Back to October 1997 Archive Index

 

SHOWDOWN
The ELO Mailing List Digest
Issue #003
October 9, 1997


     In this issue:

     Why is the "Part II" necessary?
     Hurricane Maurice strikes
     Early Part II vs. late Part II
     The "Honest Men" debate


============================================================
ALL PUBLIC RESPONSES TO ARTICLES ON THIS LIST SHOULD BE
SENT TO THE TALK LIST ADDRESS: elo-list@eskimo.com
============================================================


Subject: Son of "Part II" continued...
Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 11:56:16 +0000
From: Lynn Hoskins 

When Supertramp reformed this year, die-hards were shouting, "You can't
call yourselves Supertramp without Roger Hodgson!"  Well, yes you can.
Even though the bulk of the band's hits featured Hodgson on lead vocals,
it was Rick Davies who "owned" the band (this is where contracts come in
real handy!)  Davies and Hodgson co-wrote everything, which gave Davies
the right to perform his own songs.  He "replaced" Hodgson's vocals and
guitar parts with Mark Hart (recently of Crowded House) and now they're
off doing the big tour circuit as Supertramp.  No "Part II" necessary.
(I think what fans meant to say was, "You don't sound like Supertramp
without Roger Hodgson!")

The Pink Floyd ordeal got a bit ugly.  In the mid '80s, Roger Waters
offered partners Gilmour and Mason legal entitlement to the name.  He
didn't want to be in the band anymore, he was off doing his own thing,
what did he care?  He even informed the record company that he was out.
Waters' charitable mood soon turned sour and he went to court to
dissolve the partnership.  He claimed that as band leader and creator of
their biggest hits, he had the right to block Gilmour and Mason from
recording or touring under the name Pink Floyd.  Waters lost.  *He*
didn't OWN the name Pink Floyd.

Which brings me to ask about ELO and why "Part II" is necessary.
Apologies if this has already been covered to death on this list, but
can someone tell me why Bevan, as 50% owner of ELO, doesn't have the
right to perform and tour under the name, The Electric Light Orchestra,
or ELO?  I know that Lynne was raising hell about the band using "ELO"
in its name, saying, "*I* was ELO!"  But, did he have the legal right to
stop Bevan?  Was attaching "Part II" to the end of the name a compromise
that was reached between all parties?  Or, is Bevan still doing battle
in court?

I realize that Lynne wrote and sang the songs (among other things!) and
there are many who feel that without Lynne, there is no more ELO.  But
creative contributions aside, I thought ELO was a legal partnership
between Lynne and Bevan?  Did they go with the "Part II" so as not to
mislead the public?

My inquiring mind wants to know...


                                **********


Subject: Re: Smoke On The Whopper (good Burger King commercial on US
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 15:06:28 +0000
From: Maurice Dockrell

Scott Pierson wrote:

> - One night is definitely the best overall ELO Part II production.
> - If you like the "old" ELO sound, I think you will enjoy Moment of
> Truth over their first release (Electric Light Orchestra Part Two)
> - Conversely, if you like the "late" ELO sound more, I think the
> first release will be more to your tastes.
> - Don't listen expecting to hear ELO or you'll be disappointed.

Whatever you do do not buy the first ELO Part II album - apart from 
Honest Men (lyrically the most embarrassing song ever done by ELO or 
Part II) and 1,000 Eyes it is unlistenable to. It is a very very sad 
attempt and is probably why no record company is prepared to market 
this fine band properly.

Moment of Truth on the other hand is nearly brilliant - it is a very 
good album with a sound of its own and at times totally inspired. The 
talents writing for it come very close to Jeff (only the lyrics are a 
bit of a let down at times - too much lets save the world stuff) - So 
if you are looking for good ELO ish material it is the one to get. If 
you can get them, probably only through the nice folks at Face The 
Music the Orkestra material is jsut as good and much more ELO quality 
than the first Part II album.

One Night is superb also but much of the material is what you know 
already - the new songs on it are also brilliant and make the purchase 
justifiable on its own. Furthermore the interpretation of the original 
ELO songs in a live context is actually better than the original ELO 
live show - let's face it Jeff was no showman (only a genius who could 
play and sing brilliantly) and these guys are.

So to sum up essential listening is

1. Moment of Truth - ELO Part II
2. One Night - ELO Part II (live)
3. Beyond the Dream - Orkestra
4. Roll over Beethoven - Orkestra (rehashes much of Beyond the Dream 
but still worth having both)
5. Earthrise - Tandy and Morgan (very hard to get but really very 
insane and good - worth having ).

