LOU REED
"Hey man what's your style? How you get your kicks for living?"
General Rating: 2
ALBUM REVIEWS:
Lou Reed is the 'weird guy' of the Seventies, but there's really nothing
particularly weird about him. The problem is that since his work with the
Velvet Underground he's been mistakenly categorized as a 'proto-punk idol'
which isn't even a part of the whole truth, since it's simply wrong. The
few punk elements that Lou really inserted in his compositions were usually
limited to extensive use of feedback which you could call 'psychedelic'
as well, and his lyrics. Essentially, Lou is just a singer-songwriter,
and a bit more ambitious and definitely a bit more audacious than most.
His "street philosophy" is far more tasteful and refined than
that of, say, Bruce Springsteen (although the comparison isn't exactly
justified due to Lou's never taking himself as a "working class hero"),
and his intriguing brand of rock poetry makes him my second favourite singer-songwriter
after Dylan - even some of his worst albums are saved by the fact that
he never cheapened his lyrics unless it were an intentional hoax.
Funny enough, it is exactly the lyrics that also led him to a short
period of flirtation with such a trivial genre as glam rock in the early
Seventies - all these gay and S&M themes that Lou was exploring in
all sincerity were highly appropriate for shock-posturing glam rockers,
and he even stirred some interest in David Bowie who produced his second,
and the most glammy, album of all, Transformer. After that, however,
and a suceeding stint at a public glam image trhat lasted for about two
years, Lou seemed to abandon any hint at a stable style, and went off flirting
in all directions, rather like Neil Young: industrial noises, conceptual
rock operas, acoustic folkish romances, and Fifties' nostalgia all have
the equal chance of being met on a certain Lou Reed album. This makes it
extremely hard to draw any definite conclusions about the man, except for
the obvious - his being a vastly experimental person. Over the years he's
produced quite a solid load of crap, along with a not less solid load of
gems, and messed with so many genres that he just can't be categorized.
His personality is quite mysterious, too: while the theater nature of David
Bowie and the 'heart-on-a-sleeve' nature of Neil Young are evident, most
of the time it's really hard to guess Lou's message. He can be deadly serious
and playful at the same time, and nearly every record will leave you standing
on your head trying to think what kind of thing the guy really wanted
to say. One of the reasons, I guess, is Lou's famous voice: gruff, wheezy,
cold and never emotional - if there's one rock star to be described
as 'the dude who never smiles', it should be Lou. This cold, emotionless
approach to music really gets on my nerves sometimes, to the point of my
wanting to just let him fuck off and discarding all his records. But I
admit that's something really silly to do, and anyway, why should one always
lay his soul bare in his songs? That's up to the artist to decide.
On the other hand, Lou Reed is a great songwriter - perhaps not in the
same league as the Beatles or Townshend or Bob Dylan (whom he often tries
to imitate), but in a class of his own. His earliest solo records, when
he was still fresh off his position in the VU, are chock-full of catchy,
memorable tunes with solid melodies, and his unique style of blending garage
rock with a special German sensitivity had no analogies. Unfortunately,
his material began to seriously decline in quality later on, but should
that surprise us? Name me a 'dinosaur' who was consistently good in the
Eighties... If anything, it's Lou's relentless productivity that earned
him the hate of many a snub-nosed reviewer; but just as it happens with
other overproductive artists, such as Jethro Tull, for instance, we shouldn't
forget their real true merits. And Lou has a lot of those; at least his
Seventies' catalog is consistent enough to gain him as much "solo
artist" recognition as he usually receives it as member of the Velvet
Underground.
Anyway, I'm not a big expert in the worst records of Mr Reed - I don't
have them, and so I wouldn't want to particularly blasphemize Lou until
I've had a chance to get some serious listens; for now, I'm just concentrating
on his first, 'young' solo period - arguably the best in his career. Eventually
this page will include all of his albums, at least I'm hoping - if I live
that long. If I live long enough to survive listening to a couple dozen
crappy Lou Reed albums, that is.
Jes' kiddin', of course. They might be magnificent. Let's wait and see,
shall we?
What do YOU think about Lou Reed? Mail your ideas
Your worthy comments:
Steve Maffei <[email protected]> (06.11.99)
Huh. You don't sound like you really meant to give Lou a two. Anyway, I'm enjoying reading these reviews, and Coney Island Baby is definitely up to what you said it was. Transformer, too, I'd give that a 10. Please review some more of his RCA releases. I'd sure like to see what you'd give Metal Machine Music.
Year Of Release: 1972
Record rating = 10
Overall rating = 12
A quiet, almost 'nostalgic' debut with only occasional bursts of
conscience, this is pleasantly inoffensive.
Best song: BERLIN
Lou Reed's first solo album is often carelessly overlooked in favor
of Transformer, his much more well-known 1972 glam-rock 'masterpiece',
but it's a shame, because this particular record is quite good. It's not
a particularly great listening experience, of course. But it's one of those
quiet, stripped-down albums with a share of moderate, but carefully crafted
rockers that turn out to be close to magnificent at close listen. If you're
a big Velvet Underground fan (more exactly, a big fan of the VU's early
period - as far as I know, later VU albums were more close to Reed's solo
efforts; unfortunately, I just haven't heard 'em), you're well advised
to stay away from this album - you won't find any of the wild, reckless
experimentation here, and you won't find no S&M lyrics or direct drug
references either.
Instead, Lou mainly focuses on three subjects. First of all, it's his usual
brand of social critique, albeit quite moderate in the current case ('I
Can't Stand It', 'Wild Child'). Next, his usual brand of psychoanalysis
and self-bashing ('Going Down') or others-bashing ('Walk And Talk It').
And finally - a big surprise: a large percent of the songs are just plain
love ballads, with a slight trace of nostalgia now and then ('Berlin',
later recycled for his 1973's album of the same name) or with a slight
trace of philosophy ('Love Makes You Feel'). The lyrics are good, but sure
as hell, nothing on here is groundbreaking. Come to think of it, what kind
of lyrics could have been groundbreaking in 1972? Oh, and of course I forgot
to mention that about half of these songs are from his past - some, in
fact, have later cropped up on VU (the 'great lost Velvet Underground
album' that I have never heard).
