Comments on: Mojo Jojo https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo Lollards in the high church of low culture Mon, 19 May 2014 12:13:05 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.3 By: Mark M https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-3#comment-1371130 Mon, 19 May 2014 12:13:05 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-1371130 Re60, 61: We were having similar running battles with Emap Metro over the copyright grab throughout the late ’90s into the ’00s, probably still going on probably. I certainly wouldn’t expect any one editor to have been able to do anything to stop it – they could have resigned in protest, of course, but alas, that wouldn’t have changed much.

Re62: Yes, IPC fled crumbling King’s Reach Tower some seven years ago, I think. KRT is now South Bank Tower – not so much demolished as stripped of its cladding and growing. Anyone who has a spare five million or so will one day be able to invite people up and say, ‘Once upon a time, it was all Mark Sinker round here…’

]]>
By: mark sinker https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-3#comment-1371037 Mon, 19 May 2014 10:28:24 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-1371037 kings reach tower itself is apparently being demolished and rebuilt even taller (fancy apartments this time)

]]>
By: mark sinker https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-3#comment-1371036 Mon, 19 May 2014 10:25:28 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-1371036 iirc ipc had already introduced the “signing away yr rights” contract when i was still at nme: certainly there was a lot of grousing and pushback at the time (and ppl signing the contract and sending it back with the key lines crossed out and such)

(i don’t recall how this eventually played out as i left for other things — but i assume the recent fight about who had the right to reprint old reviews on the internet is linked: many old freelancers banding together to insist that they owned their own work and forcing the site which put it up to shut) (if i’m remembering this correctly)

]]>
By: punctum https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-2#comment-1370983 Mon, 19 May 2014 09:41:56 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-1370983 I wrote for Uncut for two years and do not remember Jones as quite the charming chap you present him as. It may have been the influence of IPC’s “Brand Manager” of the time but my impression (based on the accounts of others who worked there) was that he was a bit of a shit, and my time with the magazine came to a sticky end*. I do not think that in the MM days Jones would have insisted on writers signing away copyright for whatever they wrote in order to get paid for work that they had already done (but then he did not author or countersign the document in question).

*actually, nobody there bothered to tell me that my time with them had come to an end; I was simply dropped, without any sort of explanation or even notification, and although this happened nearly ten years ago, rest assured, you managers there in King’s Reach Tower, some of us have very long memories and DON’T forget…

]]>
By: Mark M https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-2#comment-1370191 Sun, 18 May 2014 16:43:30 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-1370191 Noticed today that both Uncut and Mojo have contemporary (if hardly new) bands on the cover this month: Arctic Monkeys and Black Keys.

Also, seems like a good place to mark the retirement of Allan Jones*, founding editor of Uncut, after an epic 40 years at just two magazines – he was at the Melody Maker from 1974 to the launch of Uncut in ’97. I only worked with him for a rather bizarre two days, but he’s always seemed like a decent bloke, and – certainly in his MM days – seemed to be one of those editors happy to let individual staff members get on with being good at what they were good at, rather than the kind of editor who would have preferred to write every word themself if they could have had the time.

Also, I just like the idea of those characters who stretch back in the mists of time – IPC will feel diminished without him.

*I keep misspelling his first name as Allen – that’s someone else entirely.

]]>
By: Czekaj?c na refren (Kiosk 2/2011) | Ziemia Niczyja | Mariusz Herma https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-2#comment-1285224 Sat, 25 Jan 2014 12:21:50 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-1285224 […] rysuje personalno-finansowy krajobraz krytyki muzycznej w 2010 roku (za komentarz niech s?u?y ten wykres nt. ok?adek Mojo), kto? inny zestawi? listy sprzeda?y z podsumowaniami p?ytowymi ubieg?ego roku – […]

]]>
By: lonepilgrim https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-2#comment-799891 Tue, 22 Feb 2011 19:20:55 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-799891 the latest (April) edition of Mojo featuring The Smiths on the cover seems like one of the most uncentred for some time

]]>
By: punctum https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-2#comment-786756 Mon, 07 Feb 2011 13:21:38 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-786756 I thought the whole of Bring It On was very good and inventive, myself. Hardly listened to Liquid Skin and it went on my Poor Of The Parish pile almost immediately but that may not be Gomez’s fault.

