IkarisOne wrote:Well, I've not read the whole thing yet- more in my ADD skip-around technique, but it is absolutely Clash trainspotter heaven. Just brilliant. It's given me a new appreciation of the preparation and production of the album and the interaction between the various band members. What's more it's proves just what a blatant, naked surrender to the American market the album is. All of my worst suspicions are confirmed thanks to Marcus' relentless attention to detail- it's almost painful. The Clash were throwing everything they once stood for to the wolves- the wolves being the aging hippies who were the gatekeepers of American radio and music journalism. And they did so purely so they could be huge in America- which ironically had disappointing results. I haven't dug into that part yet but I think the perfunctory 1980 "tour" -if you can even call it that- proves just how disappointed the Clash were in the results.
Interesting parallel- Guns n Roses released a double album produced by Bill Price and toured for two and a half years. DId the Clash even manage two and a half months? The Police toured Outlandos in a station wagon and did four times as many US dates than the Clash did for London Calling. Its odd- as amazing as they played in 80 I can't listen to those shows anymore. There's something hollow there.
Great work, Marcus. Indispensable reading- love the track by track histories.
Ikaris, you know I love you like a much bigger determinedly contrary gung-ho gonzo freestyling brother... and I appreciate the props, but you're making the book out to be a trashing of all things Clash, which it ain't, and frankly I already get enough of that kind of crap with regard to Last Gang.
I don't say, and don't think, the album was a blatant surrender to the American market, more of a relaxing of the Year Zero punk pose to allow the band member's own musical and cultural interests to come through.
They were keen to break America, yes, but you have to remember that American's weren't listening to London Calling style music in 1980. They were listening to Foreigner and Styxx style music. So the Clash were trying to break the States on their own terms, rather than by pandering to prevailing tastes. The 'gatekeepers' you mention - people like Robert Christgau and Greil Marcus - were maybe arbiters of taste for an ageing minority in the USA, but I don't think their opinions meant that much to the Clash's more youthful core audience.
The 1980 US tour had to be short because Paul S had filming commitments on Ladies and Gentlemen the Fabulous Stains, aka Caroline Coon's Revenge. And after that, the Clash had to slot in Europe before they were contractually obliged to deliver another album by the end of 1980. They didn't have time for the kind of touring schedule you advocate. Which is pretty much guaranteed to burn a band out anyway.
'Trainspotter heaven', 'relentless attention to detail - it's almost painful'... some people would take those compliments as so heavily backhanded that they might as well have a knuckleduster attached. The superficial take on the album and its songs has already been done. The only point of revisiting London Calling is if you get right in there, turn over every stone and try and look at things anew. I'd be the first to admit that this kind of approach doesn't appeal to everyone. That said, I'd maintain that you don't need to be a Clash fanatic to get something out of the central 'stories behind the songs' section, because it's really the story of the evolution of 20th Century popular music.
On second thoughts, that sounds way too boring. Let's go with what Ikaris said...