[Slowhand] Missing Parts: Transcript of 'Rolling Stone' Cream Review

[Kevin Wilson]

It would seem as though none of the 14628 members (no exaggeration) of the
Eic Clapton Music Lovers World Wide are able to assist with the missing
parts that I have of the Rolling Stone, May 11, 1968 review of Cream by Jon
Landau. If anyone here is able to assist, i will be extremely greatful. To
be honest, the magazine is available on eBay, but at a ridiculous premium
and at a shipping fee that is equally crazy.

What I have is quoted below, with missing parts indicated.

Thanks - Kevin

*Jon Landau | Rolling Stone #10, p.14| 11 May 1968 | Cream*

I recently had an opportunity to see the Cream do an hour and a half
concert; after what I had found to a disappointing second album, it was a
refreshing experience and for the most part an entertaining one. Yet I
found myself leaving the concert with a sense of frustration not unlike the
one I received from listening to them on record.

With the opening wall of sound announcing their arrival, the group
established their absolute virtuosity.

I understand that they usually begin sets with “Tales of Brave Universe”
[sic] (as they did here) and it is certainly one of their best original
compositions. By taking the pace of song down just a bit from the recorded
version, they gave their performance a more biting quality. They also
extended the soloing at the end of the piece, but other than that their
performance of this number corresponded more closely to the recorded
version than anything else they did.

With “Sunshine of Your Love,” their second number, they got into extended
improvisation work and gave the audience a chance to see what they are
really into. After going through the entire song as they recorded it, they
loosened the rhythm and then just played for well over ten minutes. And it
was at this point that my own disappointment with the group began to stare
me in the face.

Cream has been called a jazz group. They are not. They are a blues band and
a rock band. Clapton is a master of the blues clichés of all of the
post-World War II blues guitarists, particularly B.B. King and Albert King.
And he didn’t play a note that wasn’t blues during the course of the
concert. Ginger Baker’s sources are more from the rock side of the picture
and like Clapton he can run through the licks and clichés with his eyes
blindfolded. And during the improvisation that was added on to “Sunshine”
that is precisely what the two men did - run through their licks, albeit
absolutely flawlessly.

Yet melodically, the improvisation was indistinguishable from the one that
took place on their next number, “N.S.U.”, and rhythmically they never did
anything more advanced than a 4/4. By abandoning the chord progression of
the song they started out with and improvising solely around the root
chord, (which, by the way is a far cry from having abandoned a chord
structure, which Clapton says he is prone to do) they insure the
incompatibility of the solo compared with the song. And ultimately what I
wound up hearing was three virtuosos romping through their bag,
occasionally building it into something, occasionally missing the mark
altogether, but always in a one-dimensional style that made no use of
dynamics, structure, or any of the other elements of rock besides drum
licks and guitar riffs.

The specific reason why I discount Cream as jazz is this: In jazz the focus
is always on improvisation. Improvisation means the creation of new musical
ideas spontaneously. It does not mean stringing together pieces and phrases
of already learned musical ideas. It means using these phrases as a basis
for exploration and extension. A rock guitarist who improvises in the
manner of a jazzman is Larry Coryell. Clapton’s problem is that while he
has vast creative potential at this time he hasn’t begun to fulfil it. He
is a virtuoso at performing other people’s ideas. In the particular solo of
which I am speaking there were flashes of both Kings (as James Payne
pointed out recently [Correspondence. Rolling Stone Feb. 24], *Disraeli
Gears* is pervaded by the influence of Albert King and Chuck Berry).

One got the nagging feeling that the whole solo could be charted out to
show the source of every phrase.

As strong as this reservation sounds I do not mean it as a condemnation of
the group. I don’t believe there are more than a handful American bands
that come within miles of Cream. Despite the derivative styling of Clapton,
I think any comparison between Cream and people like the Doors or Big
Brother wound be in the nature of a joke.

