I grew up on Paul Simon. In high school when my peers were listening to Snoop Dog and Guns N’ Roses, I found myself attracted to the multi-cultural percusson and deep stories on Rhythm of the Saints. Same but different for Graceland.
To this day, I wonder why my tastes were so different. Maybe there is just something nerdy about the music. Of course, my dad listening to the whole Simon back catalog played a part.
Yes. I also grew up with Simon in the background. And also alot of Earth Wind and Fire. My parents were immigrants and we had alot of different music around the house. But, Talking Heads for me were the seminal band. Byrne/Eno's My Life in the Bush of Ghosts was such an exotic album I started searching the world for other sounds. When I bought my first Fela Kuti album around 1985 my friends thought it was very strange.
It was a very special time for music. I became a collector (I got employee discounts at Tower even though I didn't work there). But, when Nirvana hit the big time, labels stopped promoting that kind of music (I don't like the term 'world music' either - Byrne wrote an essay about that). The focus went elsewhere, and to be honest, it hasn't been the same since (confirmed by some friends at some special record labels).
I have a very similar experience. My parents weren't heavily into music, but my mother always played a Simon and Garfunkel tape in the car which lead me to the rest of Simon's discography once I was old enough to find it.
My peers - and bandmates - didn't share my appreciation. I vividly remember an argument with my high-school band that ended in a dog rough performance of Sweet Child of Mine at a school talent show which included a broken guitar string during a solo, inaudible vocals, and off beat drum fills.
Later in my music career, musician friends came to understand the beauty of his songwriting and musicianship. It was really great to finally share my affection for those songs.
Simon influenced my own songwriting more than any other artist.
If you want to hear something amazing, find a copy of Live from New York City, 1967. I'd heard plenty of Simon & Garfunkel before that, including many of their studio albums and some later live recordings; I enjoyed them but they didn't stand out to me. This album was eye-opening; it wasn't the songs (a bit over-earnest IMHO) nor somehow virtuoso individual performance, but the craftsmanship of their duet is beyond what I imagined for the genre, beyond anything I've heard from them or other singers. Perhaps their attention to their craft wasn't so obsessive later in their careers (I don't know), but you won't think of them or duets the same way again.
I also had a similar experience. My parents liked his Simon & Garfunkel albums, and I picked up on them because I liked the singer-songwriter and folksy tendencies. It was a bit of an anti-mainstream and old school reaction to the stadium-rock that was popular in the 80's (plus the Central Park concert was bigger than any rock concert ever, so there).
Then he had a hit on MTV with Chevy Chase, but never caught on in the same way that someone similar such as Peter Gabriel ever did (it's strange that I never realized the similarities between them until now). My Def Leppard loving friends still thought his music and especially the African vocals were weird and uncool. I later gravitated more towards electronic music and alternative, but kept buying his new albums through college.
I still like his music, and my daughter now loves the Graceland album as well, so Paul Simon was cool-dad music for 2 generations. I think I get credit for playing sound of silence for her before it got popular again. But to me his music hasn't aged well. I guess I still remember it as singer-songwriter and folksy, but now when I listen, it's mostly pop. Despite being more complex than the 3- and 4-chord melodies he was trying to outdo, the melodies seem catchy but not moving, the lyrics a bit trite--it all sounds better when explained by a critic.
The backstory about the personality and disputes is mostly new to me--I had only heard about his falling out with Garfunkel. But growing up I didn't know much about any musicians, who was in which band, nor really care. With all the mini biographies on Wikipedia, I now learn a lot more about the music I listened to, and often find myself realizing the connection between some bands, for example having the same producer. But I never idolized Simon or any other musician, so the stories don't change my experience of the music, though I do feel for the other artists.
Someone mentioned the quality of the Simon and Garfunkel duo, and I agree. Wednesday morning 3am is the least pop of their albums, with the best harmonies. The other folk group I liked with harmonies was Peter, Paul, and Mary--another hand-me-down from my parents and also to my own kid.
Yes, but for me it was the prog rock, as in Yes, King Crimson, Genesis et.al. That was in the elementary school, when others were listening to Nirvana and Cypress Hill.
Now of course my music taste has expanded to all the directions, from contemporary electronic to classical, jazz to stoner metal. I think there are always people in schools just not going with the flow when it's up to music. Sometimes it's hard, but later on you realize you still dig into the new stuff when your old peers just listen to the same songs as they did back in the school years.
I'm assuming we're roughly the same age given your peers taste in music. Ultimately, my love for Paul Simon's music comes from my parents - thats almost all they listen to.
One full day of playing failed to yield any results, but something caught Simon's attention on day two. "Paul goes, 'Hey, what's that?' We start playing what we have of it, and it is exactly what you hear on the record. So we're like, 'Oh, OK. We'll share this song.'" When Los Lobos found no trace of their names on the album's writing credits, they initially assumed that it had been an honest mistake. But when months went by with no restitution, the band's bemusement turned to anger. "It was not a pleasant deal for us," maintains Berlin. "I mean he quite literally – and in no way do I exaggerate when I say – he stole the song from us."
Graceland is the only album that I've bought three times, on LP, Cassette and CD. At this point, I think I know pretty much every sound on the album.
If you like Graceland, there's a really interesting mix (http://www.kleptones.com/blog/2012/06/28/hectic-city-15-path...) Paths to Graceland from the Kleptones recreating an idea of what the Gumboots II tape might have sounded like. It's interesting to hear a little more background that the tape actually existed.
If you want to make it 4 times, the 25th Anniversary Deluxe version includes some unreleased demo versions and an interesting story about how the title track came together. It's on Google Play Music and probably the other streaming services, too.
