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

    • Granted Shoreditch is still London, but given that the council & organisers main argument for the festival is that it is a local event, for local people (to use your metaphor), there's surprisingly little to back this up. As Blah Blah informatively points out, this is now just a commercial venture with no local connection. Our park is regarded by them as an asset that they've paid to use & abuse. There's never been any details provided of where the attendees are from, but it's still trotted out as a benefit to the local community.  There's never been any details provided of any increase in sales for local businesses, but it's still trotted out as a benefit to the local community.  There's promises of "opportunities" for local people & traders to work at the festival, but, again, no figures to back this up. And lastly, the fee for the whole thing goes 100% to running the Events dept, and the dozens of free events that no-one seems able to identify, and, yes, you guessed it - no details provided for by the council. So again, no tangible benefit for the residents of the area.
    • I mean I hold no portfolio to defend Gala,  but I suspect that is their office.  I am a company director,  my home address is also not registered with Companies House. Also guys this is Peckham not Royston Vasey.  Shoreditch is a mere 20 mins away by train, it's not an offshore bolt hole in Luxembourg.
    • While it is good that GALA have withdrawn their application for a second weekend, local people and councillors will likely have the same fight on their hands for next year's event. In reading the consultation report, I noted the Council were putting the GALA event in the same light as all the other events that use the park, like the Circus, the Fair and even the FOPR fete. ALL of those events use the common, not the park, and cause nothing like the level of noise and/or disruption of the GALA event. Even the two day Irish Festival (for those that remember that one) was never as noisy as GALA. So there is some disingenuity and hypocrisy from the Council on this, something I wll point out in my response to the report. The other point to note was that in past years branches were cut back for the fencing. Last year the council promised no trees would be cut after pushback, but they seem to now be reverting to a position of 'only in agreement with the council's arbourist'. Is this more hypocrisy from 'green' Southwark who seem to once again be ok with defacing trees for a fence that is up for just days? The people who now own GALA don't live in this area. GALA as an event began in Brockwell Park. It then lost its place there to bigger events (that pesumably could pay Lambeth Council more). One of the then company directors lived on the Rye Hill Estate next to the park and that is likely how Peckham Rye came to be the new choice for the event. That person is no longer involved. Today's GALA company is not the same as the 'We Are the Fair' company that held that first event, not the same in scope, aim or culture. And therein lies the problem. It's not a local community led enterprise, but a commercial one, underwritten by a venture capital company. The same company co-run the Rally Event each year in Southwark Park, which btw is licensed as a one day event only. That does seem to be truer to the original 'We Are the Fair' vision, but how much of that is down to GALA as opoosed to 'Bird on the Wire' (the other group organising it) is hard to say.  For local people, it's three days of not being able to open windows, As someone said above, if a resident set up a PA in their back garden and subjected the neighbours to 10 hours of hard dance music every day for three days, the Council would take action. Do not underestimate how distressing that is for many local residents, many of whom are elderly, frail, young, vulnerable. They deserve more respect than is being shown by those who think it's no big deal. And just to be clear, GALA and the council do not consider there to be a breach of db level if the level is corrected within 15 minutes of the breach. In other words, while db levels are set as part of the noise management plan, there is an acknowledgement that a breach is ok if corrected within 15 minutes. That is just not good enough. Local councillors objected to the proposed extension. 75% of those that responded to the consultation locally did not want GALA 26 to take place at all. For me personally, any goodwill that had been built up through the various consultations over recent years was erased with that application for a second weekend, and especially given that when asked if there were plans for that in post 2025 event feedback meetings (following rumours), GALA lied and said there were no plans to expand. I have come to the conclusion that all the effort to appease on some things is merely an exercise in show, to get past the council's threshold for the events licence. They couldn't give a hoot in reality for local people, and people that genuinely care about parkland, don't litter it with noisy festivals either.   
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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