I am not sure yet. The chronological strategy makes it difficult to incorporate archival releases on a systematic basis - fortunately, the true flood of archival releases for bands and artists does not seriously begin until about 1966-1967, so there's quite a way to go - but I'll probably have to make room for an occasional exception. We'll see eventually, and I'm way past the foolishness of trying to make life plans for anything more than a couple of weeks ahead anyway...
For all my rock and roll love, I really dwell on the empathy and intensity of some modern compositions. Be it for deeper lyrics or, the musical impulse (from up there?). So for me, a formally catholic guy who won't go to Church (maybe for a baptism, under threats), it's funny to see how formative Gospel has been to such pieces of music. And even funnier seeing me shed a tear or two when it all comes together in "I was born by the river/In a little tent" (here I'll take "You hear them moanin' their lives away"), or heck even in that Whoopi movie about nuns who discover a bit of rock and roll in their souls. Maybe I'm a bit of a believer :D
I simply suppose that as long as one believes in anything - even things and ideals as remote from organised religion as possible - it's never too difficult to find common ground with people who believe in other things. The problem with things like Gospel music is not the sentiment but rather the rigidness and conservatism of the form, but in small doses it's always acceptable.
Surely George, enough beloved artists of yours dabbled in pre-rock pop you don't like for you to eventually review some *authentic* pre-rock pop you don't like, rather than Marvin Gaye or Sam Cooke trying to do it!
The problem is that, even if some of pre-rock pop is listenable, almost none of it is reviewable. I have never encountered a single review of a Sinatra album that would be interesting for me to read.
That's fair. I think there are at least a few Sinatra records that would be worth your time (he did a baroque pop concept album about a divorced father called "Watertown" in 1970 that's quite good-although it predictably flopped- and most of those "sad drunk bastard" albums in the fifties are great) but I think he'd be very hard to fit into your "every album reviewed in order" schema.
One thing's for sure, I'd rather hear Otis Redding sing "Try A Little Tenderness" than Bing Crosby sing it. Many great soulsters often sing that material in a more listenable way than most pre-rock pop artists.
So, how do you plan to handle Harlem Square Club? Will it be reviewed when you hit 1963 or do we have to wait until you get to 1985?
I am not sure yet. The chronological strategy makes it difficult to incorporate archival releases on a systematic basis - fortunately, the true flood of archival releases for bands and artists does not seriously begin until about 1966-1967, so there's quite a way to go - but I'll probably have to make room for an occasional exception. We'll see eventually, and I'm way past the foolishness of trying to make life plans for anything more than a couple of weeks ahead anyway...
For all my rock and roll love, I really dwell on the empathy and intensity of some modern compositions. Be it for deeper lyrics or, the musical impulse (from up there?). So for me, a formally catholic guy who won't go to Church (maybe for a baptism, under threats), it's funny to see how formative Gospel has been to such pieces of music. And even funnier seeing me shed a tear or two when it all comes together in "I was born by the river/In a little tent" (here I'll take "You hear them moanin' their lives away"), or heck even in that Whoopi movie about nuns who discover a bit of rock and roll in their souls. Maybe I'm a bit of a believer :D
I simply suppose that as long as one believes in anything - even things and ideals as remote from organised religion as possible - it's never too difficult to find common ground with people who believe in other things. The problem with things like Gospel music is not the sentiment but rather the rigidness and conservatism of the form, but in small doses it's always acceptable.
Surely George, enough beloved artists of yours dabbled in pre-rock pop you don't like for you to eventually review some *authentic* pre-rock pop you don't like, rather than Marvin Gaye or Sam Cooke trying to do it!
The problem is that, even if some of pre-rock pop is listenable, almost none of it is reviewable. I have never encountered a single review of a Sinatra album that would be interesting for me to read.
That's fair. I think there are at least a few Sinatra records that would be worth your time (he did a baroque pop concept album about a divorced father called "Watertown" in 1970 that's quite good-although it predictably flopped- and most of those "sad drunk bastard" albums in the fifties are great) but I think he'd be very hard to fit into your "every album reviewed in order" schema.
One thing's for sure, I'd rather hear Otis Redding sing "Try A Little Tenderness" than Bing Crosby sing it. Many great soulsters often sing that material in a more listenable way than most pre-rock pop artists.