A pocket guide to Shadow Music: A reaction

Only for the Shadows, their music, their members and Shadows-related activity

Moderators: David Martin, dave robinson, Iain Purdon, George Geddes

A pocket guide to Shadow Music: A reaction

Postby Dance with Shadows » Tue Sep 29, 2009 2:41 pm

Hi,

I recently purchased a copy of Campbell, Bradford and Woosey's A Pocket Guide to Shadow Music. It is full of interesting bits of information. I was surprised, however, at the number of negative entries that were largely of a subjective nature. I was expecting a more objective treatment. Did anyone else have a similar take on the work or is it just my reaction?

regards

Michael
Dance with Shadows
 
Posts: 108
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 1:04 am
Full Real Name: Michael Brooks

Re: A pocket guide to Shadow Music: A reaction

Postby AlanMcKillop » Tue Sep 29, 2009 3:06 pm

Can you give an example?

Any book will contain a writers perspective and this one is no different, however, it's the detailed information which is useful to most. Whether they think a particular track is ropey (my choice of word) might differ from my view and in contrast I may think a particular track poor whilst they think it's great, but that's just having an opinion.
User avatar
AlanMcKillop
 
Posts: 1318
Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2009 8:04 pm
Location: Motherwell, Lanarkshire
Full Real Name: Alan McKillop

Re: A pocket guide to Shadow Music: A reaction

Postby Dance with Shadows » Tue Sep 29, 2009 3:25 pm

Hi Alan,

here's an example and I'll quote most of the entry

One Way to Love. ... In the editor's estimation at least, the two and a quarter minutes of this excruciatingly laboured piece are two and a quarter minutes too many: jangly in a self-conscious, showy kind of way, and desperately short on melody, it apes the style of the excellent Searchers--on one of their (occasional) bad days". p.171.

I like the tune, like the sound of the guitars and like the singing. Malcolm Campbell clearly does not. Where does that get us? What does one learn about the track from such an entry? We learn something about Campbell's tastes and that's all.

regards

Michael
Dance with Shadows
 
Posts: 108
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 1:04 am
Full Real Name: Michael Brooks

Re: A pocket guide to Shadow Music: A reaction

Postby bgohara » Tue Sep 29, 2009 3:50 pm

Michael - it's just someone's opinion - personally I thought that Malcolm's views made it an entertaining read. If it had been written based purely on facts I think it would have been a more difficult read - and pretty dry. I enjoyed his section on Beatles V Shadows - I found his views fascinating - and very well thought out. Regardless of such personal views,however, it is still an amazing reference point - and must have taken an enormous amount of research and preparation.
One man's meat....
bgohara
 
Posts: 433
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 12:10 pm
Full Real Name: Bernard O'Hara

Re: A pocket guide to Shadow Music: A reaction

Postby bgohara » Tue Sep 29, 2009 4:03 pm

ps michael - by the way, I like that song too!
Bernie
bgohara
 
Posts: 433
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 12:10 pm
Full Real Name: Bernard O'Hara

Re: A pocket guide to Shadow Music: A reaction

Postby JimN » Tue Sep 29, 2009 4:59 pm

bgohara wrote:Michael - it's just someone's opinion - personally I thought that Malcolm's views made it an entertaining read. If it had been written based purely on facts I think it would have been a more difficult read - and pretty dry. I enjoyed his section on Beatles V Shadows - I found his views fascinating - and very well thought out. Regardless of such personal views,however, it is still an amazing reference point - and must have taken an enormous amount of research and preparation.
One man's meat....


Absolutely right, Bernard!

Malcolm and I have an amusing relationship: we rarely agree on anything about The Shadows! But Malcolm's writing is always engaging, learned, informative and a joy to read (as, in a different way, was the work of our mutual friend, the late Roberto Pistolesi).

That reminds me... I must get hold of copy of the book on The Ventures which MC co-wrote with Secrets drummer (and fount of all knowledge on the The Ventures) Dave Burke...

JimN

PS: It was great to meet up with you on Saturday night at the O2, Bernard. And now you've met someone who played with Les Paul... !
Last edited by JimN on Tue Sep 29, 2009 7:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
JimN
 
Posts: 4799
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:39 pm
Full Real Name: Jim Nugent

Re: A pocket guide to Shadow Music: A reaction

Postby George Geddes » Tue Sep 29, 2009 5:11 pm

No-one who has heard Jim and Malcolm discuss the 80s output of the Shadows can fail to have been entertained. Malcolm's commentary on the Shads recordings is a personal view - aided abetted and sometimes contradicted by his co-editors - but I do not feel that in any way it detracts from the value of the book.

My personal opinion, of course...

George
George Geddes
 
Posts: 1487
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 9:18 pm
Location: Glasgow
Full Real Name: George Geddes

Re: A pocket guide to Shadow Music: A reaction

Postby winkrich » Tue Sep 29, 2009 5:42 pm

I loved the book. It sits in my bathroom permanently! Of course I disagree with some of the opinions expressed, but that just makes the book more interesting. Think how boring it would be if every single track was rated "excellent". Movie critics pan films that I love, but that doesn't mean I'm going to stop reading film reviews. What a critic has to say can throw an interesting new light on any piece of "art".

Cheers, Richard
winkrich
 
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 9:56 pm
Full Real Name: Richard Wink

Re: A pocket guide to Shadow Music: A reaction

Postby Kon-Tiki » Wed Sep 30, 2009 11:17 am

:!: Too much ref. to The Ventures - in my opinion...........
- but it's a good book.............
Kon-Tiki
 

Re: A pocket guide to Shadow Music: A reaction

Postby Shad1 » Wed Sep 30, 2009 7:13 pm

Lets be honest, some of the Shads tracks were awful. Was the lead bad? No. Was the the rhythm suspect? No. Was the drumming poor? No. Bass flawed? No. Arrangement poor? No. Just very poor choices of instrumental. The point is we won't all agree on which of the 'bad' instrumentals they are. I'm aware that contractual obligations led to recordings that the Shads were not happy about but I'm sure most 'selling' artists have a similar story. (Not now though....:))

Malc.
User avatar
Shad1
 
Posts: 138
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 3:32 pm
Full Real Name: Malcolm C McEwan

Next

Return to The Shadows

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 27 guests

Ads by Google
These advertisements are selected and placed by Google to assist with the cost of site maintenance.
ShadowMusic is not responsible for the content of external advertisements.