]]>
By: MichaelH https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-2#comment-786713 Mon, 07 Feb 2011 12:16:18 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-786713 Back to Gomez … To be fair to Mojo, Gomez won the Mercury; they played completely Mocut friendly music; they had some sort of a story; and “the biz” genuinely thought they were going to be huge. Lots of people bought that first Gomez album (only to discover Whippin’ Piccadilly was the only listenable song on it) and it probably seemed to Mojo that here was a perfect new band does old music feature. Sadly, the world stopped giving a shit about Gomez almost immediately.

]]>
By: Ed https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-2#comment-786001 Sat, 05 Feb 2011 19:18:38 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-786001 #53 That is a good point, and I agree it is surprising. I look at the covers of both Mojo and Uncut most months, and I would have never gussed how much more friendly Mojo was to new(ish) music. It shows why it is worth applying science here.

In the 21st Century, Uncut has neglected the Arctic Monkeys, Amy Winehouse, the Fleet Foxes and The Strokes, and under-played the White Stripes severely, compared to Mojo, and I think Uncut has suffered for it. Those calls by Mojo on who to admit to the canon are all pretty reasonable. No more Gomez-type fiascos, anyway. And if you refuse to add any new music to the canon, then it is bound to feel increasingly antique and lifeless.

Uncut has seemed increasingly stale in recent years, and I have certainly been buying it less and less often, without quite knowing why. Perhaps those cover stars are the answer.

]]>
By: Tom https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-2#comment-785823 Sat, 05 Feb 2011 02:04:55 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-785823 What surprises me is that it’s Mojo which is the keener to showcase emerging – er, recently emerged – talent. I think of Uncut as skewing slightly more modern, and it likes its post-punk, but as Mitchell pointed out to me on Twitter, Shelby L. is the only act to have appeared on Uncut’s cover within FIVE YEARS of their debut.

]]>
By: Ed https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-2#comment-785813 Sat, 05 Feb 2011 01:23:37 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-785813 @12, 48, 51 Thanks for those. So: Mojo and Uncut, compare and contrast….

Mojo is a lot more keen on Brit-rock: Floyd, Zeppelin and Oasis do much better there.

Uncut, as has been said, likes its Americana: higher placings for Dylan, Neil Young and REM. And the Stones, who always wanted to be American, and are a massive influence on a lot of those Americana acts.

But Uncut also gives proper respect to Bowie, bless it.

Giving four times as many covers to Oasis as to Bowie makes the whole Gomez thing look quite well-judged.

]]>
By: Billy Smart https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-2#comment-785752 Fri, 04 Feb 2011 20:16:36 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-785752 And finally – the inevitable conflated MOCUT cover star canon;

1 The Beatles etc 36
2 Bob Dylan 19
3 Pink Floyd etc 18
4 Led Zeppelin etc 15
= The Rolling Stones 15
6 Neil Young 12
7 Oasis 11
= The Who 11
9 Bruce Springsteen 9
10 David Bowie 8
= The Clash 8
= Nirvana 8
= Radiohead 8
= REM 8
15 Jimi Hendrix 7
= The Sex Pistols/ PiL 7
= The Smiths 7
= Paul Weller/ The Jam 7
19 Bob Marley 5
20 Blur 4
= The Doors 4
= Joy Division 4
= Iggy Pop 4
= Queen 4
= The Stone Roses 4
= U2 4
= The White Stripes 4
28 The Beack Boys 3
= Kate Bush 3
= The Kinks 3
= New Order etc 3
= The Police/ Sting 3
= Elvis Presley 3
= Lou Reed/ The Velvet Underground 3
35 AC/DC 2
= Arctic Monkeys 2
= Johnny Cash 2
= Nick Cave 2
= Eric Clapton 2
= Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young 2
= Nick Drake 2
= Peter Gabriel/ Genesis 2
= Marvin Gaye 2
= Elton John 2
= Kings Of Leon 2
= Kraftwerk 2
= The Pretenders 2
= The Ramones 2
= The Specials 2
= Rod Stewart/ The Faces 2
= Tom Waits 2
= Frank Zappa 2
53 ABBA 1
= Richard Ashcroft 1
= The Band 1
= Beck 1
= Captain Beefheart 1
= Blondie 1
= The Byrds 1
= Leonard Cohen 1
= Elvis Costello 1
= Crowded House 1
= The Cure 1
= Depeche Mode 1
= The Eagles 1
= Echo & The Bunnymen 1
= The Flaming Lips 1
= Fleet Foxes 1
= Fleetwood Mac 1
= The Foo Fighters 1
= Gomez 1
= Happy Mondays 1
= John Lee Hooker 1
= Howlin’ Wolf 1
= Michael Jackson 1
= Janis Joplin 1
= KD Lang 1
= Shelby Lynn 1
= Madness 1
= Manic Street Preachers 1
= Massive Attack 1
= Van Morrison 1
= Primal Scream 1
= Red Hot Chilli Peppers 1
= Roxy Music 1
= Smashing Pumpkins 1
= Steely Dan 1
= Sly Stone 1
= The Strokes 1
= Suede 1
= T Rex 1
= Amy Winehouse 1
= Stevie Wonder 1
= The Yardbirds 1

