Jump to content

Recommended Posts

This documentary was the first time I had seen Art contribute as well. I'd seen lots of documentaries where he was absent. It seems they are friends again. They spoke in praise of each other.


It was interesting also that Bridge over Troubled Water was played against a background video of the funerals of JFK, Bobby Kennedy and Martin Luther King, and was once taken off the TV schedule as it was considered to be a protest song - something Paul Simon says he looks back on and is now quite proud of.

BBC4 Saturday Night, about 11:20pm. Man In Chair, with several guitars behind him (or his own modern art, or a mixing desk) ponders modestly on his lost genius. It could be Brian, or Paul, or the one off of Fleetwood, or perhaps the Genesis* guy on his houseboat.


"And then we really needed another verse because it was too short and we didn't have another verse and we only had another 15 minutes of studio time because of the unions in those days so I just wrote one out there and then in my head as I walked from the little boy's room to the mixing desk and even though it didn't fit the rest of the lyric it just sounded so right and Art/Mick/John/Stevie really got it first time for once and now of course that's the verse that everyone remembers but it wasn't even in the song when I wrote it."


I do like those programmes, though.


* Actually not Genesis, I'm thinking of David Gilmour, aren't I?

I like the old 'we set the drums up inside a tin bath in the elevator, halfway between floors 4 and 5' routine, but it has to come from the mouths of bald, old men with nicotine fingers and Reactolite sunglasses.


Someone from Radiohead explaining how they dangled a customised one-off microphone wrapped in vintage crinoline down a disused well to obtain an incredible and unique reverb has none of that charm.

"Anyway, accusing Paul Simon of plagiarism is as ridiculous as me claiming that Julien Temple nicked my book's title for his London documentary"


Paul Simon did nick Scarborough Fair by copyrighting what was an established UK folk song ! I think Martin Carthy can back that one up.

He's definitley the control type. Having said that I really like his music. But where would he be/have gotten to without Bridge over Troubled Water, who knows.


On one bit of old footage shown last night they were singing it and he shouted at the producer/sound man - "where's my mic, whats happened to my microphone", implying it was turned down. He realised it was on and backtracked, whilst the sound man and Art did nervous twitches, they were obviously scared of him.


He seemed to have a chip on his shoulder about the song that made him.


Having said that he's contributed a lot of good music over the years that I have enjoyed and I don't really care what type of person he is, its not like he's in our lives.

Bit he said, she said that Myth of Fingerprints story, isn't it?


I'm probably biased, though. And I do agree that since we choose our heroes for their uniqueness, their genius, their extraordinary talent it might be a bit much to hope that they might be warm, rounded, ethically sound people too.


Not sure I'll ever get over Gerald Durrell though.


Edited for punk, puncshoe, punctuateness, too many full stops.

The Boxer is another favourite of mine.


There was a documentary about the 25th anniversary of Graceland in which some black South Africans told Paul Simon that they'd been angered when he made it because it ignored the international cultural boycott against the apartheid regime. He seemed genuinely upset about it and I got the impression it had never dawned on him, he just liked the music and wanted to make an album with these musicians.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Absolute mugs. That's what they take you for.  
    • Trossachs definitely have one! 
    • A A day-school for girls and a boarding school for boys (even with, by the late '90s, a tiny cadre of girls) are very different places.  Though there are some similarities. I think all schools, for instance, have similar "rules", much as they all nail up notices about "potential" and "achievement" and keeping to the left on the stairs. The private schools go a little further, banging on about "serving the public", as they have since they were set up (either to supply the colonies with District Commissioners, Brigadiers and Missionaries, or the provinces with railway engineers), so they've got the language and rituals down nicely. Which, i suppose, is what visitors and day-pupils expect, and are expected, to see. A boarding school, outside the cloistered hours of lesson-times, once the day-pupils and teaching staff have been sent packing, the gates and chapel safely locked and the brochures put away, becomes a much less ambassadorial place. That's largely because they're filled with several hundred bored, tired, self-supervised adolescents condemned to spend the night together in the flickering, dripping bowels of its ancient buildings, most of which were designed only to impress from the outside, the comfort of their occupants being secondary to the glory of whatever piratical benefactor had, in a last-ditch attempt to sway the judgement of their god, chucked a little of their ill-gotten at the alleged improvement of the better class of urchin. Those adolescents may, to the curious eyes of the outer world, seem privileged but, in that moment, they cannot access any outer world (at least pre-1996 or thereabouts). Their whole existence, for months at a time, takes place in uniformity behind those gates where money, should they have any to hand, cannot purchase better food or warmer clothing. In that peculiar world, there is no difference between the seventh son of a murderous sheikh, the darling child of a ball-bearing magnate, the umpteenth Viscount Smethwick, or the offspring of some hapless Foreign Office drone who's got themselves posted to Minsk. They are egalitarian, in that sense, but that's as far as it goes. In any place where rank and priviilege mean nothing, other measures will evolve, which is why even the best-intentioned of committees will, from time to time, spawn its cliques and launch heated disputes over archaic matters that, in any other context, would have long been forgotten. The same is true of the boarding school which, over the dismal centuries, has developed a certain culture all its own, with a language indended to pass all understanding and attitiudes and practices to match. This is unsurprising as every new intake will, being young and disoriented, eagerly mimic their seniors, and so also learn those words and attitudes and practices which, miserably or otherwise, will more accurately reflect the weight of history than the Guardian's style-guide and, to contemporary eyes and ears, seem outlandish, beastly and deplorably wicked. Which, of course, it all is. But however much we might regret it, and urge headteachers to get up on Sundays and preach about how we should all be tolerant, not kill anyone unnecessarily, and take pity on the oiks, it won't make the blindest bit of difference. William Golding may, according to psychologists, have overstated his case but I doubt that many 20th Century boarders would agree with them. Instead, they might look to Shakespeare, who cheerfully exploits differences of sex and race and belief and ability to arm his bullies, murderers, fraudsters and tyrants and remains celebrated to this day,  Admittedly, this is mostly opinion, borne only of my own regrettable experience and, because I had that experience and heard those words (though, being naive and small-townish, i didn't understand them till much later) and saw and suffered a heap of brutishness*, that might make my opinion both unfair and biased.  If so, then I can only say it's the least that those institutions deserve. Sure, the schools themselves don't willingly foster that culture, which is wholly contrary to everything in the brochures, but there's not much they can do about it without posting staff permanently in corridors and dormitories and washrooms, which would, I'd suggest, create a whole other set of problems, not least financial. So, like any other business, they take care of the money and keep aloof from the rest. That, to my mind, is the problem. They've turned something into a business that really shouldn't be a business. Education is one thing, raising a child is another, and limited-liability corporations, however charitable, tend not to make the best parents. And so, in retrospect, I'm inclined not to blame the students either (though, for years after, I eagerly read the my Old School magazine, my heart doing a little dance at every black-edged announcement of a yachting tragedy, avalanche or coup). They get chucked into this swamp where they have to learn to fend for themselves and so many, naturally, will behave like predators in an attempt to fit in. Not all, certainly. Some will keep their heads down and hope not to be noticed while others, if they have a particular talent, might find that it protects them. But that leaves more than enough to keep the toxic culture alive, and it is no surprise at all that when they emerge they appear damaged to the outside world. For that's exactly what they are. They might, and sometimes do, improve once returned to the normal stream of life if given time and support, and that's good. But the damage lasts, all the same, and isn't a reason to vote for them. * Not, if it helps to disappoint any lawyers, at Dulwich, though there's nothing in the allegations that I didn't instantly recognise, 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...