Odile W Husband stuff

[Neil.]

Aw, I wish Elvis wasn't doing this new stuff, really.

He has painted himself into a corner - suspicious of journalists, he's interviewing himself, and coming across as self-obsessed and defensive.

It even seems he might have been having a look at fan messageboards (nothing wrong with that - I would, if I was famous!) but I suspect he could even be referencing previous discussions on this very message board about arcane terminology on his last album, for example.

The stuff about musicals sounds very defensive, expressing his frustration at his lack of progress in this area, and his inability to complete a dramatic score - but, as usual, blaming anyone but himself.

Gah, I love Elvis - I wish he'd have some sort of epiphany whereby he wasn't so angry about negative responses to his work - especially as, historically, he has had a good press, and amazing endorsement (has Paul McCartney asked anyone else to co-write with him, for example?)

Elvis, you're a genius - you don't need to worry about critics, whether professional ones or internet forum fusspots. Keep writing, keep performing - you're great, you don't have to worry about them. Please notice that most of us love you - you seem to notice the criticism but not the adoration!

That said, this is just my interpretation - he could be chilled about it all! It's just that his new prose suggests otherwise - an ornate, humorous conceit which seems to hide a great deal of anger, and a very large ego - only Elvis is fit to interview Elvis. I guess geniuses are going to have a large ego, if anyone's going to, but it does seem to lead to excessive defensiveness. Why does he care? He's one of the greatest artists of all time!

That's how it seems to this fan, at least.

[Jack of All Parades]

Unfortunately this defensiveness is nothing new for EC; it has been happening for some time. As one of those 'internet forum fusspots' , like yourself, lack the 'hubris' to think he gives a care what I or you think. If he bristles at anything it may very well be this veneration of him as a 'genius'. I strongly suspect he views himself as a working musician fortunate to be able to make a living doing what he enjoys most- making and playing music. I do not for a minute think he feels himself a 'genius', a term which gets bantered about too much by people. I equally suspect that this new persona is a way of insulating himself further from our and the presses preoccupation with him and the minutia of his life.

OWH: In the last years, you seem more and more drawn to arcane language and historical context. Do you spend much time on detailed research?
EC: One makes you forget the other.
OWH: In what sense?
EC: You must memorize and then destroy, just like a spy movie.
All of the words, arcane or otherwise, animate the characters and construct the worlds they walk in. But these little dramas and comedies are also works of imagination and you know how dreams can be distorted versions of waking life.
Only prigs and pedants hold songs up to the light, looking for clues, as if decoding them could carry you into an exact replica of the past, a facsimile of the truth.
Those looking for absolute veracity seem to forget that history is not only written, as they say, by the victors but it is also printed in bad translation, via a false or faulty memory.
We can only speculate as to how the air felt around your face, how the knife of a cruel word twisted in the heart.
OWH: So, historical accuracy is not of primary importance to you?
EC: It seems rather missing the point that we should fixate on the buttons on a coat.

I like this take in his self interview- as he says only 'prigs and pedants' get twisted up in the words.

[FAVEHOUR]

Personally, I'm enjoying these "interviews". It's just a different form of him writing liner notes for the record, putting it in a formalistic context and addressing the topics he wants to. It's certainly revealing things a standard interview would not.

I don't read his discussion of unfinished works, uncompleted avenues as defensive. He's writing this, he could have avoided the topic altogether. Why bring up projects we never even heard about if he was worried about how we would react to the prospect of something that is never going to happen? (Unless he's just teasing those of us, myself included, who tend to spend much too much time thinking about such things.) His approach to his work and his working process has always been very organic, for the last 20-25 years or so, it just develops naturally; and if it doesn't, on to the next possibility. If he was one of those guys who only put out a record every 5 years or so, it would be highly upsetting to read of all these roads not taken. Happily, he continues to motor forward, on one avenue or another, at a consistently high standard.

