[Slowhand] Shake Up

[Cobhome at aol.com]

What an amazing group - always interesting to read people's comments on both 
sides of the never ending discussion - Susan - I really enjoyed your post - 
and would just like to add a thought of my own -  to me the point about EC is 
that his acclaim as a guitarist was not as a BLUES guitarist - his work in those 
early brilliant years was informed by the blues - but the man was a ROCK 
guitarist - his genius was in using blues techniques in a rock medium - Crossroads 
as done by Cream - was not anything at all like the blues of Johnson - it was 
a new and alltogether unique re- interpretation - which preserved the power 
and feeling of the original but in a language that made sense to the audience 
then - Cream was a ROCK and Roll band - not a blues band - and to me that is 
the fire that once informed EC's music which has been absent for some time now - 
oh yes - occasional glimpses - but the spontaneity  - the passion - even the 
anger - of rock n roll - that is what I'd like to hear just a bit of - in his 
work now - somehow he misses the point that rock need not be perfect - 
that so called mistakes are part of the spontaneity - that is what made r n r 
 such a powerful force - 

Cecelia





I agree, DeltaNick.  A shakeup of some sort is in order. =20

The fact alone that EC, in a September article from riverfronttimes.com, =
would even be considered in the running as one of "The Ten Most Hated =
Men in Rock (besides Sting)"--as runner-up by one critic with honorable =
mention by the author, Mike Seely--is emblematic of the fact that change =
is needed.=20

In his article, Seely gives McCartney top honors, but adds, "According =
to San Francisco Chronicle pop-music critic Aidin Vaziri, the runner-up =
is Eric Clapton, a ranking based almost exclusively on the guitar god's =
synth-slop collaborations with Babyface. While we may not agree with =
this ranking, the criteria for what makes a rocker "hated" is more or =
less spot on: have talent, use it well for a substantial period of time, =
then intentionally squander it for commercial riches, fame and/or forced =
mass appeal." =20

I don't think EC is really hated or that he has intentionally squandered =
his talent.  But I do think there is discontent on the part of fans and =
critics brought about by Clapton's all-consuming, ubiquitous comfort =
zone-- which probably has more to do with his self-admitted propensity =
for laziness, add insecurity and compulsive perfectionism, (maybe even a =
dash of new found domesticity) then any of the afore mentioned gains. =20

Rereading the Seely article has given me a sense of dread; dread of some =
future AC/MOR mediocrity if a turnaround is not effected.  But as we =
know, no one is more capable of turnaround than Clapton.  And no one is =
more capable of greatness.  Like DeltaNick said, "a few knock 'em dead =
records would do the trick."

In 2005, will we find EC still polishing the glass to temperate levels =
within his well-worn comfort zone?  Or will he drop the cloth and fire =
it up to blazing heights.  Hopefully the latter.  And his stepped up, =
improved over 2001 performance last summer gives me great hope; hope =
that we will no longer have to debate whether or not he still has the =
fire, it will be an emphatic, definitive, "YES, he does!"

best,
susan


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://six.pairlist.net/pipermail/slowhand/attachments/20041229/6ce2d754/attachment.html