Compared to Cream, such groups don’t even have the technical equipment, the
understanding of their instruments, with which to play rock. Clapton
himself seems to feel that way about white American groups in general and
he has labelled San Francisco a “fashion” and stated that “black records”
are still the best thing coming out of this country.

The shortcomings of “Sunshine” were again present when the group performed
“N.S.U.” This is another of their originals and I think it a terrible song,
both melodically and lyrically. Yet I enjoyed it most when they were
actually singing and playing the tune. Here they were recognizing the
nature rock and roll, the fact that it really is a heavily structured music
- and they worked with that structure, using their understanding to draw
the song out.

In general, interpreting a song is the most difficult task confronting a
rock instrumentalist, for in that situation he is in a position where he
has to respond to a vocalist, a melody line, and a pattern not present in
freer musical forms.

Once the improvisation began, wholly unrelated to the context that the song
had set for it, indistinguishable from the improvisation on the song that
preceded it, the whole concept of interaction, the whole concept of a band
was destroyed. It was every man for himself and back to the clichés. What
was particularly disconcerting was that the entire improvisation centered
again around a single chord, thereby severely limiting Clapton in terms of
the range that he could explore.

“N.S.U.” was followed by what Cream chose to do as their slow blues for the
evening, “I’m Sitting on Top of the World.” This tune is a white country
blues originally done by Bill Monroe, and recorded a few years ago by Doc
Watson. The Grateful Dead did a version of it on their album at a super
hyped-up tempo. Cream did just the opposite and slowed it down to a slow
crawl, with a heavy, heavy beat. They performed the number as a straight
blues with little improvising and it was probably the shortest number they
did all night.

Clapton’s guitar playing, which was here given the full melodic range of a
blues progression to play itself off against, (instead of the simple root
chord improvisations he used on the previous numbers) was among the best
blues playing ever heard, even though it was again largely derivative.
Clapton was able to transcend his own limits because he was truly playing
the song. It was only here that he was the master [???] licks, only here
that he transcended his limitations, by knowing [???] are. (Bruce’s
singing, by [???], which seems to me to be significantly better live than
it is on record, was at its best and helped to p[???] Clapton admirably.)

Following these four numbers the group moved into a series of [???]
featuring one member of the [???] each time. For Clapton’s f[???]id
“Stepping Out.” Regrettably the version he recorded with Mayall [two???]
years ago was far superior to what I saw him do live. Bruce stopped the
middle of this piece and Clapton and Baker got into some intense
interaction with each other. Generally, the entire thing, which went on for
nearly twenty minutes, was far too long. Clapton was repeating [???] from
earlier solos and even [???] the end, earlier parts of [???]. Baker’s
drumming was much too busy, as it often is, and showed once again that it
is often more [???] for the virtuoso mentality to [???] thing easy than to
do something [???].

“Stepping Out” was followed by an extended harp show piece by Jack Bruce
which was easily the low point of their performance. Bruce is not very good
on that instrument and 15 minutes of him working out on it is simply
ludicrous. It amazes me that such brilliant musicians can be oblivious to
their own shortcomings.

They closed with Baker’s show piece, “Toad.” Baker is a solid drummer who
gets a fantastic sound out of his drums. However, he is extremely
repetitious, not particularly creative, and highly over-active. He took two
or three extended solos during this particular concert and by the time he
got to the end of “Toad” I found it all to be terribly boring.

Cream live, as on record, are clearly in a transitional stage. Having
mastered the rudiments of their instruments they are rapidly approaching
the point where they have to ask themselves where they want to go with it.
Currently, their live style and their record style reveals both their
talent and also their aimlessness. The whole is not equal to its parts. And
the greatest pitfall that stands before them is that an over-accepting
audience in the United States will lull them into a complacency in which
they increase their virtuosity at the expense of their own involvement. It
would not be difficult for a group of this calibre to start making it all
sound like scales.

Yet the Cream, even now, are so much more than simple masters of their
instruments. When they get over their virtuosity hang-up - which is what I
think their kind of virtuosity is - we may really see something. At the
moment they’re just warming up.