]]>
By: punctum https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-2#comment-785705 Fri, 04 Feb 2011 16:54:36 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-785705 Surprised there’s no Ryan Adams.

]]>
By: pink champale https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-2#comment-785683 Fri, 04 Feb 2011 15:30:35 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-785683 wot no kingmaker?

]]>
By: Billy Smart https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-2#comment-785658 Fri, 04 Feb 2011 14:14:53 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-785658 Thanks Mitchell – I can now present the COMPLETE Uncut covers canon;

1 The Beatles etc 17
2 Bob Dylan 10
3 The Rolling Stones 9
4 Neil Young 8
5 Pink Floyd etc 7
= Led Zeppelin etc 7
7 David Bowie 6
8 Bruce Springsteen 5
= The Who 5
10 The Smiths/ Morrissey 4
= REM 4
= The Clash 4
= Jimi Hendrix 4
14 Nirvana 3
= Paul Weller/ The Jam 3
= Radiohead 3
= U2 3
= The Stone Roses 3
= Oasis 3
20 The Doors 2
= The Sex Pistols 2
= New Order etc 2
= Joy Division 2
= Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young 2
25 Elvis Costello 1
= Elvis Presley 1
= The Beach Boys 1
= The Specials 1
= Echo & the Bunnymen 1
= Suede 1
= The Pretenders 1
= Happy Mondays 1
= Primal Scream 1
= Shelby Lynne 1
= Bob Marley 1
= Depeche Mode 1
= Elton John 1
= The Police 1
= The Eagles 1
= Fleetwood Mac 1
= The Byrds 1
= Eric Clapton 1
= The Cure 1
= The Kinks 1
= Queen 1
= The Band 1
= Stevie Wonder 1
= Van Morrison 1
= The Flaming Lips 1
= The Small Faces 1
= Johnny Cash 1
= Madness 1
= Blur 1
= The Yardbirds 1
= The White Stripes 1
= The Velvet Underground 1
= Kate Bush 1
= Nick Cave 1
= Kings Of Leon 1
= Roxy Music 1

]]>
By: mark sinker https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-2#comment-785652 Fri, 04 Feb 2011 13:58:48 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-785652 @45: re U2 and Q, yes I agree (and thought I’d posted something to this effect already, but apparently forgot to). There’s an element in Mojo’s and Q’s approach of defining themselves against each other niche-wise: Q went for “out amusing and personable chat with the fourth most famous member of the muswell hillbillies”, and Mojo was more “further documents unearthed from the production history of unhalfbricking” — and as lonepilgrim notes way up-thread, Mojo also always had a good line in sneaking in interesting offpiste material you wouldn’t get elsewhere, sugarcoated in a very conservative-seeming package.

]]>
By: Mitchell Stirling https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-2#comment-785649 Fri, 04 Feb 2011 13:45:51 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-785649 I have just been looking at Uncut covers myself and am missing a few of the earlier ones.