What really makes you feel so good about the record are the melodies, of
course. Oh, and the general atmosphere. The album is anything but depressive,
and yet, there's something sad in the air when you go and listen to it.
Even such songs as the gentle country ditty 'Lisa Says' convey a slightly
darkened mood - maybe it's due to Lou's usual gruff voice? Maybe it is.
Personally, I just plain go nuts over that weird 'oh nooooooo' in between
the backup females chanting 'Lisa sa-a-a-ys!' The song itself is very reminiscent
of contemporary Dylan (you know, the kind of Nashville Skyline Dylan),
but maybe even better - due to the superior instrumental backing (by the
way, both Caleb Quaye of Elton John's fame and Rick Wakeman of Rick Wakeman's
fame back old Lou on this album). And isn't it fun to hear the slow country
tune suddenly develop into a faster jazz groove halfway through?
Then there's the rockers - the simple, garage-like stuff that you probably
won't hear on any other 1972 record, like the downright great 'I Can't
Stand It' and the slightly less memorable, but still fun 'Walk And Talk
It'. Lou Reed must have been the only chap not to be afraid to record such
kind of songs - bare, stripped down rockers with not a single wink neither
to glam nor to heavy metal - in 1972. 'Wild Child' is mostly interesting
lyricswise, but it's still danceable and certainly a good cure from, say,
Close To The Edge, if you ever vow to listen to all the notorious
records of 1972 in a row.
My best bet, though, is on the wonderful, absolutely flabbergastingly,
jigsawpuzzlingly great ballad that might seriously be his best (not that
I heard a lot, so I'm not making definite statements here, hear that?)
'Berlin' starts out as a weird, slow, piano-driven cabaret showtune; I
still can't decide whether he's aiming at the Hollywood or the German style
here, but must be German, after all - otherwise, the tune would probably
be named 'L. A.' Add to this the usual German intonations of Lou's voice
that he's had from the very beginning, and you get yourself an unexpected
pseudo-German lounge ballad (I say 'pseudo-' because it's much better than
any real German lounge ballads). However, as soon as the song drifts into
the chorus, the German intonations are gone, and you get yourself a passionate,
warm, emotion-filled nostalgic plea that strikes me as maybe one of the
most emotionally-charged bits of music of the early Seventies. That 'I'm
gonna miss you now that you're gone' bit moves me to real tears - and old
Lou Reed has his own special ways of driving a person to tears (see 'Sunday
Morning' for further reference).
The album ends a bit weaker than it starts, with the lacklustre 'Ocean'
where, for once, Lou's voice betrays him and goes down to the depths of
shakiness and off-key-state. (Then again, maybe I just have a personal
incompatibility with that particular intonation). This is however compensated
with the magnificent ballad 'Love Makes You Feel' - maybe the simplest
song on the album, both lyrics- and melody-wise, but it gains from this
simplicity, rather like John Lennon's 'Love'. And don't you love that moment
where he sings 'Love makes you feel ten feet tall/And it sounds like this'
and rips out a chaotic ringing solo? Finally, I feel I'm slowly becoming
a big fan of 'Ride Into The Sun', a quiet little pop rocker with some enthralling
guitar interplay and a very complicated vocal melody - Lou sings
in several keys and goes from one section to another with such natural
ease that you just don't notice the different parts replacing each other.
In all, this is a brilliant debut album, and the fact that it's practically
out of print in the US... ah wait, I'm not gonna complain about that because
I already stated this complaint for half a dozen albums. Get it wherever
you can - I have a deep feeling that it will satisfy both the lovers of
punk and prog, because this is a rare, brilliant moment where both ends
meet. Dang it, there ain't a bad song on here! Okay, so I said I disliked
'Ocean', but that's just because Lou didn't bother to clear his throat
before recording. That's it to you - always clear your throat before
singing! And carry a couple of bottles of sacred water around!
Walk and talk it! Mail your ideas!
Your worthy comments:
Martin <[email protected]> (07.09.2000)
Yeah! Well, my first Lou Reed CD was a junky "best of" type of collection. Listening to that I really thought that this is the limit (in relevant criteria). Haven heard all the big and great of seventies I thought that Lou was just another dude born in the right time.... But as I bought my first album of VU (Load) and Lou (Lou Reed), I understood that the man is genius or at least stands along side to Ian Anderson and Dylan and Hendrix are just myths raised to heaven. I really like Hendrix and agree that the man was a natural talent, but as I'm ready to say that Hendrix born with guitar in his hand, I'm ready to say that Lou born with unique ability to think and talk, which is not too common, sadly enough. I do not have all releases of Lou Reed, but I'm sure that the one from 72 sets the standard and is a great piece of art.
Year Of Release: 1972
Record rating = 10
Overall rating = 12
Reed going pervert once again? Whatever your emotional reactions
might be, the songs are still mighty fine.
Best song: VICIOUS
Lou Reed's glam rock album? It's not me who made that up - that's an
opinion widely shared by critics, and they do bring up vital arguments
in favour of it. However, most of the 'glam' here turns out to be superficial
at close look. Of course, it is no small coincidence that the album was
produced by Lou in close collaboration with David Bowie and his guitarist
Mick Ronson (the latter also contributes a fair share of guitarwork and
is even responsible for the strings arrangements). And the fact that the
album is filled to the brim with themes of homosexualism, perversion, sexual
bitches, etc., etc., etc., not to mention the album title and the album
cover, also contributes to the general delusion. One must not forget, though,
that most of these lyrical topics were essential to Lou's creativity long
before Bowie started getting draggy and the term 'glam rock' was even coined.
And even if Bowie did leave a slight imprint of his personality on some
of the songs, he was in no way such a patron and creative godfather to
Reed as he was for, say, Mott The Hoople. This is a real Lou Reed album
- and it has as much to do with glam rock as, for instance, Peter Gabriel
and Genesis: you could argue that Genesis were a glam band, but apart from
certain theater elements in their show, there was not much of a glam influence
in the band.
Musically, the album is a little less interesting than the unjustly underrated
debut - which might be due to the fact that Lou had nearly emptied the
barrel of Velvet Underground outtakes (only 'Andy's Chest' and 'Satellite
Of Love' got recycled) and finally got around to the necessity of composing
a complete record by himself and on his own. Basically, it's just a little
underarranged and devoid of hooks: I just don't see as many interesting
melodies as on the previous one. This is, however, mostly compensated by
the weird, dark atmosphere that Lou weaves around his compositions, transferring
a potentially perfectly normal pop album into a gloomy tale of half-legal
night clubs and the down side of New York's night life. His voice is in
perfect form, and bad and wheezy as it might be, it's certainly the ideal
instrument for conveying these dark feelings - and providing them with
enough sincerity and conviction to forever ban this record from the glam
category.
The moderate rockers here are 'Vicious' (my personal favourite, though
for no obvious reason, it seems) and 'Hangin' 'Round', groovy but not very
memorable foot-stompers: the best thing about them are again lyrics, incredibly
smutty and almost sacrilegious on the latter and incredibly funny and almost
stupid on the former ('Vicious/You hit me with a stick/But all I've got
is a guitar pick' is my fav line there). There's also the anthemic, rambling
'I'm So Free' - the loudest and clunkiest on here, but not very entertaining.
Anyway, it isn't the rockers that make the record - the most important
stuff is usually stripped down, peppered with tubas and harmonicas to get
that lounge jazz/German cabaret sound again, and combined with Lou's voice,
becomes almost magical. This includes the hit 'Walk On The Wild Side' (although
I'm still baffled as to how could a song that mentions giving head become
a hit), with its horrible dirty imagery set to a quiet little shuffle and
Lou's gentle 'doo doo doo's that almost suggest that there's nothing bad
going on. I'm also a big fan of 'Make Up', the one where Lou proudly announces
that 'we're coming out of our closets': it's probably the closest he got
to imitating that German sound (except for 'Berlin', of course), and it
sounds so generic that it's almost ingenious. And, of course, in order
to appreciate the 'concept', one has to take some close listens to 'Andy's
Chest' and the ridiculous piano groove of 'New York Telephone Conversation'
- a song where Lou plays the jerk so convincingly that you can't help being
totally sucked in by the very fact!
Still, in between the 'conceptual' songs are sandwiched some beautiful
ballads that continue developing Lou's romantic side along the unforgettable
lines of 'Sunday Morning' and 'Love Makes You Feel'. 'Perfect Day', with
its 'Berlin'-style atmosphere, quiet, Dylan-ish singing, and gentle piano
chords moves me to tears, and 'Satellite Of Love', while some might call
it a trifle cheesy, actually features a magnificent arrangement - the vocal
harmonies on the choruses are superb, the jazzy bits are tasty, and the
melody is right there - it's just that you have to wait for it.
And what a better way to end the record than to sign it with such a flourish
as 'Goodnight Ladies' - one more cabaret send-up with perfectly innocent,
yet fascinating lyrics about lonely Saturday nights and sucking lemon peels?
Even if you hate this loungy type of music, you could still be enthralled
by Lou's style on this one - the melody is as generic and ripped-off as
possible, but it's the combination of the melody with the lyrics and the
vocal tone that makes this listening experience unforgettable (actually,
this applies to the record as a whole). And don't forget that this sounds
nothing like the classic Velvet Underground - punk lovers, please do not
bother! This is lounge music, not your standard three-chord rock!
Perfect day to mail your ideas, isn't it? (Actually, any day is perfect for doing that...)
Your worthy comments:
Simon Hearn <[email protected]> (08.09.99)
THE ONLY Lou Reed album to own! Class abounds within the grooves of this little beauty. My fave song is 'hangin around' - just a brilliant piece of songwriting. I do have a certain penchant for 'new york telephone conversation' too - should I be worried?! This captures the mood of a time in modern history for me and is that not what great records do? I have to say that even though he was doing this sort of "underground" stuff with the velvet's - is it not bowie's influence as producer (+ mick ronson) that has brought this "gender bending" quality? Bowie's influence also gave the record the success it so richly deserved. This is a sad fact as Reed is a consummate performer, but it took a mega star for him to be noticed fully.
Ben Greenstein <[email protected]> (01.10.99)
Lou does glam-rock? Doesn't make sense to me, for several reasons. First
of all, his stuff is usually kind of folky, and secondly, because he looks
stupid in makeup! Look at that picture of him as a woman on the back cover
- he's the ugliest transvestite I've ever seen! And I've seen quite a few...
Still, the album is pretty good. "Vicious" really grew on me
after severely annoying me the first four times, and "Walk On The
Wild Side" is a classic (don't ask me why, though). "Perfect
Day" and "Sattelite Of Love" are both semi-hits, and for
good reason. They are simply gorgeous. And the rest of the album is great,
too - though I'd rather have more of the orchestrated stuff and less rockers.
Still, all good songs. A nine.
Valentin Katz <[email protected]> (09.12.99)
It's hard to believe that such a good album can be produced by David Bowie, but it is true, I don't know if I'd give this a 10, more like an 8, but 8 is pretty damn good. You have to give Lou some credit, he knows how to write songs that perfectly fit his nasal, teen-age voice, especially on 'Perfect Day', "You Just keep me haaaangginnn' Oooonn". 'Vicious' is a great opener but 'Walk on the Wild Side' has to be the best song on here. Perfect melody, perfect lyrics, perfect singing, essentially, the perfect quiet apocalyptic song.
Year Of Release: 1973
Record rating = 8
Overall rating = 10
As far out as could be - Lou Reed producing his version of Cabaret????
Best song: MEN OF GOOD FORTUNE
An overall rating of 10, I feel, is not going to satisfy anybody - there
is really no middle ground. You will either deify this record, calling
it one of the richest and most wonderful chef-d'ouevres that modern music
has managed to produced, or trample it under your feet all the while spitting
out curses and lamenting over the fact how you'd like to punch the fat
ass of the guy who told you Lou Reed was the archetypical proto-punk.
One thing's for certain, though - Berlin ain't for everybody. It's
also quite unlike anything Lou Reed had ever done before or since, and
I'd even go as far as to state with all certainty that the album has no
analogs in rock music at all. On a basic level, this is a 'rock opera'
about a romance between an American dealer and a German drugged-out courtisan
- they meet, they fall in love, they marry, they make children, they quarrel,
they part their ways, they leave the kids with the father, they rave nostalgic,
and then the story ends - what a great subject for a neo-realistic film.