None of these albums is ELO but don't worry they are all good and 
similar without being clone attempts.


                                **********


Subject: Part II recommendations
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 10:39:20 +0000
From: Scott Pierson

Maurice wrote:

> Whatever you do do not buy the first ELO Part II album - apart from 
> Honest Men (lyrically the most embarrassing song ever done by ELO 
> or Part II) and 1,000 Eyes it is unlistenable to. It is a very very
> sad attempt and is probably why no record company is prepared to market 
> this fine band properly.

Actually, Honest Men is one of the "saving graces" on this
production, along with Kiss Me Red and For the Love of a Woman.

Buy it and make up your own mind... don't listen to argumentative old
farts like us...


                                **********


Subject: Re: Part II recommendations
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 18:36:02 +0100
From: Jules McNab 

Oooh sorry chaps, but I gotta say something... I'm quiet for months,
then a subject gets my dander up (metaphorically speaking :)

>Whatever you do do not buy the first ELO Part II album - apart from 
>Honest Men (lyrically the most embarrassing song ever done by ELO or 
>Part II) and 1,000 Eyes it is unlistenable to.

Well, I agree that the first Part II album is not their best work -
mainly, I think, due to the fact that Pete Haycock and Neil Lockwood had
alot of input.  Thousand Eyes and Honest Men are both Eric songs, and
they're brilliant.  Why do you say they're embarrassing lyrics on HM?
OK, so they're making a statement, but it's a "where did all the heroes
go" message, and I think that when it came out it was quite pertinent.
You have to remember this album is now five years old!  Just recently
there's been a song in the charts "Where have all the cowboys gone" -
very similar message.  Eric writes what he believes in - of course, all
songwriters write about what they feel strongly about.  That's where the
main muse comes from.  Do you want every single song in the world to be
about love/lack of it?  I love ballads, but not *all* the time.

>Moment of Truth on the other hand is nearly brilliant - it is a very 
>good album with a sound of its own and at times totally inspired. The 
>talents writing for it come very close to Jeff (only the lyrics are a 
>bit of a let down at times - too much lets save the world stuff.)

MoT is brilliant.  It's a pooling of great songwriting talents and it's
an amalgamation of the *whole* band working as a songwriting team, and
that shows through.  The main drivers of Mot writing were Eric and Phil
Bates, and anyone who's heard Phil's solo album "Naked" will know how
brilliant he is.

My point again, though - too much let's save the world?  Well... not
really - The Fox is about foxhunting and Voices, I'll grant you is about
worldsaving things, but Power/Glad you said Goodbye/Breakin/Whiskey
Girls/Love or Money/One More Tomorrow/Twist of the Knife/ are all about
relationship aspects.  Blue Violin isnt' really about anything, it's
just beautiful, and Don't Wanna is really unusual in it's lyrics.  It's
a break from the norm.  No save the world stuff there (that I can see),
mate.  Would you care to elaborate?

I think your recommendations are excellent.  OrKestra is great.


                                **********


Subject: Re: Smoke On The Whopper
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 20:00:17 +0000
From: Maurice Dockrell

Jules McNab wrote:

> My point again, though - too much let's save the world?  Well... not
> really - The Fox is about foxhunting and Voices, I'll grant you is 
> about worldsaving things

Ok - Honest Men musically is very good but give us a break the lyrics 
are just painful "we're just a stone's throw from burning hellfire"  -
melodramatic or what

We've had our fill of
This gallery of scoundrels
the leaders of the world
those power hungry liars

throw out the tyrants
The aged fat cats

Strike a blow
save the ship etc

now to my mind this is the usual kind of wet hand wringing bemoaning of
the state of the world that infests the writings of the fourteen to
eighteen age group - all very heartfelt but not very well expressed - I
have nothing against saving the world but if so could be left to John
Lennon who could make it sound hip instead of just plain childishly
anaemic.

SOS emergency
Sinking fast and getting worse
Where's your honest men ?
to your stations
Man the ramparts
The barricades
we need new heroes urgently

Call to him
he lives next door
Across the street
On the upper floor

It's our only hope we need him now
Send the SOS and red alert etc

Please this is not great songwriting - this is adolescent baby talk. 
the whole song just grates on the nerves which is a pity as musically it 
is so very good. The whole album is appalling really but to have the 
best moment spoiled like this is just desperately annoying. Can anyone 
listen to the above without laughing - looking at the lyrics I am 
surprised Eric failed to include the "neighbours cot" or the" school 
nearby" or a" computer terminal in the sky".

