Showing posts with label John Mayer. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John Mayer. Show all posts

Friday, November 6, 2020

Hidden Places: Dancing in the Street

 



purchase [ Martha and the Vandellas ]


Where do you dance?

Myself> at a wedding party, perhaps a similar party venue, like a year-end celebration. How about in the streets? Chicago, New Orleans, New York City. Philladelphia, PA, Baltimore, Motor City and D.C.

Aside from their country of location, what relevance to our theme? Well ..  they're places and they're not mentioned in the title.That makes them fodder for this <Hidden Places> theme. 

These cities, of course, have streets and they were chosen. Chosen to represent a kind of revolution that took hold starting back in 1964. A revolution of abandon? No, that was dancing in the streets when WWII ended. That was the jitterbug craze. But the evil that rock and roll represented was a kind of abandon where the youth danced ... wild. Arms and hands and hips all over the place. Often side by side nearly on top of eachother (definitely no social distancing here). Disgraceful.

Marvin Gaye's song - made famous by Martha and the Vandellas - has been covered by the Kinks, the Dead and Van Halen among others.

Now, 1964 is a bit early for the 'Nam revolts ... More a reaction to LBJ's Civil Rights Act? But it seems to be part of a spark that lead to a more sustained expression: we'll dance in the streets to voice our opinions and our understanding of what it means to be social. And - it doesn't even matter what you wear.

Seems quaint. These days, we'll bring our guns or drive our trucks <to the streets>






Friday, October 26, 2018

Homecoming: Sweet Home Chicago



purchase [Sweet Home Chicago ]

Sweet Home Chicago is so old and such a classic that it almost rates as kind of trite to post it.
And then again, there are renditions of the song that stand out, even after 80 plus years [Robert Johnson, 1936 or before], sometimes because of the interpretation, sometimes because of the line-up of musicians (each with their own interpretation).

More credit to you if you can name these guys in order of appearance (some are pretty easy, others need a little expertise).
But, whatever, the clip is a pretty good example of unique interpretations of a riff.

The list ( if I ain't confused):

Buddy Guy starts us off.
Johnny Winter appears to solo, but it isn't clear that he's playing.
Hubert Sumlin does a solo. (1931-2011, and a member of Howlin' Wolf's band)
Clapton and Buddy Guy sing a verse.
John Meyer - love the way he swings his guitar and the unusual notes he hits in his solo.
Johnny Winter's actual solo,
followed by Jimmie Vaughan's solo
And a Clapton/Buddy Guy wrap

The history of the song is particularly entertaining, because, while credited to Robert Johnson, there are a fair number of preceding progenitors and a plethora of interpretations of the lyrics. I'll simply provide you with a link to the informative Wiki article (and, because Turkey continues to ban access to Wikipedia, it's a link to the alternative Wikipedia that those of us over here have to use, unless we're on a VPN)

Groove ...




Saturday, June 11, 2016

Father: Daughters


Purchase [Daughters]

John Mayer's <Daughters> has plentiful references to fathers and their relations to their daughters within. As you might suspect, the general tone/trend of the song is that fathers (need to) look out for their daughters. Repeated several times throughout the song: "Fathers be good to your daughters.."

What means? You would assume that any parent (any adult) would be "good" to a minor - it's so basic an ethic standard that it is embedded in the law. It makes me think: is there something below the waterline here? And again in the lyrics: "lookin' out for every girl .." - My sense is that the underlying message appears to be that girls need more looking out for than boys. Wrong?

An article in the Guardian entitled "Girls have a right to roam too" highlighted the dicotomy of our (admittedly more liberal in this respect now than in the past) society regarding the way we "look out for" our daughters. The article focuses on how we limit the freedoms of unmarried girls in our effort to "protect" them: fathers (and mothers) place more limits on their girls' freedoms than on their boys' in a well-meant effort that is primarily focused on keeping them from getting pregnant [sorry: fact]. Life isnt fair: boys can roam/girls are at risk if they do- although even that, too, appears to be somewhat curtailed these days.

But, fathers:they get to roam.

Love the guitar work here from Robbie McIntosh. It's more than just an accompaniment to Mayer.