Or, wait, didn't we see the first part of this story in Cabaret?
Why, as a matter of fact, we did - life goes on and on, you see!
What makes the album so special isn't the storyline, of course, but the
atmosphere of the album. Even though it is recorded with a cast of thousands
(Jack Bruce of Cream and Tony Levin of the future King Crimson on bass,
B. J. Wilson of Procol Harum on drums, Steve Winwood on organ, etc., etc.),
the arrangements are again mostly stripped down, but this time it is not
the stripped-down-ness of a New York S&M club or a ghetto bordello,
as in Transformer; it is the stripped-down-ness of a psychological
record, brimming with emotions, both sincere and fake, with a strong German
flavour. Sometimes it's just Lou sitting all alone with his guitar ('Oh
Jim') or piano (title track), but more often the atmosphere is created
with eerie effects - a gloomy church organ in the background, a barrage
of heavy, bass-emphasized piano chords, some echoey, leaden vocals, a distorted
block chord now and then, you know, that kind of stuff. It all combines
to make a record so depressed and tragic, so utterly pessimistic, almost
apocalyptic, that even Quadrophenia sounds like 'Ode To Joy' in
comparison. If you can't stand slow, lethargic, gloomy records, don't even
think about buying this, no matter how much your friends praise it.
The big problem is that the actual songs seem to be a little neglected
in favour of the mood and the lyrics - although, to be honest, the record
does contain some of Lou's most hard-hitting lyrics ever ('Men Of Good
Fortune', 'The Kids'). The tunes are very rarely memorable, their structures
transparent and feeble, and the melodies often diluted in a sea of noises
or disorganised piano chords. The title track, recycled from Lou Reed,
is a perfect example: the formerly magnificent nostalgic ballad with a
heart-breaking chorus is given a piano-only arrangement and a careless,
almost off-key vocal treatment (not to mention that only a short snippet
of the original actually made it to the re-recording). Same goes for such
songs as 'Lady Day', the story of the protagonists' meeting, that picks
a little steam only during the choruses. If you're looking for rockers,
look elsewhere: 'How Do You Think It Feels', with its aggressive guitar
part, is probably the closest to a rocker on here, but it's also the song
that fits in with the mood least of all.
So my best advice is to accept the album as it is - relax and try to give
yourself in to the enchantment that Reed clumsily casts upon you. If you
succeed, you'll find quite a lot of pleasure and sometimes even catharsis
in these songs. 'Men Of Good Fortune', for instance, evolves from a slow,
typically Lou Reed-style humming into a raising scream of protest; 'Caroline
Says' is tender, sad, and moving, with its lyrics about the breaking of
relationship between the lovers; and the centerpiece of the whole 'opera'
seems to be 'The Kids', a fascinating tale of the mother's separation from
her children complete with real kids weeping and crying 'Mummy!' - a tale
that, when delivered in Lou Reed's casual, but here very Bob Dylan-ish
wheezing tone, assumes an almost universal meaning - classic!
Yeah, kids, this ain't rock'n'roll in the faintest degree - slow song after
slow song after lethargic song after hypnotic song, and not a real
rock riff in sight. And I admit it's hard, what the hell, at first listen
it must be pure torture to sit through the melancholic 'Caroline
Says (part 2)', then endure the pessimisitc 'Kids', before being submitted
to the nostalgic 'The Bed' (with an unbearable, angel-voiced coda that
reminds me of the 'Crucifixion' scene in Jesus Christ Superstar)
and the romantic, universalist 'Sad Song', all of which go off at the same
tempo (super-slow) and apparently feature only rudiments of melody,
all of them based either on a sloppy acoustic rhythm track or a falling
apart set of piano chords. But real art isn't always easy to endure, friends
- and this is real art, no doubt about that. The question is whether the
game's worth it - will you be morally rewarded for trying to endure this?
Well, I still am not: I can't really get used to the atmosphere and the
lack of melodies, and I guess I will never be, unless I find something
in my life so that I could identify myself with one of the heroes (hope
I won't). But the album is still very good - those who are able to fit
in the groove will never want to part with it. The lyrics are clever, the
arrangements are perfectly suited for them, and the production is just
what is needed for this kind of conception. Now... LET ME GO TO SLEEP
before I write another idiotic word-combination!
Men of good fortune often mail your ideas
Your worthy comments:
Ben Greenstein <[email protected]> (09.08.99)
You're right, George. You are going to get a lot of flack for not really
liking this album.
I LOVE this album. It's so perfectly dark and depressing (unlike a lot
of phony "gloom-rock" bands like the Cure, who I acually really
like) that one can't help but be captured by it's world. Plus, it's got
an actual fluid plotline, unlike most "concept" albums I've heard.
I mean - you can just look at the album cover and remember things like
the characters, the events - find me one other album that can do that!
And it doesn't remind me of Cabaret at all - possibly because I've
never seen it.
And the songs rule! The entire second side, for one, makes me cry - with
"Caroline Says 2" being his most melodic tune ever (though it
is a just a better rewrite of the Velvet's "Stephanie Says").
"Lady Day" describes the lovers meeting, but does it in such
a dark way - as if Lou knows that she's going to be the end of him somewhere
down the line. "Oh, Jim" is cool, and "The Kids" is
possibly his most folky tune ever. The one tune that makes me shiver with
fear is the oh-so-spooky "The Bed," in which Caroline kills herself.
Brrr...
So I love it! A superb album, and with none of that stupid "Vicious"
crap. I love Lou, but I hated it when he tried to be "cool,"
as he did with glam rock. Still, he could occasionally turn out a great
album - this and Transformer are both outstanding.
Year Of Release: 1974
Record rating = 8
Overall rating = 10
A live glam rock album, is it? A little bit heavy on the guitar-wanking
side, but remember - this guy came from the VU!
