peterbirks: (Default)
 
 
2017 - a year of consumption

Back at the end of November 2016 I decided to keep a list of much of the material that I read, or watched (i.e., books, films and TV series), or music that I listened to for the first time. The general aim was to reach a "target of consumption". I've only got a finite number of years left (as have we all, apart from my two demi-god immortal readers) so I would like to have a rough idea of how many films and books I get through in an "average" year.

My targets turned out in places to be way-too optmistic and in others to be reasonably accurate.

Albums:
I wanted to listen to 200 new albums; I managed 49.

Films:
I wanted to see 100 "new" films; I managed 48.
I set myself 50 Lovefilm rentals, and managed 42, 10 of them in the final month before Lovefilm shut down.
I wanted to watch 100 "recorded" movies from TV, but managed only 40.

On the books front:
20 non-fiction, and I exceeded this with 24.5 (I'm half-way through Paul Johnson's "The Birth Of The Modern"). Four of these were "doorstoppers". So I've done well there.
A target of 40 novels was missed by 8. However, of the 32 I read, three or four were rather long. I could have done better.

TV:
Finally, where I watched far more than I thought I would (at the expense of recorded movies) was TV series. The quality of television drama has improved, and some TV series are closer to "long films". I imagined that I would watch 10 series, and I ended up watching 28.

For films I managed 130 in total, while for books I managed 57. There were maybe three or four more "re-reads" on Kindle (Trollope, mainly).

So, for December. I thought I would do a little of my "best of 2017".

Albums:

Often my favourite album is the last one I listened to. Many of the albums date back decades (I note that the "mean" year is 2004).
So my favourite "oldies but newies" were:

1. A New World Record: ELO

2. Lodger: David Bowie

3: Heroes, David Bowie

4: Five Bridges, The Nice.

Of course I had heard all of these before, but I had not "possessed" them or listened to them all the way through for more than 20 years.

Disappointments were:
All The Young Dudes (Mott The Hoople),
Several other David Bowies
The Nice's Thoughts of Emerlist Davjack
Two early Fleetwood Mac albums.
None of these got many playings.

The best "new" (or newish) albums. Very hard to decide.

1. Planetarium, Sufjan Stevens

2. Public Service Broadcasting Live at Brixton Academy

3. Benjamin Clementine, I Tell A Fly

4. The Far Field, Future Islands

5. Pablo, Kanye West

6. Alone In The Universe, Jeff Lynne's ELO

7. Puberty 2, Mitski

Disappointments were:
Revolution Radio, Green Day;
I like it when you sleep, The 1975;
99%, Kaytranada;
You Want It Darker, Leonard Cohen;
Home Counties, Saint Ettienne;
The Bride, Bat For Lashes;
Sleep Well Beast, The National;
Goths, The Mountain Goats;
A Moon Shaped Pool, Radiohead;
Skeleton Crew, Nick Cave and The Bad Seeds.

Once again, none of them were awful, but they have't got many multiple plays.

Honourable mentions for "neither old nor really new".
The Origin Of Love, Mika;
Random Access Memories, Daft Punk. Both wonderful.

Public Service Broadcasting and Benjamin Clementine dominate my modern music listening at the moment. But "Planetarium", every time I play it, leaves me aghast at how good Sufjan Stevens can be.

Next blog: Movies, old and new.

The 1960s

Dec. 28th, 2013 01:00 pm
peterbirks: (Default)
When did the 1960s start? The obvious answer is, January 1 1960. People took more notice of decades in those days. I do not remember the passing from the 1950s to the 1960s, but I do remember the passing from the 1960s to the 1970s. I went to a New Year's Eve Party at a council flat off the Wandsworth Road. A pop TV programme was on, of which I only really remember The Who.

But social movements and decades do not neatly coincide. And how one defines "the sixties" depends on your parameters. Politics? Economics? Fashion? Music? Literature? Film?

I possess two well-known books on that decade - The Neophiliacs by Christopher Booker and The Pendulum Years by Bernard Levin. It would be easy to write 200 pages on how the Age of Austerity morphed into the era of "You've Never Had It So Good" and then morphed again into the end of that Macmillian era -- so beautifully drawn by Timothy Birdsall in an early Private Eye, depicting Bacchanalian excess at the heart of the Conservative government.

But this is more of a personal memory, written down now because, I realize to my horror, far fewer people are alive who remember the early 1960s than those who do not.

We are defined by the age and by our age. I was too young to remember Bill Haley, too young to remember early Elvis. But I was just old enough to remember the release of She Loves You, a copy of which was played on my treasured Dansette (well, it was my parent's Dansette, but I was the one who used it).
But I was too young for Philip Larkin's comment on sexual intercourse beginning in 1963 which was, as Larkin (b 1922) wrote: "rather late for me". It was rather early for me. And it wasn't true. Sexual liberation was more rumoured than fact.

I was quite distinctly defined by pop music. And so my measure of the start of the 1960s is pop-related.

I was reminded of this while watching a compilation of 1960s hits. With the benefit of time, it's easier to see the flow from the 1950s through the 1960s to the 1970s. The "new music", so hated by my father, in terms of The Beatles and The Rolling Stones, really consisted of nice middle-class white boys in sharp suits and ties, adapting the blues music of American blacks. If you wanted a real innovator in UK terms, you had to look to Lonnie Donegan.

No, it was not "She Loves You" that defined the beginning of the 1960s, not for me.

While watching that 1960s music compilation, I realized that the real groundbreaker was Sonny and Cher's performance in 1965 on Top Of The Pops of "I've Got You Babe". The tune was not radical, but the words represented the San Francisco ethos that would become famous three years later with Scott Mackenzie.

More important than the words, though, was THE LOOK. Compare the collarless shirt of Sonny Bono with the suit and ties of the Dave Clark Five, Gerry and The Pacemakers, The Beatles, Freddie And The Dreamers. Sonny and Cher had the look of the 1960s as we now remember it. Sonny and Cher showed, for the young me, the way that things were going. They, not The Beatles, represented the events of 1968 that were still three years away. While the Beatles went to Wales to see the Maharishi, the Sonny and Cher look represented what would be seen on the streets of Paris that same summer.

So, that's it. For me, the 1960s started in 1965, with that performance on Top Of The Pops.
Don't let them say your hair's too long
'Cause I don't care, with you I can't go wrong
Then put your little hand in mine
There ain't no hill or mountain we can't climb.
peterbirks: (Default)
It's strange what kind of music suddenly becomes influental 20 years on. Who would have thought that XTC would one day have been seen as a seminal band? But the likes of Franz Ferdinand and Kaiser Chiefs clearly owe a debt to these tune-meisters.

And I never thought that I would recommend a band that clearly owes a debt to U2 and, indeed, seems keen on introducing U2-like guitar riffs into most songs on their new album. But when that band clearly owes a greater debt to The Comsat Angels and The Sound, then I'm prepared to accept the soaring anthemic guitar.

I would guess that this band would be categorized with Interpol, but there is little faux Joy Division here. This is more Positive Noise territory. And the vocals are distinctly Adrian Borland. Oh, and the album is called The Back Room.

August 2023

S M T W T F S
  12345
6789101112
13 14151617 1819
20 212223242526
27282930 31  

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Apr. 23rd, 2025 09:21 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios