Comments on: WHAM! – “Edge Of Heaven”

By: wichita lineman

wichita lineman — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 07:09:09 +0000

Re 51: Yes, of course you’re right. But if we’re talking about specific end points for eras (ie G’n'R killed corporate rock with their violently new sound, and a guitarist from Stoke), it felt as if that TOTP marked a sea change – the radio dominance of major label sponsored, gated snare pap in the UK was soon to be over. For better or worse, Radio 1 were barely acknowledging the “never-been-done-before electronic dance music” even when it was number one in 1987 (shhhhh), more sticking their fingers in their ears and hoping it was a passing craze, like the Mambo.

Fools Gold and Hallelujah (the singles on that programme) weren’t really sixties influenced guitar stuff either. If you’re going to make me use the term ‘indie dance’, dammit, I will.

But maybe this is a debate for later…

I love Street Tuff too.

By: LondonLee

LondonLee — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 21:58:30 +0000

The funky drummer beat of ‘Fools Gold’ was considered quite “new” at the time was it not?

Not only is that the only Stone Roses record I ever bought but it’s the only one I’ve ever heard. That I remember anyway.

By: AndyPandy

AndyPandy — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 19:04:05 +0000

But it’s hard to see the Stone Roses as exactly breaking boundaries – unless we’re talking boundaries that had already been broken about 20 years before. (And their TOTP appearance hardly put them on the lips of the nation in 1989 or even gave them a very big hit).

ie There was all this exciting never-been-done-before electronic dance music in the charts/on the streets and groups like the Stone Roses were intent on retreading some old sixties influenced guitar stuff.
A lot of us would have rather had the pop-rap of “Street Tuff” by the Rebel MC and Double Trouble than the whole of the Stone Roses catalogue…

By: wichita lineman

wichita lineman — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 16:46:34 +0000

The idea of Guns’n'Roses killing off corporate rock is a little odd. They may have dissed the man but musically it was all so stagnant*. I know it’s just me…

Easier to spot in Britain I’d say, Lena – corporate ‘pop’ effectively on borrowed time once Happy Mondays/Stone Roses appeared on the same TOTP in ’89 (opens small can of worms, stands back…)

*I’d take Richard Marx’s Hazard over the entire G’n'R catalogue.

By: Lena

Lena — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 16:37:48 +0000

It is a fine book and it’s definitely available from amazon on either side of the Atlantic – here’s the UK link. I wish a UK chart version of it existed, I might have to write it myself!

By: MichaelH

MichaelH — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 17:06:11 +0000

PS Is the book still in print? Be curious to read it.

By: MichaelH

MichaelH — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 16:46:15 +0000

@46 … doesn’t necessarily make him right, though!

By: Lena

Lena — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 14:48:13 +0000

The death of Reaganrock is from Popstrology, which Ian Van Tuyl wrote a few years ago; he ends the book with Richard Marx, in 1989, but specifically says that it took Michael AND Guns ‘n’ Roses to eliminate the compromise of corporate ‘rock’ that had (partially, I’ll admit) taken over the charts. I mentioned 1991 to specifically show the gulf between the singles and the albums.

(I agree that nothing is ever really ‘killed off’ in music as much as it becomes deeply uncool/unfashionable to the ‘kids’ – and can be rescued/resurrected a generation later, much to the perplexment and even dismay of those who never liked it in the first place.)

By: MichaelH

MichaelH — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 12:49:22 +0000

@ my own 43: sorry, should be “cause in 87″.

By: taDOW

taDOW — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 12:46:09 +0000

our first year of listening w/out prejudice (unless it’s against noted hitmaker john parr).

nearly cited george’s death of rnb except i haven’t read it in ~20 yrs and couldn’t remember his take on george michael or luther vandross or anita baker or jimmy jam & terry lewis or whether or not new jack swing even enters into it (do remember his concern over michael jackson and prince’s playing to a white audience).

By: MichaelH

MichaelH — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 12:36:47 +0000

@40 The 91 list is the one I was looking at that clearly suggested a change had occurred. But that’s four years after you were saying Reaganrock was killed off. Surely, in something as fast moving as pop (even if the US changes nowhere near so quickly as the UK) that’s too great a gap to attribute effect in 91 to cause in 91? Clearly there was a huge sea change in the early 90s, but I’m not sure we’ve reached the bottom of it here. Interesting in @38 the argument that what George really helped do for was “buppie” music – do you mean O’Neal, Vandross etc – when I was at school the black kids listened to that kind of soul, or to reggae (none listened to hip-hop in the mid-80s where I was, interestingly – though it was a soul and reggae town).

Be interesting to see US album charts for this period. I imagine Axl’s influence might be more keenly felt there than in the singles charts.

By: a tanned rested and unlogged lørd sükråt wötsît

a tanned rested and unlogged lørd sükråt wötsît — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 10:41:55 +0000

it’s along time since i read it, but doesn’t nelson george’s book “the death of rhythm and blues” explicitly cite george michael’s success as a symptom: not because he was white and lame, but because he was a young brit who was making better music than the then-soul industry

(note: “death of r&b” as title — r&b so far from being killed off that [insert present-day delight/despair here])

By: a tanned rested and unlogged lørd sükråt wötsît

a tanned rested and unlogged lørd sükråt wötsît — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 10:38:09 +0000

if there’s one thing i’ve learnt in 20 billions years writing about pop it’s that nothing is ever “killed off”

By: Lena

Lena — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 10:37:43 +0000

I’m sticking, clearly, to the simple yardstick of US #1 singles; if you look at, say, this list and, oh, this one, you’ll see a whole new set up that has not changed very much since. And it started to change in late ’87-’88, more or less.

By: thefatgit

thefatgit — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 10:07:07 +0000

Hmm…I always thought hip hop and thrash metal killed off MOR in the States.

By: taDOW

taDOW — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 18:57:42 +0000

Huey Lewis released a jazz fusion album, Bruce Hornsby abandoned his sound (though the songs he still wrote in that style and gave to Don Henley and Bonnie Raitt still turned into big hits in 89 and 92(?)), Starship broke up, Lionel Richie stopped recording for a decade: not sure how many of these can be tied to George Michael (he’s not a freemason by chance is he?). Whitesnake peaked alongside George Michael (enough that you could as easily claim Whitesnake killed his career in the States as the reverse), Motley Crue had their biggest album in sales, airplay, and hits after Faith, their second biggest the same year as Faith, the same year Ratt had their last big hit (of how many total – four?). What I could vaguely buy Faith bringing about was the death of buppie domination on R&B radio – black radio resistance to hip-hop was very very real, rooted mainly in generational and class divide, and Faith’s success (esp it’s AMA win as best r&b album) was fairly controversial, at least as a symbol that something was wrong (imagine a take on DORF) that’s more Jet than the Nation); w/ hip-hop meanwhile doing very very well on pop radio, Mtv, and in sales that ‘black’ radio was meanwhile much more receptive to a white brit doing wet behind the ears Marvin, a smarter Michael Bolton really, than to pick yr golden age hip-hop act (esp at a time when hip-hop was getting increasingly politicized) had to provoke some self-examination (nevermind it was just bad business). Enter New Jack Swing to give R&B radio an option besides embracing Brand Nubian, etc and exit any future for George Michael (or Michael Bolton) on black radio.

By: MichaelH

MichaelH — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 17:15:48 +0000

@36 Not sure that’s so true. Motley Crue’s bestselling album was Dr Feelgood, from 89. Richard Marx became a huge star with his second album in 1989. We Didn’t Start the Fire, the song that brings Reagan’s foreign policy to the charts, was No 1 in 1989. Michael Bolton’s mullet was still ubiquitous through 89-93. Wilson Phillips were having No 1 in 1990. The artists you name might have been fading at this point, but there were plenty who sounded just like them who continued having big hits.

Looking at a list of US No1s, the key year for change appears to be 1991, when R&B based pop really becomes a dominant trope, comfortably eclipsing white middle-of-the-road rock.

By: Lena

Lena — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 16:23:23 +0000

@22: Faith, paired with Guns ‘n’ Roses, effectively marked the end of Reaganrock – that being anything & everything from Huey Lewis & the News to Starship, Billy Ocean to Kenny Loggins, Bruce Hornsby to Lionel Richie, Whitesnake to Mr. Mister and yes even John Parr – they all had #1 singles, more than one in some cases, and after late ’88…not so much. (I might also include Ratt & Motley Crue, though not Twisted Sister, if only for their giving the kid the immortal phrase “I wanna rock” in one of the funniest videos ever.)

By: Gavin Wright

Gavin Wright — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 12:05:00 +0000

Re 34: You’re right – just had a look on here:

http://tosq.com/petersaville/disc/

Never knew that Peter Gabriel album was one of his. For me one of the unexpected pleasures of Popular has been seeing all the record sleeves – often just for the contrast between how low-budget/rushed the singles look compared to the same act’s respective album(s).

By: wichita lineman

wichita lineman — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 11:09:17 +0000

Re 33: Peter Saville did the sleeve for I’m Your Man (or, more likely, a Saville underling). Haven’t got a copy to check but I’m guessing this is his work too.

By: Gavin Wright

Gavin Wright — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 10:41:52 +0000

Following on from the ‘A Different Corner’/'Atmosphere’ single sleeve comparisons the other week, is it just me or does the cover for this look quite New Order-ish?

My initial reaction to this entry would have been to say that this is the one Wham single I actually quite like but I can’t remember anything about it beyond the “yeah yeah yeah yeah” bits (which are great)…

By: MichaelH

MichaelH — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 20:44:54 +0000

Always rather liked this one: felt stronger, somehow, than the previous Motown pastiches. For those of us who – at that time – couldn’t stand Wham!, there was also the comfort that this was goodbye (by this point they were long since a girl’s band, though at the time of Wham Rap and Young Guns, they were widely admired at our school by every single lad who went on to become a B-boy. Gateway rap, perhaps).

Anyway, I suspect Jens Lekman was listening: A Sweet Summer’s Night On Hammer Hill sounds like the indiepop version of Edge of Heaven.

By: wichita lineman

wichita lineman — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 19:04:14 +0000

Re 29: This neatly explains why I never understood the significance of The Big Chill, and its life-altering rediscovery of Motown for thirty-something Americans. Thanks Lee!

As for TEOH, for its somewhat thicker production, and its rather more meandering tune, I prefer it to I’m Your Man and Freedom. Slim pickings for me in this leather-bound Fauxtown stuff, 5.

Swanstep – surely no one thought these records were produced by Moroder/Prince/Horn?? They sound so undercooked (tough lump of beef excepted); Lenny Kravitz did a more convincing job on retro-soul and I wouldn’t put him within two leagues of Prince either.

By: Caledonianne

Caledonianne — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 18:44:06 +0000

Don’t think I’ve ever heard this before, and can’t say I feel as if I’ve missed anything.

#12 Mike. Steely Dan. Now THAT’s More like it!

By: LondonLee

LondonLee — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 21:44:51 +0000

The classic Motown sound doesn’t have the stain of Boomer nostalgia on it in the UK the way it is in the States — we don’t really think about “Boomers” as a monolithic bloc anyway — it was constantly played on the radio right through the 70s so it never really felt “old” because it was always there and seems free from history somehow. Instead of being tied to one generation it was everybody’s music and every home (that I went to anyway) had one or more volumes of ‘Motown Chartbusters’ sitting on the shelf. That’s the way I saw it anyway. It’s the people’s music!

I was at an English friend’s wedding in New York a few years ago and his drunk brother got up on the stage at the reception, started singing “This Old Heart of Mine” and tried to get everyone to join in. The only people that knew the words were the Brits, the Americans were clueless, (and possibly not drunk enough) because that stuff was in our DNA.