I like these lines, they pretty much nail the century so far:
These are the days of lasers in the jungle
Lasers in the jungle somewhere
Staccato signals of constant information
A loose affiliation of millionaires
And billionaires and baby
These are the days of miracle and wonder
It was a slow day
And the sun was beating
On the soldiers by the side of the road
There was a bright light
A shattering of shopwindows
The bomb in the baby carriage
Was wired to the radio
Amazingly prescient considering it was written in 1986.
[UPDATE] Actually, it turns out that the lyric is probably referring to this event in 1985:
... written in 1986 when terrorist bombs were common in many countries including the UK and Spain, and the Unabomber was active in the US. Terrorism did not begin in 2001.
1965-70 was the most fertile time in popular music. Right place, right time. Simon had well-developed talents for melody (which the British are usually better at) and poetry.
He also (unlike Joni) had a street-wise sense of humor and mystery (e.g. 'Me and Julio') to keep it real.
He never settled into a pattern, but (like Madonna and Neil Young) kept renewing himself. Hard to do, but doesn't fade away.
I'm surprised no one (including the OP) has mentioned "American Tune," which I thought was lifted from a Bach piece but which it turns out Bach himself lifted:
> The tune is based on a melody line from a chorale from Johann Sebastian Bach's St Matthew Passion, itself a reworking of an earlier secular song, "Mein G'müt ist mir verwirret," composed by Hans Leo Hassler.[3] The melody used for "American Tune" can be heard quite distinctly in part 1, number 21 and number 23 and in part 2, number 54. The melody to "American Tune" is practically identical to that of "Mein G'müt ist mir verwirret" and "O Sacred Head, Now Wounded," although Simon expanded on the tune. [0]
Knowing that, the wit of the title starts to rival the mastery of the song.
On the other side, I remember a drum video in which Carter Beauford of Dave Matthews Band shows how the drum groove from "#41" (or some early song of theirs) was taken directly from "50 ways to leave your lover." IIRC the segment where he shows how to play it is captioned "50 ways groove," not "#41 groove." Of course, that probably came from one of Simon's session drummers (not himself), but who cares. Art can much much more ruthless than that, and rightly so.
Graceland's lyrics and cultural meaning are tremendous. But don't overlook the absolutely awesome editing, sampling and production tricks. I'm a bit of a gear nerd and always marvel at the bass sounds, the tape loops they made of live drums and the really weird mix of "white/western" songwriting gelling with these african, often processed/resampled backing tracks.
The idea that someone can "own" a culture is patently absurd. Everything we do is a hopeless mix of cultures. Every culture is influenced by other cultures. It's like trying to stake out Mississippi water in the Gulf of Mexico.
And as a direct result of "Graceland", I've bought a number of CDs from African artists who I'd never have sought out otherwise.
We bitch when white men write only about white male culture as that is exclusionary. We also bitch about cultural appropriation if they write about anything else. We also also bitch about how evil and terrible it is if other cultures feel forced to put their culture on display to try to make money.
Yeah imagine people telling Picasso that he couldn’t make African-influenced art. Turns out his work actually led lots of people (myself included)to take African primitive art seriously.
It's a thankless job to try to convince anyone that what Picasso did was appropriation. Notoriously, he himself said (translated) "African art? Never heard of it."
Cultural appropriation hurts when it's done by someone in a position of relative power to amplify their own voice, rather than allow the foreign culture in question to be heard. This idea is not a politically radical form of thought policing, it's just good democratic practice and respect.
> Cultural appropriation hurts when it's done by someone in a position of relative power to amplify their own voice, rather than allow the foreign culture in question to be heard.
Well, given how many people became familiar with South African music—and Ladysmith Black Mambazo in particular—through Paul Simon's music, that seems to be a pretty good description of what he did.
Another example would be Led Zeppelin being inspired by blues artists on another continent. That fits the definition of "cultural appropriation", but do you seriously want to denounce Zep for that? Music is so rich and diverse and beautiful and ever-changing because of copying/blending styles from other cultures and genres.
(Those blues artists would be long forgotten if not for Zep, the Stones, Eric Clapton, and others copying/blending it.)
These are fine counterexamples. The existence of instances of borrowing that nobody objects to doesn't mean that the problem of cultural appropriation doesn't exist.
It's a question of nuance, on a case-by-case basis. It's not about something "fitting the definition" of cultural appropriation, it's about whether someone is hurt by it e.g. by having their voice or agency denied. It's a subjective thing.
Showing me a piece of software with no bugs doesn't disprove the existence of other, buggy, software...
Well, a Google search finds a number of articles/posts on the topic which make the observation that more nuance is needed in the conversation. So you are probably right that it is typically lacking, though the word nuance isn't totally absent from the discussion.
How can someone take something they've never heard of seriously? Have you heard and evaluated all musical styles from all cultures? I'm sure nobody has - do you regard that as a real problem?
> Everything we do is a hopeless mix of cultures... It's like trying to stake out Mississippi water in the Gulf of Mexico.
Cultures influence each other, but it’s silly to argue they don’t have a meaningful geographic origin. Italians are right to take pride in Italian food. Would you say a carnitas taco is equally Mexican and Chinese?
Cultures are a real thing, usually tied to real places and real people. Pretending otherwise is approbation, but it’s also just rude and incorrect.
> silly to argue they don’t have a meaningful geographic origin
I'm not arguing that, nor am I arguing that one shouldn't take pride in one's culture.
> Cultures are a real thing, usually tied to real places and real people. Pretending otherwise is approbation
That is a new definition of appropriation. For example, the "walk like an Egyptian" dance is now considered cultural appropriation, yet it explicitly says it is Egyptian.
To this day, I wonder why my tastes were so different. Maybe there is just something nerdy about the music. Of course, my dad listening to the whole Simon back catalog played a part.
Anyone else have a similar interest?