[wordnat]

I've always seen EC's bullshit "modesty" for the sham that it is. He knows he's a badass!

[cwr]

I like the self-interviews, too. He asks himself questions that other journalists wouldn't think to ask.

As for the defensiveness, well... He's always been prickly about any kind of criticism, but I'd argue that these kind of reactions have also given us more than a handful of great songs.

Listening to the 30-second clips has me super-excited about NR. Love the self-harmonies, love the different kinds of sounds and song styles. It has the feeling of a MAJOR Costello album, doesn't it?

[krm]

I like the self-interviews, too. He asks himself questions that other journalists wouldn't think to ask.

The questions are usually quite relevant, but the answers........

[Jeremy Dylan]

I love the interviews! Informative and hilarious.

[Ypsilanti]

I like the self-interview, too. It's an interesting read--full of real information. We all just read it and learned a bunch of stuff we didn't know before--not just about the record, but also about the session work with Lucinda Williams, the fact that "I Hope" is a cover, etc.

When National Ransom comes out there will be plenty of time for all the lazy, poorly-researched, inaccurate, sniping, carping interviews and reviews. It will be the same useless, recycled crap we get with every record. It's amazing to me that Elvis--or any other artist in his position--can find the necessary patience and grace to put up with all that bullshit. I would go nuts from the tedium & stupidity.

If Elvis wants to control the message a bit...good for him! He's certainly doing it in service of the record. I'm sure he's very proud of NR (and I suspect also has a feeling this one is going to be "special"). It's perfectly reasonable for him to want to send his creation out into the world with the best possible chance for success.

I find the "Odile" interviews playful & funny. For example...

OWH: You are making this up, aren’t you?
EC: I am most certainly not, Mrs. Husband.

C'mon--"Mrs. Husband"? That's adorable!

Regarding the issue of Elvis' "defensiveness", I'll say this...

Elvis' quick Irish temper is just part of the package, right? Perhaps even part of his charm. If you make him mad, he might punch you in the face. Or write a scathing letter to the editor. Or write a withering revenge song about you. Or hold a grudge. Personally, I endorse all these behaviors. But that's just me. I'm a grudge-holder, myself. I haven't been privy to every instance of Elvis getting pissed-off at criticism of his music, but I've read quite a few things. And maybe he has mellowed with age, but what I notice is this...he gets irritated by people who don't understand--or don't want to understand--or even try to understand--what he's doing. And this is far from a rare occurrence. He's irritated by stupid criticism--by people who don't know what the hell they're talking about, by critics who have a pre-formed agenda about what they want the music to be, by people who want him to keep repeating 1978 over and over again, by reviewers who clearly haven't listened to the music very carefully, if at all. And also by people who say shitty things about his wife.

And why shouldn't this kind of obnoxiousness piss him off? It would certainly piss me off. It would certainly make me defensive.

Elvis is an artist and his songs are his artwork. He makes them out of thin air, using the sweat & toil of his brain and his soul and his decades of practice and experience. Saying, "that's a crappy song" is not the same thing as saying, "you drive a crappy car". There has to be a different standard--a different scale of permit-able defensive responses when someone's artwork is involved. Attacks on an artist's work are really attacks on the self--it's impossible to separate the two. Anyone who's ever been involved in a creative endeavor knows what I mean.

I would also like to point out that one of Elvis' sharpest critics over the years has been Elvis, himself. It's all right there in the songs...

Regarding the issue of Elvis' giant ego...

I keep reading about this--it's often referred to, of course. However, I'm starting to think of it as something like an urban legend. People who actually know him, like Paul McCartney, Allan Toussaint, his wife, his father, T-Bone Burnett, Roseanne Cash, Twyla Tharp--to name a few--describe him as generous, unselfish, patient, a good listener, etc. I'm sure you've all read the same articles I have. And we've all seen how generous he is with people he shares a stage with. So how, exactly, do those things add up to an inflated or unhealthy ego? I'm just suggesting that there is likely a big difference between the person and the persona (created by Stiff Records all those years ago). Since none of us really knows him, why not assume the best instead of the worst?