Best song: WHITE LIGHT/WHITE HEAT
Isn't it ironic that Lou Reed's best-selling album was a live one? And
not just a live one - an album packed to the brink with live versions of
old VU standarts. Apparently, this was the public's muffled expression
of what it really felt about Lou disbanding VU. Of course, it's soothing
to see that Lou wasn't going to discard his past and saw no problem in
taking his VU legacy on board. But the funny thing is, this doesn't sound
like the VU at all! Oh, how the clever nostalgic public was probably disappointed
(and how the not so clever contemporary public was probably filled with
awe).
Instead, Lou goes for a gimmicky, loud and dazzling sound - most of the
entertainment is provided by constant guitar duels courtesy of hired-guns
Steve Hunter and Dick Wagner. It isn't even mentioned in the liner notes
if Lou plays guitar himself - I highly doubt it, seeing as he rarely played
anything on his previous solo records. And on both the front and back covers
he is pictured as a show-off-ey, highly maked up, well, 'rock'n'roll animal'.
This is definitely a glam show, and a glam rock record - the guitar sound
is heavy but not thoroughly sincere, and from the very 'Intro' where Hunter
and Wagner enter the stage playing dazzling (and highly professional) guitar
licks off each other, you're in for a true show - the songs take
on an almost 'monumental' feel, most of them being sped up, cranked up,
puffed up and blown up. Yeah, that's right. All of this is just spectacle,
of course, but, as with the best examples of glam rock, it's high-quality
and extremely entertaining spectacle.
A metallized, arena-rock-adjusted version of 'Lady Day' is the only Lou
Reed solo tune that made it to the album (more of his solo numbers cropped
up on the later Lou Reed Live, though), and it's easy to see why:
the general mood of the 'brilliant show' is in no way compatible with the
quiet, stripped-down, modest moods on his solo records. 'Lady Day' is,
in fact, the worst cut on the album, especially if compared with the far
superior studio version on Berlin. On the other hand, the VU tunes
have suddenly proved to be much more adaptable - the two short and the
two long numbers on here rock mercilessly and are thoroughly enjoyable
even in their lengthiness.
Of the short numbers, the speedy, raving, punkish version of 'White Light/White
Heat' is the best, with enough kick-butt energy to equal and probably surpass
the studio version - I mean, instead of the Velvets' intentionally sloppy,
dirty approach, you witness a tightened up, crunchy rocker, with an almost
AC/DC-like riff holding up the song; but 'Sweet Jane' is quite decent as
well, once you've gotten past the lengthy intro featuring the guitarists'
talents. The main emphasis, however, is placed on the two lengthy cuts
- 'Heroin' and 'Rock'n'Roll'. While I can't admit to liking this version
of the latter too much, and the repetitive jam at the end gets way, way
too long, I certainly lift my thumbs up in favour of 'Heroin' - the version
here is much more thought out, inspired and professional than the sloppy
original. The multiple sections of the song are quite diverse, the famous
speeding up on the refrain is exercised in a series of different ways,
and the song's twelve-minute length is almost perfectly justified in that
you never know what is going to happen next. Crisp, hard-hitting guitar
parties abound, the occasional organ solo (Ray Colcord is on keyboards)
is cute, and Lou's vocals are sharp and distinctive as well. If anything,
the song receives a real 'rock-out' treatment - a thing that was sorely
lacking on the original; I know VU purists might crucify me for this statement,
but unless you're a VU purist (and most VU purists I've had the chance
of meeting on the Web were absolute freaks, so I'm not speaking on their
behalf), you're bound to agree with me.
As for 'Rock'n'Roll', it kicks just as much ass as everything else on here;
I'm not too sure if there was any real point in extending the song so drastically
- Hunter's repetitive wah-wah riff, for instance, simply has no reason
to stick in your ears for so long without any other instruments backing
it - but on the whole, it forms a dazzling and highly suitable ending to
the show that's supposed to highlight Mr Reed as the Rocker to outrock
everybody else. Who could have thought that this highly commercial, so
straightforwardly crowd-pleasing record would be followed by Metal Machine
Music just a few years later?
So, even if the album is by no means essential, it's probably a must for
all Lou Reed studiosos - turns out that the man's live edge and studio
edge around 1973-74 were two different things. And if you're dissatisfied
with Reed's German-style ditties or pretentious conceptual musings, this
is the album to own - flashy and kick-ass. Rock'n'roll, dude, rock'n'roll
to the core. Plus, the production is near-excellent (funnily, it might
even be better than on his contemporary studio records), and the coolest
thing - which often goes unnoticed - is that Lou never even says a 'thank
you' to the audience. Snubby son of a bitch, ain't he?
Rock'n'roll or
artificial glam? Mail your ideas
CONEY
ISLAND BABY 
Year Of Release: 1976
Record rating = 9
Overall rating = 11
The closest Lou has ever come to creating his own, near-perfect Dylanesque
style. Peaceful, gentle, clever and moving.
Best song: CRAZY FEELING
Amazing. Once again, Lou reinvents himself - this time he concentrates
more on the 'romantic' side. This, rather short (about thirty five minutes
long), album simply consists of songs with simple love thematics: simple,
that is, by Lou's own standards, because such a smart guy can't really
write simple love songs, now can he? The arrangements are all stripped
down, the glam element is gone completely, but no signs of art-rock complexity
either - Berlin this record ain't, for sure. Now you can kill me
and you can sue me and you can sneer at me, but for Heaven's sake I don't
understand why I like this album so much. The problem is, there just aren't
that many distinctive melodies - after all, how many distinctive melodies
you can actually produce when you're just sitting in the studio and absent-mindedly
strumming your guitar? Most of these songs are simply what we'd call 'streams
of consciousness': some have verses and choruses, some prefer not to have
them; some have lots of lyrics, some have the same lines repeated over
and over; some happen to have hooks, others have none. And throughout the
whole record he mostly sets the same groove - a simple rhythm guitar track,
often acoustic, sometimes electric, quiet spare instruments like gentle
slide guitar or an occasional piano, and soft, unobtruding drumming. And
the vocals, of course. People who are allergic to Reed's vocals, better
stay away - they're always the center of attention.
So what can explain the high rating of this record? Dunno. I just like
it, that's all. Right, now, stop this, let me try to think of an explanation.
Hmm... I guess it has something to do with the atmosphere, right? And the
vocals, of course - I can just imagine this album sung by, say, the Byrds
(what a disaster!) Lou really gives the record style with his usual German
intonations, and it's probably the best place to start if you want to compare
his style with Dylan's. Throughout the record, he shakes, quivers, trembles,
hits bad notes, stutters and mutters - and it all works, everything works,
right up to the last note! Have you heard 'Kicks'? It rules! It's the one
where Lou explains his need to get 'kicks' and does it in such a groovy,
paranoid manner that it's simply fascinating! The song is a bit jazzy in
structure (a pretty jazzy guitar plays some delicious licks in the background),
and Lou almost improvises the vocals, turning the song into a proto-hip-hoppy
jam that culminates in Lou shaking and howling and almost going crazy -
'I ne-ne-ne-ne-ne-ed some k-k-k-icks...'
Another extremity is the magnificent 'A Gift', a song that says and means
so much with so few means that, once again, I'm stumped. How does 'e do
this, man? And what lyrics! 'I'm just a gift to the women of this world.'
And, of course, the immortal lines: 'Responsibility sits so hard on my
shoulder./Like a good wine I'm better as I grow older.' That's about the
only lyrics that keep being repeated over and over, plus those backing
vocals that repeat them even more in a creepy whisper over a simple, unadorned
backing track. I mean, what a great musical idea! And how much does it
suggest! Don't ask me what exactly it suggests, please - it's simply
ultra-cool, and a thing that couldn't be tackled with so much sincerity
and emotional power by anybody but old Lou.
Then there are the 'faster' tracks. 'Ooohhh Baby' and 'Crazy Feeling' are
both tasty as a fresh-made lollypop, especially the latter that has some
miraculous slide guitar - you know, the kind of licks that only George
Harrison could master in his prime. A great embellishment for this upbeat,
quirky pop tune - another proof that Lou was, above everything else, just
a talented popmeister. But then again, the song would probably fade to
nothing wthout that wonderful slide, eh, what the hell, it's the best slide
I've heard in quite a long time, and it's been a long long long time since
I last put on a George Harrison record. Been too busy with my Rod Stewart
reviews, understand that? How many times do you have to go through a Rod
Stewart record to make a sincere, objective review? Actually, one will
do, but each one causes a nervous breakdown...
...anyway, what's the deal about Rod Stewart, I was talking about Lou Reed
here who actually gets the same overall rating as Rod but that's just because
Rod used to be good, not worse than Lou by any means. However, never in
his sweet short life could Rod come up with a record as cool as Coney
Island Baby. And I haven't yet mentioned the title track - a slowed
out, romantics-drenched, tune on which Lou simply ad libs his lyrics without
singing them, but it still sounds so great... come to think of it, he rarely
sings at all. Can you call the things he does 'singing'? He recites all
his songs! He recites here, too, a long, fascinating story about his passion
for football and about the glory of love, set to generic female backing
vocals. It's moody, intriguing and gentle, and from time to time elevating
to a passionate climax - especially in the end, where Lou finally mentions
his 'Coney Island baby'.
To sum it up: a record whose existence I can't either understand, explain
or justify, but I love it dearly anyway. A couple of songs are relative
throwaways here ('She's My Best Friend' still does nothing for me), and
the style is so monotonous that it might sometimes get dull when you're
not in the mood, so it's not a ten; but if you're in the mood, count this
a ten. A glorious artistic statement by the best man in the world to reproduce
the classic Dylan vibe without really imitating Dylan at all.
Ooohhh baby, mail
your ideas now
GROWING
UP IN PUBLIC 
Year Of Release: 1980
Record rating = 5
Overall rating = 7
Aw, not too good. A lot of life philosophy, which may or may not
speak to you, and a definite lack of care for the music.
Best song: THE POWER OF POSITIVE DRINKING
Lou entered the Eighties completely 'ready to suck', as might be said.
It's not that he was being misled by robotic, technophilic production,
a thing all too common for elder stars in the decade; it's just that it
was much and much too hard for him to remain on the leading edge of musical
innovation. Just take a look at this record. You might notice these hardly
impressive numbers that I put up there in the beginning and think that
I completely condemn this album as a rotten one or something. Actually,
not at all: I don't really mind listening to this stuff, just as I don't
really mind listening to, say, Bob Dylan's contemporary stuff (although
he did release his worst album ever that year). It's fairly decently
produced, too - the band is stripped down once again, with the main emphasis
on a couple electric guitars and the rhythm section, and only Michael Fonfara's
annoying synths manage to spoil the picture from time to time. Plus, the
record is not too long: eleven cuts, none of which go over four minutes,
so if you don't like a song, chances are it'll go away before you even
have the chance to express your disappointment.
The problem is, there's hardly a good song here you'll like in all. And
a major problem it is, as the tracks on this record hardly even fit the
definition of 'song'. Much more often, it's just pieces of entertaining
or not that enetertaining monolog set to a certain musical backing. 'So
what's the deal?', you'll say. 'It's Lou's usual approach - mumbling out
his life philosophy to some musical backing or other.' True, of course,
but there comes a time, every now and then, when the formula begins to
get on your nerves, especially when there are next to no musical ideas
at all to back it. In the past, Lou used spare arrangements as well, but
he always managed to make them moody and enthralling enough to fit in with
the words and the overall message. On Growing Up In Public, the
music seems kinda... in the way, if you know what I mean. In the way of
'poetry'. I can easily imagine this album not having any music at
all - you know, just 'Lou Reed-ing Poetry'. No cool vocal harmonies here,
no delicious slide guitar, no lounge trumpets, no impressive guitar solos;
like I said, the only musically significant element here are Michael Fonfara's
synthesizers which mostly stay in the background but sometimes get into
the spotlight a bit too much and give the song an ultra-banal Eighties'
feel which it really does not need at all, as in the case of the pathetic
instrumental break on 'How Do You Speak To An Angel'.