I do have the last four years though

Jan-07 The Beatles
Feb-07 Radiohead
Mar-07 The Smiths
Apr-07 The Who
May-07 Pink Floyd
Jun-07 Paul McCartney
Jul-07 The Rolling Stones
Aug-07 Bob Dylan
Sep-07 Paul Weller
Oct-07 List 50 Best Gigs (Jimi Hendrix)
Nov-07 Robert Plant
Dec-07 Neil Young
Jan-08 John Lennon
Feb-08 Bob Dylan
Mar-08 The Small Faces
Apr-08 The Rolling Stones
May-08 Led Zeppelin
Jun-08 David Bowie
Jul-08 Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young
Aug-08 George Harrison
Sep-08 Oasis
Oct-08 Pink Floyd
Nov-08 Bob Dylan
Dec-08 Paul Weller
Jan-09 Led Zeppelin
Feb-09 Johnny Cash
Mar-09 Neil Young
Apr-09 The Stone Roses
May-09 Madness
Jun-09 Bruce Springsteen
Jul-09 Blur
Aug-09 The Yardbirds
Sep-09 The Who
Oct-09 The Beatles
Nov-09 Jack White
Dec-09 The Velvet Underground
Jan-10 Bob Dylan
Feb-10 Jimi Hendrix
Mar-10 Joy Division
Apr-10 The Rolling Stones
May-10 Neil Young
Jun-10 Kate Bush
Jul-10 David Bowie
Aug-10 John Lennon
Sep-10 Nick Cave
Oct-10 The Clash
Nov-10 Kings of Leon
Dec-10 The Kinks
Jan-11 Paul Weller
Feb-11 Roxy Music
Mar-11 Led Zeppelin

If anyone has the cover stars for issues 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 17, 25, 30, 39 and 43 I can produce the equivalent to the graph at the top of the page. Thanks.

]]>
By: Dark Chanting Goshawk https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-2#comment-785642 Fri, 04 Feb 2011 13:21:33 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-785642 My impression of Uncut, as a reader since its launch, is that it has got a lot more conservative in terms of cover stars over the years, with a higher proportion of Beatles/Stones/Dylan covers. Shelby Lynne was relatively early on, while they were still championing alt.country/Americana. The free CDs also have changed from being mostly tracks from the month’s new releases to be being mostly generic “Roots of xxx” or covers of a particular artist or album (is this cheaper to license? The roots CDs ofter have a fair amount of material whose publishing rights have expired, anyway).

I suspect the last four years of Uncut won’t add many new names to the above list. I’ll look over the weekend if Billy doesn’t beat me to it.(BTW Billy, you’ve got Neil Young twice on the list above.)

Incidentally, I wonder if the low number of U2 Mojo covers is due to the relatively high number of U2 covers for Mojo’s stablemate Q (Q seemed to have U2 on the cover about twice a year in the early 90s).

]]>
By: Mark M https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-2#comment-785639 Fri, 04 Feb 2011 13:19:45 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-785639 Re 40: an Uncut staffer once asked me what I presumed would be in an average issue of the magazine. I said something like ‘You seemed to have a “the new Emmylou Harris” every month.’ He rather ruefully admitted this was true.

At the same time, as that list shows, they do much more post-punk and beyond than Mojo.

Allan Jones is out having a fag every time I go to lunch. I find it a reassuring sight in an uncertain world.

]]>
By: Billy Smart https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-2#comment-785615 Fri, 04 Feb 2011 12:39:21 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-785615 The NME appears to have moved into this heritage rock market in serious earnest of late. See this week’s cover star, Bobby Gillespie: “20 years of Screamadelica”. I don’t know how many 20 year-olds are going to be impressed with that.

]]>
By: mark sinker https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-2#comment-785605 Fri, 04 Feb 2011 12:19:48 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-785605 Shelby Lynne proves my point!

]]>
By: Billy Smart https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-2#comment-785599 Fri, 04 Feb 2011 12:01:55 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-785599 I made a note of Uncut covers up to that point at the time of their tenth anniversary in 2007. I don’t have the last four years to hand today, but it hasn’t changed much;

