originally Posted By: Gerk

The River was a mess. It should never have been 2 albums. Bruce was a writing machine and that got in the way of the production of the project. It represents what an album would sound like when Bruce is distracted, or his attention span is that of a 5 year old. Judging by all the outtakes from those sessions (the ones circulating anyway), a much better, tighter album SHOULD have been released. Hidesight is 20/20, I guess.

My 2 cents.


That is an interesting point, but I would say that The River is supposed to be all over the place.

Remember, Springsteen wanted to release an album that played like a slice of life. He wanted it to be a hodge-podge, and his selection of 'The River' as the album's title lends creedence to the idea that he wanted to emphasize the ebb and flow of his moods and to see if he could make sense of everyday life by representing it through all different types of music and characters, no matter where it took him.

Again, I could be wrong, but this is the way I always viewed it. I think after the thematic tightness of BTR and Darkness, Bruce wanted to let everyone knew he was still a musician first, and an artist second.
Originally Posted By: Morey
musician first, and an artist second.


In my mind, those terms are not mutually exclusive. My definition of a musician includes being an artist, in fact, it's the litmus test to quantify quality. Someone just playing notes as written is just a technician, however proficient they may be.
Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×