[Jack of All Parades]

Ypsilanti- amen-could not agree more-if it gives him pleasure to play within this persona by all means enjoy it. Seems to be a trend these days what with the recent release of the Casey Afleck film "I'm Still Here" or the Dylan biopic by Todd Hynes of a few years ago. After all, we all have a different perceived approach to our favorites- I will never see EC in the same way that you do and vice/versa. I do think that there is an inherent cause for concern when one's idols are put too high on a pedestal and one begins to take offense at legitimate criticism. Too often on this site I notice a tendency to vilify any person who does not worship a given artist unequivocally; people can take a reasoned opposing view. I would hope we realize that EC and other artists do create dross along with their gold. It always brings to mind for me the famous anecdote concerning James Joyce- one day an admirer stopped him on the street and wanted to shake the hand of the man who wrote Ulysses. Joyce shot back "it has done a lot of other things, too!".

[Ypsilanti]

Too often on this site I notice a tendency to vilify any person who does not worship a given artist unequivocally; people can take a reasoned opposing view. I would hope we realize that EC and other artists do create dross along with their gold.

The point I was trying to make is...none of us really know Elvis. We don't have dinner at his house or talk to him on the phone or meet him for coffee. He's, to some extent, an abstraction. We have no way of actually knowing whether he's a nice, humble guy or a total dick. But in spite of a lot of evidence to the contrary, I read over and over again on this board that he's an egomaniac, can't stand any criticism, is delusional about his own work, is obsessed with his place in music history, is filled with bitterness, and so on.

Of course, EC has been many unpleasant things in his life--cokehead, adulterer, bully, etc. Surely, there is plenty for him to regret. But overall he's probably a decent person. It seems his parents raised him right. Nobody is forcing him to fly to San Francisco next month to put on a concert to raise money for his friend's sick child, for example. I'm always a little surprised at how willing the members of this board--his most die-hard "fans"--are to say really negative stuff about him. Since we don't really know, why assume the worst?

[cwr]

I think EC's apparent personal flaws are part of what make him interesting, and none of them are so egregious as to offset all the nice qualities he also seems to have, not least of which is an absolute love of music and musicians.

He also seems to be well-liked by most musicians he comes into contact with. Or, at bare minimum, well-regarded.

I try not to link my perception of an artist as a person (which is usually based on very little except what's out there in the public realm, not all of which, of course, can be trusted) to what I think and feel about their art. It's not always easy, because a lot of great art is an extension of who the artist is, so there is a link.

I've personally witnessed Lou Reed being a total asshole to a sound tech who appeared to be totally undeserving of such public scorn. Based on this and lots of other things I've heard, have led me to the conclusion that Lou Reed is kind of a dick. I still love The Velvet Underground and tons of his solo work.

EC can be prickly. He's probably been a prick to plenty of people over the years. He's also, as noted, been terribly kind to lots of people, friends and strangers alike. He has an ego. He's also written literally hundreds of great songs. Take out the part about writing hundreds of great songs and I could be talking about myself.

It's fun to observe when he's seeming a little full of himself, it's interesting to point out when he's saying or doing something that seems strange or somehow off-kilter or misguided. Costello himself has not shied away from pointing out the foibles of others. I think that's part of what an Internet message board discussion is all about.

Having said that, I'd almost always rather talk about what's great about Costello than something negative. This guy has made the records I love the most, and he has turned me onto other people's music that I never would have listened to. It's no exaggeration to say that 70 percent of my music collection can be traced back to that first Costello record I ever bought, The Juliet Letters. It completely opened my ears to music in ways that eventually led to appreciating country, classical, swing, hip-hop, folk, etc.