1 The Beatles etc 13
2 Bob Dylan 7
3 The Rolling Stones 7
4 Pink Floyd etc 5
= Neil Young 5
6 Led Zeppelin 4
= Neil Young 4
= The Smiths/ Morrissey 4
= REM 4
= The Clash 4
= David Bowie 4
= Bruce Springsteen 4
= The Who 4
14 Nirvana 3
= Paul Weller/ The Jam 3
= Radiohead 3
= U2 3
= Jimi Hendrix 3
19 The Doors 2
= The Stone Roses 2
= The Sex Pistols 2
= Oasis 2
= New Order etc 2
24 Elvis Costello 1
= Elvis Presley 1
= Joy Division 1
= The Beach Boys 1
= The Specials 1
= Echo & the Bunnymen 1
= Suede 1
= The Pretenders 1
= Happy Mondays 1
= Primal Scream 1
= Shelby Lynne 1
= Bob Marley 1
= Depeche Mode 1
= Elton John 1
= Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young 1
= The Police 1
= The Eagles 1
= Fleetwood Mac 1
= The Byrds 1
= Eric Clapton 1
= The Cure 1
= The Kinks 1
= Queen 1
= The Band 1
= Stevie Wonder 1
= Van Morrison 1
= The Flaming Lips 1

]]>
By: mark sinker https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-2#comment-785587 Fri, 04 Feb 2011 11:33:07 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-785587 Differently traditionalist, maybe: Uncut always featured a ton of new country.

]]>
By: the pinefox https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-2#comment-785557 Fri, 04 Feb 2011 10:44:56 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-785557 If anyone recent / current deserves to be canonized it’s Stephin Merritt. I don’t think I’ve ever seen him on the cover of any magazine. Possibly not even Chickfactor.

I’d be interested in an Uncut equivalent to all this, as I’m a bit more familiar with that magazine. Is it less traditionalist than Mojo?

]]>
By: swanstep https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-2#comment-785537 Fri, 04 Feb 2011 09:39:00 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-785537 I don’t know anything about Gomez but that photo reminds me of shots of XTC and of Waterboys/World Party.

As for the cover-canon more generally: I like a lot of their choices but stripped of wider musical context it feels like a pretty arid bunch. No james brown, prince, curtis mayfield, talking heads is bizarre and as for ’90s stuff, one would think they’d be eager to canonize MBV, Jeff Buckley, Underworld, PJ Harvey, etc.. It honestly feels to me like Mojo invented an unhelpfully narrow musical niche to cater to.

]]>
By: Billy Smart https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-2#comment-785531 Fri, 04 Feb 2011 09:08:49 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-785531 Aha! Look also at the December 1998 competition for Mojo cover star – it was a quiet month; Frank Zappa (who had already had a cover), Ian Dury and Mike Oldfield – both interesting stories, but rather divisive acts who would alienate much of the readership.

Also the first issue of the year is the time for music magazines to showcase their bright hope for the coming months. I can remember the NME hailing Terris as the band for the new millennium in January 2000.

]]>
By: Mark M https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-2#comment-785527 Fri, 04 Feb 2011 08:48:32 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-785527 Re 35: that’s a horrible, horrible picture. But it’s also almost certainly the product of a long and unhappy photo session where the photographer and the stylist have battled heroically for hours to coax any hint of charisma out of the group. I’m guessing ‘imagine you’re the Magic Band’ was the theme of the shoot. The editor and the art editor and the editorial director will have spent hours over the light box just hoping that if they look long enough just one of the thirty shots they have on there will come to life. And with Gomez* there would have been no option of biting the financial bullet and putting aside your exclusive shoot for an agency buy-in.

That cover line (“The band we’ve all been waiting for…”) is rather poignant in its yearning and misguideness. See, they wanted to branch out beyond the Beatles…

*Possibly even more inexplicable than Mojo putting them on the cover is the fact that I interviewed Gomez for The Face, of all magazines…

]]>
By: Ed https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-2#comment-785397 Fri, 04 Feb 2011 03:05:16 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-785397 @33, 34 That is some enlightening demystification. But are you really trying to tell me that this:

http://991.com/newGallery/Gomez-Mojo-448052.jpg

was the best picture they could find anywhere in the autumn of 1998?

Blimey

That is a sobering thought.

I remember seeing some style-mag ed being interviewed and complaining about how the civilians just didn’t understand how tough his job was. “We have to pick a cover picture,” he wailed, “EVERY MONTH.”

Perhaps I should not have laughed quite so loud or so long.

