True, there were times when I thought the Stones were worth of attention only after Satisfaction - Fool me, Red Heylin would slap my hand; now "The Rolling Stones in Mono" is a favourite. Them: What a great band name, listening now to this record in full for the first time. I remember listening to Gloria in the radio, I was very impressed (and "Baby Please Don't Go" which I already knew from AC/DC's Jailbreak '74) And soon after, by chance, getting my first Doors cassette (Alive She Cried) and loving Jim's version of Van's song. Made sense to me, you're right, the connection. They even played together it seems in '66 (only a photo survives). But the original by Them is gold.
Makes sense, and yes, it does fit. Monsters of course. Once I read somewhere that some youngsters named their bands using words to express what they thought about their parents, mostly animal-related: most surely Animals, Zombies.. Beetles, Monkeys? Pretty Things wasn't the case obviously.
Taking into account your point about the lineup being such a movable feast that basically anyone with a guitar in Belfast between 64 - 70 was probably in Them at some point, my favourite thing about Them, apart from the great songs, is that it is the band that unites Ireland's holy trinity. Eric Bell was in some version of Them for a while, as was John Wilson of Taste. Thus Van Morrison, Rory Gallagher and Phil Lynott's most direct connection lies with Them!
Another thing, while Them were relative latecomers, Van had been in Germany at the same time as The Beatles etc. in a band called The Monarchs, playing Hamburg etc. his main desire upon returning to Belfast was to create a R&B club in Belfast, which he did at The Maritime (as mentioned in your review). Another connection, Rory also played at the Maritme, as did Gary Moore.
I know all of this is useless information, but how and ever, there you go!
I admire without not quite agreeing with your defense of the british blues/r&b scene- I have a real soft sport for a lot of it, but I also totally understand why (Stones aside) the youfs would rather listen to Muddy Waters and Howlin Wolf if they're going to listen to that stuff at all. I look forward to seeing what you make of Van Morrison when you (I assume inevitably) get to him!
Honestly, I've never really understood why this has to be a matter of choice. "I Just Want To Make Love To You" punctures different parts of my brain when it's done by Muddy or by the Stones. If one makes an effort to exclude race politics a la "no white man can ever play the blues" variety (usually the main reason behind the preferential treatment), accommodating the different approaches is really not a problem.
I think for me I lodge the separation on strictly aesthetic grounds, where there's a certain grime and musculature that many of the (non-Stones/Animals) UK interpreters of that sound lacked. For "the youfs" I think it's a particularly American thing-you can never really get away from the ugliness of the racial dynamic here, so it's gonna taint people's view of that stuff even if the bands themselves were often worshipful of the black bluesmen etc. It's unfortunate but the kind of rigid posture the young are always adopting etc etc
I think you are overestimating how much they actually listen to the originals. When they dismiss early British Invasion, most of them do not actually go back and listen to Muddy, Wolf, Hooker, etc. because their perspective on it is 100% political. If they actually did take that time to do so, most of them would see that when the Yardbirds do I’m A Man, it is radically different than how Bo did it. Much of this perspective actually comes out of sheer ignorance more than well-thought out reasons of why their covers are bad on principle
True, there were times when I thought the Stones were worth of attention only after Satisfaction - Fool me, Red Heylin would slap my hand; now "The Rolling Stones in Mono" is a favourite. Them: What a great band name, listening now to this record in full for the first time. I remember listening to Gloria in the radio, I was very impressed (and "Baby Please Don't Go" which I already knew from AC/DC's Jailbreak '74) And soon after, by chance, getting my first Doors cassette (Alive She Cried) and loving Jim's version of Van's song. Made sense to me, you're right, the connection. They even played together it seems in '66 (only a photo survives). But the original by Them is gold.
They actually got their name from a sci-fi horror movie about giant ants:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4URRp39XOo
...totally appropriate for the overall vibe they got going, I'd say.
Makes sense, and yes, it does fit. Monsters of course. Once I read somewhere that some youngsters named their bands using words to express what they thought about their parents, mostly animal-related: most surely Animals, Zombies.. Beetles, Monkeys? Pretty Things wasn't the case obviously.
Taking into account your point about the lineup being such a movable feast that basically anyone with a guitar in Belfast between 64 - 70 was probably in Them at some point, my favourite thing about Them, apart from the great songs, is that it is the band that unites Ireland's holy trinity. Eric Bell was in some version of Them for a while, as was John Wilson of Taste. Thus Van Morrison, Rory Gallagher and Phil Lynott's most direct connection lies with Them!
Another thing, while Them were relative latecomers, Van had been in Germany at the same time as The Beatles etc. in a band called The Monarchs, playing Hamburg etc. his main desire upon returning to Belfast was to create a R&B club in Belfast, which he did at The Maritime (as mentioned in your review). Another connection, Rory also played at the Maritme, as did Gary Moore.
I know all of this is useless information, but how and ever, there you go!
I admire without not quite agreeing with your defense of the british blues/r&b scene- I have a real soft sport for a lot of it, but I also totally understand why (Stones aside) the youfs would rather listen to Muddy Waters and Howlin Wolf if they're going to listen to that stuff at all. I look forward to seeing what you make of Van Morrison when you (I assume inevitably) get to him!
Honestly, I've never really understood why this has to be a matter of choice. "I Just Want To Make Love To You" punctures different parts of my brain when it's done by Muddy or by the Stones. If one makes an effort to exclude race politics a la "no white man can ever play the blues" variety (usually the main reason behind the preferential treatment), accommodating the different approaches is really not a problem.
I think for me I lodge the separation on strictly aesthetic grounds, where there's a certain grime and musculature that many of the (non-Stones/Animals) UK interpreters of that sound lacked. For "the youfs" I think it's a particularly American thing-you can never really get away from the ugliness of the racial dynamic here, so it's gonna taint people's view of that stuff even if the bands themselves were often worshipful of the black bluesmen etc. It's unfortunate but the kind of rigid posture the young are always adopting etc etc
I think you are overestimating how much they actually listen to the originals. When they dismiss early British Invasion, most of them do not actually go back and listen to Muddy, Wolf, Hooker, etc. because their perspective on it is 100% political. If they actually did take that time to do so, most of them would see that when the Yardbirds do I’m A Man, it is radically different than how Bo did it. Much of this perspective actually comes out of sheer ignorance more than well-thought out reasons of why their covers are bad on principle