So if I occasionally complain about how unimpressive his website has been over the years, I should maybe spend a little more time talking about how awesome he is as well. I sometimes forget to do that, and I think the Internet would maybe be a slightly nicer place if more people remembered that it's actually okay to like something and say so. That kind of thing has kind of been derided by cynics as "fanboy worship" or other such terms, but since when is it bad to like stuff? When did it become cooler to be a complainer? (I'm as guilty of this as anybody, but I'm trying to be better about it...)

[Jack of All Parades]

Ypsilanti-agree very much regarding the private EC- do not know him, never will- though my brother in law has spent some time around him and has had very nice things to say about him. That was the point of my Joyce anecdote. I think you misread me; my point has nothing to do with him personally[never have been particularly concerned about the daily minutiae of the man's life- that is private as far as I'm concerned and has no place for me]- I suspect like you do that he is an extremely decent and caring person for those around him and for the world he lives within. My point has only to do with your statement regarding criticism of his musical efforts by professionals and lay people. You take a stance that any criticism is unfair when it comes to EC's musical efforts. That it is biased, ignorant, has an axe to grind, is ill informed, etc. I am simply wary of such an approach to any artist. I value reasoned criticism that is founded on real listening, viewing or observation and knowledge of the piece of work. I suspect EC does as well as it is hard for me to believe any artist wants only acolytes worshiping at his/her alter who fawn at every creation by that artist. How else do you discern the solid from the mediocre or the gold from the dross?

CWR-you have a sound approach- agree with you that EC has provided me with plenty of my favorite music of the last 30 some years. My tastes however were probably formed in a comparable time frame as his growing up in the same years of the sixties and seventies. We seem to share a great many similarities in the artists we like. I just will always advocate that there should be room for reasoned disagreement concerning a work of the imagination. Not everything an artist produces is of an excellent nature. Valid criticism like you provide from time to time is a welcome thing for me. I also like it when you put the cheering pom poms on.

[Ypsilanti]

You take a stance that any criticism is unfair when it comes to EC's musical efforts. That it is biased, ignorant, has an axe to grind, is ill informed, etc.

No. I'm not saying ANY criticism is unfair. I'm saying most "professional" critics are lazy idiots who produce useless crap. I am also saying it's inappropriate to make judgments about Elvis, personally, as if we are actually privy to the real facts of his life/habits/personality, because we are not privy to those facts and it's all speculation.

And I totally agree, by the way...private lives are private and are no one's business.

[Jeremy Dylan]

People who actually know him, like Paul McCartney, Allan Toussaint, his wife, his father, T-Bone Burnett, Roseanne Cash, Twyla Tharp--to name a few--describe him as generous, unselfish, patient, a good listener, etc. I'm sure you've all read the same articles I have. And we've all seen how generous he is with people he shares a stage with. So how, exactly, do those things add up to an inflated or unhealthy ego? I'm just suggesting that there is likely a big difference between the person and the persona (created by Stiff Records all those years ago). Since none of us really knows him, why not assume the best instead of the worst?

Having spent all of seven minutes in the man's company, during which he extremely warm and friendly, I can't speak personally, but I've heard nothing but good things from, for example, Jim Lauderdale, who's spent a good deal of time touring with the man.
It's also worth pointing out that he may be quite differently adjusted now to how he was in the late 70s when his popular persona was first formed.

[Top balcony]

It's also worth pointing out that he may be quite differently adjusted now to how he was in the late 70s when his popular persona was first formed.

This early career "attitude" can be entirely attributed to the Cockney devil which was en habiting his vocal chords at the time, particularly during on stage announcements. Once the exorcism was performed, and Scouse became his standard diction, the horribleness evaporated, as you would expect.Certainly that's been my experience at several meet-n-greets when he has been very patient and good humored.

However, he does seem to retain a special look for guitar roadies who appear on stage any slower than Hussein Bolt, although I put this down to the pressure to keep-the-show-going seamlessly, than any character fault.

And I really like Odile W Husband stuff.