]]>
By: Mark M https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-2#comment-785280 Thu, 03 Feb 2011 23:33:59 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-785280 I’ll second everything Sinkerman says at 33 and points above, especially as regards to the choice of cover star being in practice a whole lot more haphazard than most folks think. You might imagine that it would be one of the first things about an issue that’s decided – in fact it can often be just about the last. This is true even on the best run, fully staffed and monsters in their sector magazines I’ve worked on – Cosmo, for instance.

Also, the importance of good* pictures: magazines are design-led – check the staff list of (print) ones and you’ll often find that the art director is the second or third name you see after the editor and far above a features editor. (This is part of the reason why moving a magazine to the internet means so much more of a complete change of priorities than just a shift of medium and therefore a little bit of why iPads (& equivalents) are seen as salvation…)

*Good pictures can be a bastard to find – have a look on the newstand and you’ll see plenty where they’ve clearly settled for the least rubbish option.

]]>
By: a tanned rested and unlogged lørd sükråt wötsît https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-2#comment-785262 Thu, 03 Feb 2011 23:01:30 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-785262 haha my choice of the kinks as munters was totally random, indeed they are handsome fellows all — what i meant was, what you’re deciding on when you choose a cover is the actually pictures on the table in front of you, based on your kneejerk response to the pictures you have rather than the pictures you’d like, and sometimes the pictures you fnd yourself with are RUBBISH… so you end up going with gomez instead of whoever!

]]>
By: Elsa https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-2#comment-785253 Thu, 03 Feb 2011 22:38:59 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-785253 30: that’s a good point and it makes you wonder how Mojo would deal with a featured artist who had thoroughly tacky or disreputable taste in earlier acts – or if said artist had no respect for any earlier acts! It would be amusing to try to imagine the kind of bad taste that would get you blackballed from Mojo. I do remember Mojo doing one of those “pick 50 tracks” pieces with Mark E. Smith and his choices were rather idiosyncratic, including a disco track (albeit a magnficent one) and other sundries.

]]>
By: the pinefox https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-2#comment-785122 Thu, 03 Feb 2011 18:20:16 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-785122 I guess James Joyce never really read the Cantos either.

]]>
By: lonepilgrim https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-1#comment-785115 Thu, 03 Feb 2011 18:13:39 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-785115 Another element which may influence the choice of Mojo cover star is that as well as being performers they can also be engaged with as fans of earlier acts and that this becomes an (imagined?) link between interviewer and star (and reader and star). This serves to bolster the familiar canon and make the readership feel a part of a discerning community that includes the ‘stars’ themselves. Consequently Mojo regularly features cover CDs featuring the ‘roots’ of Led Zeppelin, The Beatles, etc. as well as the ’50 best tracks by’ chosen by a selection of the great and good.
A few years ago there was an interesting occasion where Paul McCartney described how he had bought ‘Astral Weeks’ after it had scored highly in a Mojo poll – admitting that he had never heard it before then. I remember thinking “but you’re part of the canon – ‘Astral Weeks’ is part of the canon. You SHOULD have heard it”

]]>
By: Erithian https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-1#comment-785072 Thu, 03 Feb 2011 16:57:03 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-785072 Oh, I dunno about “munters” – to me the Kinks look like the essential 60s pop group, not pretty-boy beautiful or iconically well-known, just a bunch of lads whose talent and ability to seize the moment have allowed them a degree of fame unimaginable to earlier generations of their families, and all while having a whale of a time as well. Which also makes me think of the Small Faces – where was their Mojo cover?

Incidentally, I’m not asking anyone to spend the time researching it, but what might a similar graph for Q magazine reveal?

]]>
By: mark sinker https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-1#comment-785067 Thu, 03 Feb 2011 16:52:22 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-785067 Gah what unclear posts. It was RDCook’s latedoors reconfig of The Wire which we always assumed Mojo got its mojo from (which DID have Prince on the cover, and also Van Morrison); not so much his&my subsequent version, which had a robot and etc.

]]>
By: mark sinker https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-1#comment-785045 Thu, 03 Feb 2011 16:08:26 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-785045 Note the thing that *I* leave unsaid: that’s there’s a relationship between “articles it’s easy for a magazine to generate” and “articles it would like to think its readers find value in”. As a former editor of the magazine some say was the inspiration for Mojo, I should point out that there’s a lot of factors in “what’s going on the cover this month” which are only distantly connected with ideology at this level.