Growing Up In Public is basically a concept album (big surprise)
about, well, growing up, whether it be in public or not. Thus, it happens
to contain more than a fair share of autobiographic songs, rendering it
perhaps the most important self-describing album in Lou's career. The more
personal song thematics range from first youth reminiscences ('How Do You
Speak To An Angel') to rough parental relations ('My Old Man') to problems
with establishing social contact (title track) and, well, the themes are
many and they're not all that unusual for an autobiographical cycle. The
lyrics are also nothing really special: 'My Old Man' even borders on banal,
if not for the somewhat unexpected ending. I mean, most of this stuff is
nice, but then again, so are hamburgers. I'd come to expect something more
deep and thought-provoking from Lou: this autobiographical cycle is to,
say, Coney Island Baby as the Kinks' later obnoxious rock operas
are to their early deeply intelligent and sharp concept albums.
On this here record Lou is probably at his best when the songs are quiet
and relaxed; my favourite is the pleasant little reggae-ish shuffle 'The
Power Of Positive Drinking'. It might feel out of place on the album, as
it's essentially a funny throwaway - come on now, how come a song with
lyrics like 'Some say liquor kills the cells in your head/And for that
matter so does getting out of bed' belongs on here? But I love it all the
same. Then there's 'Teach The Gifted Children' which (a) closes the album
(so you're particularly grateful to it), (b) clocks in at 3:20 (so you're
able to breathe with relief), (c) has by far the most interesting lyrics
on the album (so you say: 'He's smart! He kept the best bit for the end!'),
and (d) tries to sound very emotional and climactic and maybe even cathartic,
but fails, because the message is definitely unclear (what's the whole
business with 'take me to the river' really about?) and the musical backing
is monotonous and boring. So you say: 'Yeah, he's a genius, but he sucks!'
None the more so than on the faster numbers, though - 'Smiles' and 'So
Alone' just bug me, especially the latter where Lou gets extremely hoarse
and implores you to 'shake your booty' in that exact intonation. Nah. The
only other tracks which I can remind as possessing interesting moments
are the title track, that had a strange trumpet-imitating synth riff over
it, kinda reminding you of the old Transformer days, and the already
mentioned 'How Do You Speak...' with its weird time changes and twisted
refrains. Everything else is simply forgettable - take Coney Island
Baby, substitute all the subtle instrumentation and romantic mood with
emotionless, noodling generic guitars and dreary whining and you get Growing
Up. Forgettable. Whew. Don't believe me? Just take a look at the album
cover for CIB and this one. See the difference? Same goes for the
music.
So alone, want
your ideas to keep me company
SONGS
FOR DRELLA 
(with JOHN CALE)
Year Of Release: 1990
Record rating = 8
Overall rating = 10
Eulogy to Andy Warhol. Ever heard anything of that one?
Best song: WORK
A weird album, this one. Apparently, it wasn't even Lou's and Cale's
original desire to write a cycle of songs describing the life and
deeds of Andy Warhol: the liner notes say the record was 'originally co-commissioned
by The Brooklyn Academy Of Music and The Arts At St Ann's'. The funny thing
is that they performed the task as best they could. The practical issue
was that Reed and Cale finally got together, and this led to a short-time
revival of the Velvet Underground a few years later. However, far more
significant is the theoretical issue: Songs For Drella is certainly
a unique project, an album that will be extremely hard to assimilate for
the non-converted and certainly hard to assimilate for those who don't
give a damn about Andy Warhol, because, let's face it, the lyrics that
Lou had come up with aren't certainly universalist - they are very personal,
referring to Andy's own world and Lou's feelings about Andy. In other words,
this is a 'poetic biography' of a crazy artist, written by another crazy
artist and performed by two crazy artists: a task that's indeed hard to
take. But please, do not judge the album too harshly - it's much, much
too easy to fling the CD into the corner after the first listen as a piece
of worthless, pretentious crap which it isn't on second listen. No, this
is no great shakes, and Lou had done better concept albums before - Berlin
is a good example - but this has something that Berlin never had:
a sense of realness, a feel of authenticity and deep, moving care. Now
I really don't know anything about Andy Warhol that I'm not supposed to
know as part of the general 'curriculum', and I certainly don't know anything
about Andy's relations with Lou apart from the well-known fact that he
'produced' the Velvet Underground's debut album and paired the band with
Nico. And a lot of the lyrics are simply ununderstandable to me, for this
and other reasons. But they work, and it's a fact.
All of these songs - though quite often it's simply impossible to call
this stuff 'songs', more like monologs set to music - sound as if Lou and
John recorded them over the course of two hours in somebody's bedroom.
Most often, it's just Cale sitting at his piano and Lou strumming his guitar
- sometimes acoustic, sometimes electric. No drums, no bass, nothing -
a few viola lines and a few moody synth backgrounds are all that deviates
from the formula. But the formula itself is pretty cool. Have you ever
heard a song that consists of an electric guitar/piano duet with no rhythm
section at all? I mean - at all? Ah now that's groovy. Plus, it often sounds
very very Velvet Underground-ish: remember their freak outs on the early
albums? Only here they never experiment with the song length or anything.
My favourite is 'Work' - a song where Lou babbles about how work was the
main principle of Andy's life and how he used to blame Lou for not having
written fifteen songs instead of ten. It has that strong distorted guitar
line supporting Cale's piano, and it manages to boogie - when there's actually
no base for a boogie, it still boogies, and Lou churns out the riff like
a demon! Ditto for 'Starlight', 'Forever Changed', and a couple of others.
However, most of the other tunes are usually softer - more reminiscent
of Lou's Berlin ballads, in fact: from the jolly gentle piano stylings
of the opener, 'Smalltown', and down to the gentle, sympathetic 'Hello
It's Me' that closes the album and represents Lou's artistic goodbye to
Andy, all these songs aren't supposed to rock - they're rather atmospheric.
I really don't think it would be useful to go over the songs one by one,
since they don't differ much in style, and their primary difference is
in lyrics, not anything else. There's only one track that openly stinks
- the lengthy monolog 'A Dream' (it's probably about Andy's death), where
Lou doesn't even try to sing - he just mumbles the text over, like in 'The
Gift' from White Light; but 'The Gift', at least, was a thrilling
story, and it was backed by some wonderful Stones-ish guitar, whereas 'A
Dream' is quite hallucinogenous, and it isn't supported by any melody at
all, just some moody synth playing from Cale. Perversely, it's the longest
track on the album (six and a half minutes), and I faithfully ditched the
album a whole point for that.
