A few points:
Believe it or not, but I never laid down a blanket rejection of "heavy
arrangements" -- strings, singers, etc. At least not this year <g>. What I
was saying was in the context of the Bare stuff from the 60s that Chet
Atkins produced. I just didn't think it worked very well, because the
dissonance between the working-class/gritty sort of tunes, and the
suburban Pleasantville type production was just too off-putting. And I
can't believe that this was an artistic choice - a deliberate effort to
add tension to a tune. It was to broaden the audience. That's not bad, but
to this "narrow" listener, it stood out like a sore thumb. To me,
production is like makeup on women; when it draws attention to itself,
then it's not working. (When I discussed Dwight's record, "A Long Way
Home," last week, I wasn't criticizing the production -- I don't have any
problem with it -- I was just talking about it, raising some questions
about why folks made a big deal about Holler's arrangements, but didn't
emit a peep about Dwight's.)
As for Bobby Bare's intentions, you all are right. It's impossible to
project some notion of mine onto a guy whom I've never talked to (though
I'd like to have a chat with him). On the other hand, I am curious about
how Bare became an inspiration for the outlaw movement of the 70s. After
he got through with Chet in the '60s, just what the hell was he rebelling
against that caught the attention of Waylon and Billy Joe? Or was all that
outlaw rebellion just a profit-motivated pose? I really don't know the
answer to those questions, cuz in the 70s I accepted (and loved) all that
outlaw stuff without questioning it.
That's all for now, though I'll confess that David's analysis of this
topic pretty well blew me away. He added some layers of complexity to this
idea of heavy arrangement = bad, and stripped-down = good. And a good
point, too, about there's more than one way to skin a cat.
In the end, how we view "artistic choices" has a lot to do with what sort
of environmental filters have been installed in your own head over the
years. Growing up in the 60s and 70s, I learned to reject the "suburban
sound" -- strings and backup singers -- because that's what my dad always
had playing on the car radio. Como, Sinatra, Martin, Davis Jr., etc.
Stripped-down rock n roll was the thing, and the same sort of partiality
eventually led to my same feelings about blues, jazz and then country.
I know I'm biased, then, but on the other hand, I still believe that once
you accept your biases, and try to compensate for them, you can credibly
look at the production choices, artistic choices, whatever, on something
like "Detroit City," and decide, with some objectivity, that the fucking
thing sucks wind. Yeah, a joke.
Actually, despite my problems with the Bare/Atkins stuff, I still like to
listen to it, because the songs are so damn great and so is Bare's voice.
And, after giving "The Streets of Baltimore" another listen, I'll concede
that this one is pretty damn good. All for today (thankfully) -- Terry Smith