(“We were going to have the Kinks but the pictures make them look like scary munters” etc etc)

]]>
By: mark sinker https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-1#comment-785042 Thu, 03 Feb 2011 16:04:46 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-785042 I think “albums” is a key jigsaw piece: if everyone involved is treating it as the unit of creative coherence, then — with untypical 50s exceptions like Sinatra, Miles and Mingus — pre-Pepper/Zappa pop importances drops down a whole level. An album generates 1500 words worth of copy far more easily than a single: it’s prepackaged for discursive examination; as is the assumption of greater importance.

Also for a key couple of decades, it was a unit more in adults wallet-reach than the single.

And — obvious key rule-proving exceptions aside — it wasn’t a unit of creative coherence as much favoured in black pop as in white; for socio-economic reasons as much as aesthetic ones…

(One of the fascinating things to emerge from Tanya Headon’s ancient and very mild trollposts re eg Pink Floyd is that the angered fan-respondents, very clearly convinced of the massively superior importance in the music they defend so passionately, never really seem aware of what the responsibilities what ought to come with this claim to sognificance . They accuse her of mindless fandom of whatever they consider to be the silly girly pop of the day, but almost none of them actually discuss PF content, except in the vaguest if-you-have-to-ask-lady terms. It’s the brandishing of the badge of importance rather than any engagement with the examination of value and etc: the obviousness is taken as read… and of course the sign of an effective magazine, in its relationship to the beliefs and desires of its readers, is exactly that what’s obvious need never be said.)

]]>
By: Tom https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-1#comment-785030 Thu, 03 Feb 2011 15:38:07 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-785030 The most glaring (but also kind of unsurprising) omission from the Mojo covers canon is Prince, I think.

]]>
By: col124 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-1#comment-785008 Thu, 03 Feb 2011 14:47:25 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-785008 I think what’s partly hurt the Hollies (in Mojo) was that they were primarily a singles band, and a “pop” singles band at that, with no “lost classic” LP to exhume, like the Zombies. Also, they weren’t the most colorful of bands: compare the Byrds, with distinct personalities like McGuinn, Clark, Hillman, Crosby, Parsons, Clarence White, etc. (& the Byrds didn’t make the cover either)

]]>
By: DietMondrian https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-1#comment-784994 Thu, 03 Feb 2011 14:24:37 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-784994 Only one cover for the Kinks, too. That seems a serious undervaluation to me, compared to six each for the Who and the Rolling Stones.

And where are the Hollies in this canon? I don’t really know their stuff but a quick look at Wikipedia reveals they had 17 top 10 hits, yet they seem to be have been relegated to a footnote in the Graham Nash/US West Coast story. I’d like to know more.

]]>
By: mark sinker https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-1#comment-784448 Wed, 02 Feb 2011 14:01:01 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-784448 They don’t do textual analysis OR any kind of musicology (actual-real academic musicology, or any of the ad hoc types that have evolved to explore musics actual-real academic musicology is a bit clueless about). I can half-imagine a vague belief about “how much there is to say about something we never really examine” DOES underpin considerations about what the readership consider is music that matters enough to be read about, but it’s a VERY long chain of unexplained assumptions, some on my part, some projected onto “their” part.

]]>
By: MichaelH https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-1#comment-784441 Wed, 02 Feb 2011 13:43:12 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-784441 I’ve always assumed it’s because there’s less textual analysis you can do on Lawdy Miss Clawdy than on Ballad of a Thin Man, but then the heritage rock mags don’t do much textual analysis, do they? They do long and involved historical documentation, with bits about the impact of the music – which would suits 50s r’n’r down to the ground. Is it because too many people are dead? Well, Jerry Lee, Chuck Berry, Fats Domino, Little Richard are still alive of the big first-wave stars (though the first two may a bit too cussed for the 12-page interview treatment).

]]>
By: the pinefox https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-1#comment-784231 Tue, 01 Feb 2011 18:47:11 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-784231 I think there’s a lot to say about the music makers, and the producers, and the wild tours, and the plane crashes, and the cultural impact, and the inspirations.