Otherwise, the atmosphere is really inviting. You can really feel that
Lou knew Warhol fine, and liked him quite fine, too. True,there's maybe,
like, a total of two or three strong melodies on the whole record, and
I really often fall asleep near the middle of the record, but who gives
a damn when it's such an honest, moving tribute? And then, there's the
lyrics, too: be sure to check out the sheet for 'Trouble With Classicists'
if you've ever been interested in the nature of art.
Hello it's me, I'm waiting for your ideas
Your worthy comments:
Philip P. Obbard <[email protected]> (10.12.99)
Cale does vocals on "A Dream", not Reed. Also, the lines are all taken from Warhol's diaries, reassembled for effect by Reed. I grew to really like this track - definitely the major opus of the album. I could do without "Faces and Names" and "Images", though.
Year Of Release: 1998
Record rating = 7
Overall rating = 9
Lou's 'Unplugged'; nice, but a bit overrated... by none other than
Lou himself.
Best song: they're kinda... all similar on here... okay, for now let it
be CONEY ISLAND BABY
Lou's latest is a lengthy live album, recorded at the Meltdown Festival
in London in 1997. Apparently, the title of the album isn't just a reminiscence
of 'Perfect Day' (which, by the way, is also in the setlist); it also reflects
Lou's own feelings towards the concert. I've read some interviews with
him where he really admits the night having been a 'perfect' one, a night
where everything worked ideally and gelled together - the instruments,
the audience, the band, the songs, the mood, etc., etc. And if you bother
to read the liner notes, you'll witness a moving story of how Lou plugged
his acoustic guitar directly into a special kind of amplifier one day and
how it worked fine and how somebody managed to eliminate all the feedback
and how he came out with that totally unique and fresh half-acoustic sound
that really enthralled him. Now me, I don't think I manage to hear any
significant differences between the sound on this record and your standard
acoustic guitar run through your standard amp, but then I'm no musician,
and I'm certainly not going to say that this is all bullshit; if it had
that much importance for Lou, it's okay. Maybe I just have to start really
training my ears some day. [Or maybe it's all just a big put-on; considering
Lou's enigmatic nature, this isn't that impossible a suggestion].
Unfortunately, I don't think it has that much importance for lovers of
Lou Reed music - some, but not lots. Maybe the concert itself was all right,
but I don't feel the atmosphere managed to transfer itself on the disc
real well. Lou begins the concert with a few oldies: just one VU tune ('I'll
Be Your Mirror'), some early Seventies' material ('Perfect Day', 'Kids',
'Vicious'), then goes into more 'modern' numbers that I haven't yet had
the chance to appreciate on the original studio releases. As far as I understand,
most of this stuff is from the late Eighties and the Nineties, especially
Lou's latest, Set The Twilight Reeling. And while the renditions
of these songs aren't particularly bad or anything, they somehow wear thin
on you rather quickly. Perhaps it's mostly because Lou was so enamorous
of his 'newly-found' guitar tone that he never bothered to diversify the
arrangements even one simple bit. So it's all formula: Lou's pleasantly,
but erratically strummed guitar with lots of syncopation but not a single
outstanding melody, uninspired backing from the band, and his Dylan-style
singing which he makes even more gruff and grating than on the studio
releases. Apparently, Lou tried to emulate the whole Dylan's workshop,
including the approach to live performances (I mean the principle 'the
worse you sing it, the more artistic it gets'). However, that which mostly
works with Dylan does not always work with Lou.
As such, I can hardly stand 'I'll Be Your Mirror': I'll always be associating
the tune with Nico, whatever be, and Lou simply can't do the song justice
on here. Where's the cold graceful charm? This song was supposed to sound
majestic, not pathetic. The stripped-down arrangement of 'Vicious' loses
more than half of its raunchy, upbeat, slinky charm either, and whoever
wants to hear 'Kids' without the children crying? Not me. I will, however,
admit, that the two tunes taken off Coney Island Baby, namely, the
title track and 'Kicks', work very well, and manage to thrill me for about
just as much as the originals. Of course, it's due to the fact that the
originals were also stripped down: Coney Island was so quiet and
mellow that it translates onto a 'half-plugged' concert with no losses
at all.
Most of the other tunes are fifty-fifty; the general principle, I'd say,
is that when Lou tries to 'rock out' with the band, he usually loses it,
but when he goes for something weepy and soulful, like 'Talking Book' or
the magnificent, tear-inducing rendition of 'Why Do You Talk', he hits
the mark with both hands and feet and everything else. Perhaps it would
have been a better idea to release an entire live album of ballads; then
again, I'd probably just get bored with it. As it is, the ballads simply
stand out proud and loud against the inept rockers like 'Original Wrapper'
or 'Sex With Your Parents'; actually, the last four tracks off the album
are all pretty much dismissable. I still don't understand why Lou went
ahead and toyed with rap on 'Original Wrapper'. All for the sake of that
stupid pun? Whatever. 'Busload Of Faith' just rules, though.
Oh well, at least Lou's voice is in perfect form, a boon which, unfortunately,
was not granted to Dylan. Ever compared Dylan's singing on his mid-Sixties
albums with the way he whines on his Nineties records? Some say it's the
result of too much smoking, but do you really think Lou Reed smoked any
less than Bob? And Lou's voice is just as strong and fresh today as it
was on Velvet Underground & Nico; a bit more deep, perhaps,
but that's about the only change. Oh yeah, he really grates on you in a
couple of places (that 'I wanna fly-y-y-y-y fly-y-y-y AWAAAAAAY' at the
end of 'Dirty BLVD' really turns my liver inside out), but you can get
used to it, and that's only a couple of places, after all.
So you can simply put on this record, relax in your armchair, and unabashedly
wax nostalgic. If you're a Lou fanatic, who knows? this album might yet
take you places unseen. Me, I prefer to go straight to the source, but
that does not mean Perfect Night is necessarily a bad album. It's
just overrated. By the artist himself. The critics hated it, of course.
But why should we?
Why do you talk? Better
mail your ideas
Return to the Index page! Now!