Colin Top Balcony

[johnfoyle]

Interesting bits of the 'epilogue' -



http://www.elviscostello.com/news/Elvis ... pilogue/73

When I am home in Canada, minding my own business in the grocery store or the tobacconist, barely a day goes by without someone mentioning the show (Spectacle) and artists they may have enjoyed or even discovered. That’s quite remarkable.

Are there still tobacco only stores in Canada? If so, what's Elvis doing in them? Is Diana still smoking?

The only song by The Doors that I like is “Break On Through To The Other Side” and I don’t think that involves any crooning. But the opening of Iggy Pop’s “Turn Blue” is a fine a croon as one could hope to hear. I based "Little Triggers" on that for "This Year's Model".

Iggy Pop’s “Turn Blue” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfUM_NOiWqs



OWH: Tony Millionaire’s illustration would look good on an L.P. jacket
EC: It will.
You can never be certain about these things going in but I always thought that "National Ransom" was composed as a double album, so you might say that the vinyl edition is the real record.

Yippee!

OWH: So what happened to “Condemned Man” and “Poor Borrowed Dress”, who songs featured in the show I saw but are absent from “National Ransom”
EC: We recorded them. Their time will come.

OWH: Have you sent “That's Not the Part of Him You're Leaving” to George Jones yet?
EC: No, but I have sent it to Solomon Burke.

If people were to hear some of the shorthand that is used in the studio they might think we’d taken leave of our senses. But if I say to Jeff Taylor, sitting at the piano, “Think Harry Lauder” just before counting off “Jimmie Standing In The Rain”, he knows what I’m talking about.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Lauder


Sir Henry Lauder (4 August 1870 – 26 February 1950), known professionally as Harry Lauder, was a Scottish entertainer, described by Sir Winston Churchill as "Scotland's greatest ever ambassador!"

For all we know. Mrs. Husband, you too are the work of a committee, just a series of curiosities and enquiries, prompted with the whispers of lovers, the jealousy of rivals, the echo of your own loathing and dread or whatever else you pull out of that Hessian postal bag of yours.


OWH: Was there a real “Alison”?
EC: Yes, he played with Buddy Holly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_Allison


L to R: Jerry Allison, Joe Maudlin, and Buddy Holly

Jerry Allison (born Jerry Ivan Allison, August 31, 1939, in Hillsboro, Texas) is an American musician, best known for being the drummer for The Crickets and co-writer of their Buddy Holly hit "Peggy Sue".

[Jack of All Parades]

Thank you- John- that is first class fun!

[Poor Deportee]

Well, I find those 'interviews' to be a lark. An 'independent Catholic journal' called 'The Inquisitor' -

There certainly are tobacconists in Canada, even in health-crazy Vancouver, whose environs both EC and I inhabit. I suspect it was just a whimsically Victorian reference, though.

As for EC being or not being a jerk, in interviews he has frequently come across as hostile and paranoid about music critics and criticisms of his work - to an unseemly degree. I found this especially true of North. I'm a fan with great respect for his work, but if I were to review that album, I'd agree with most of the reviews I read at the time, which generally cast it as admirable but a bit too formal to really convince. EC's reaction to any and all such criticism seemed to be completely overblown: like only a drooling moron (likely one with some sort of malefic personal agenda) could possibly fail to declare the record a masterpiece. At times he even explained his flight from Britain in terms of the critical dismissal of North. It was all a bit much. From his early persona to his total casting out of Bruce Thomas to his seemingly intense and recurring bouts of self-loathing and drama queen declarations of 'quitting showbiz,' there are lots of indicators of a King Kong-sized ego.

Does it matter? Not a jot or tittle. Look to the art, not the artist.

[bambooneedle]

Will I enjoy the album less if I don't get clued up on all this stuff? It should stand on its own . I'm not going to reach for this stuff if the album is failing to grab me.

[Jeremy Dylan]

I wouldn't think any of this is essential, just fun.