What I sought to suggest above was an idea (that I don’t necessarily endorse) that there is less to say about the songs themselves, either structurally or in lyrical content. I can imagine someone finding a lot to say about ‘Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds’ or ‘Like a Rolling Stone’, in that respect, more than about ‘Rip It Up’ or even ‘Cathy’s Clown’. The fact that much 50s r&r is 12-bar blues is somewhat relevant (though I daresay a lot of Stones, for instance, was 12-bar blues too – as was much very early Beatles as on Beatles at BBC, etc).

It strikes me that in voicing this possibility I may have happened upon an oft-overlooked subsection of Rockism — in which 60s Rock would be favoured by Rockists over rock & roll, as more artistic, rich, thematically and musically serious, etc. (I suppose it would then be unsurprising if anti-Rockist types revolted against this.)

]]>
By: mark sinker https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-1#comment-784189 Tue, 01 Feb 2011 15:42:34 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-784189 Yes, the idea that there’s actually less to say about 50s music or the people making it seems extremely unlikely on the face of it. Obviously willingness to talk is somewhat affected by the erm how you say very severe DEADNESS of some of the musicmakers of the 40s and 50s (and — more to the point in mojoworld — of those who worked behind the scenes with them). And scholars like Peter Guralnick and Nick Tosches have already written the (very hefty) book on some of these earlier folks, back when they weren’t dead, these books presumably somewhat being the actual inspiration for the mojo/uncut approach. But this doesn’t seem like a good reason actually to exclude updates on same.

]]>
By: lonepilgrim https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-1#comment-784185 Tue, 01 Feb 2011 15:20:13 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-784185 I suspect the reason that there is less written about the 50s (or earlier) is that it doesn’t match the readership demographic and because articles are usually tied in to acts that have product to sell or who are willing to talk. In the main this means ‘survivors’ from the 60s and 70s like Dylan, McCartney, etc. I wish the editors would be a bit more adventurous and trust the readership more by exploring some less familiar avenues.

]]>
By: the pinefox https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-1#comment-784127 Tue, 01 Feb 2011 09:48:07 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-784127 I think this point about sound quality or depth might be correct, and I suppose there is also a lack of elaborateness to rock & roll songwriting, a tendency to great structural simplicity. Maybe there is ‘not so much to say about it’?

But

a) I don’t think Elvis does sound weak now – when I first heard some live tracks from the 1950s I was amazed at how explosive they were, it brought across what an amazing loud sound this must have been at the time

b) some people (like Dylan) say old recording was good, better than now; don’t know if that’s true or arguable.

Would rather hear or watch Jerry Lee Lewis than Run DMC, or Sex Pistols.

]]>
By: Ed https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-1#comment-784069 Tue, 01 Feb 2011 05:03:14 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-784069 @13 Isn’t 50s rock’n’roll neglected partly because most of it sounds so thin to modern ears? Before the production innovations of Phil Spector, George Martin, Jimmy Page, and others in the 60s who I don’t know about, recorded music seems tinny and underpowered, especially in the bass and drums. (With Eddie Cochran maybe as an exception?) You read about the explosive impact this music had on the people who first encountered it, and the feeble-sounding recordings fail utterly to live up to the hype.

With the modern Elvis reissues, for example, the vocals always seem much too high in the mix to me.

The other point is surely that we cannot recreate in ourselves the 1950s’ capacity for astonishment. Once you have heard Run DMC or the Sex Pistols, you are never going to respond to Jerry Lee Lewis or Bill Haley the way their first listeners did.

And Gomez: that decision is almost worth a cover story in itself, isn’t it? What were they thinking? What arguments were used? What did they hear in the music? Perhaps they really were on to something. It almost makes me want to hear the album to find out.

]]>
By: mark sinker https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-1#comment-783874 Mon, 31 Jan 2011 11:00:12 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-783874 It’s about class, I think, more than colour: pre-Gram Parsons country is equally invisible. Fear of a hick planet.

]]>
By: Alex https://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2011/01/mojo-jojo/comment-page-1#comment-783867 Mon, 31 Jan 2011 10:17:32 +0000 https://freakytrigger.co.uk/?p=20462#comment-783867 13: too black….

Anyway, surely as the Mojo-reading public ages, they’ll eventually start forgetting what was on the cover last month quickly enough that they can keep turning over the same articles.

]]>