As for Moment of Truth - Ok I am guilty of hyperbole - Voices is not 
great lyrically either (it does conjur up guitar hero on mountain being 
well a guitar hero - right on man stuff - pretty terrible but a lot 
better - the point is other poeple have done the same but a lot better) 
but considerably better than Honest Men and almost a sing along. the 
Fox works very well but maybe back to back with Voices gives a glut of 
world or ecology saving things impression.

I do not have anything against world saving songs but they have to be 
done well to have any impact and I am sorry but Honest Men is just 
funny - the message gets lost in the awful way it is expressed. Not 
all songs can be ballads and when was ELO purely about ballads ? 
Never really - Rock is about everything and nothing but if you have 
a message it should be at least well expressed. the fact that other 
bands have equally awful lyrics does not mean that Honest men is 
better - just another embarassing song.

Sorry if this offends or get anyones gander up but hey that's life 
isn't it - just because it is ELO or Part II does not mean a bad 
lyric is suddenly a good one (Need her Love springs to mind as a 
moment of appalling wetness - along with Wishing). Also I would 
venture to suggest that a bit of distance is required to judge a song 
- if I personally knew Eric i may view Honest men differently in 
that judging the music of a friend is hard to do.

All the best and enjoy the debate that is sure to follow


                                **********


Subject: *Roll Up Yer Sleeves*
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 21:24:37 +0100
From: Jules McNab 

OK.  This is getting interesting.

>"we're just a stone's throw from burning hellfire" - melodramatic or
>what

I've always seen certain aspects of songwriting, along with acting and
the arts, as being melodramatic, though.  I mean, they don't have to be
melodramatic all the time, but what's wrong with that line?

>now to my mind this is the usual kind of wet hand wringing bemoaning of
>the state of the world that infests the writings of the fourteen to
>eighteen age group -

Ah.  Now I see.

>all very heartfelt but not very well expressed - I
>have nothing against saving the world but if so could be left to John
>Lennon who could make it sound hip instead of just plain childishly
>anaemic.

Well, sadly he isn't with us.  Lennon was a great songwriter, but sadly
departed, so how can we leave it to him to do?  He's done some great
ones, but he ain't going to be doing any more.  :(

I'm not saying that the lyrics are going to go down in history as some
of the greats, and I'm sure that Eric wouldn't either, but personally I
think they are OK.  Maybe it's because I'm English, but I had a mild
feeling of glee that he'd written such words about some of the corrupt
politicians we have in this world of ours.

>Please this is not great songwriting

No one ever said it was great songwriting, but I don't believe it
deserves the descriptions you're giving it.  It's one of the most
requested Part II songs to be played on tour - they've just started
doing it again for the first time in years, so I'm not alone in my
thoughts.

>Can anyone listen to the
>above without laughing

Well considering it's the only Part II single to chart in the British
Charts, then yes, probably.

>As for Moment of Truth - Ok I am guilty of hyperbole - Voices is not
>great lyrically either but considerably better than Honest Men and
>almost a sing along.

I prefer Honest Men to Voices.  Voices is a bit too "anthemy" for me.

> the Fox works very well but maybe back to back with Voices gives a
>glut of world or ecology saving things impression.

Strange that you mentioned OrKestra as your favourites then.  Kelly's
most used topic (and he did write The Fox) is ecology-saving-things, and
violence.  Look at the latest one which he performed at the Tamworth
Castle gig - No One Was Saved.

>Sorry if this offends or get anyones gander up but hey that's life isn't
>it -

It's OK to express your thoughts - that's what this is for, just don't
expect everyone to agree with you when you do.

>just because it is ELO or Part II does not mean a bad lyric is
>suddenly a good one (Need her Love springs to mind as a moment of
>appalling wetness - along with Wishing).

Strange that.  I love Need Her Love, and Wishing.  I think they're
beautiful songs.  Excuse me whilst I drip a bit.

>Also I would venture to suggest that a bit of distance is required to
>judge a song - if I personally knew Eric i may view Honest men 
>differently in that judging the music of a friend is hard to do.

Is that aimed at me?  I may be close to Eric and Part II but I pride
myself on being objective.  I'll always say if I don't like something.
Ask the people that know me... if they're out there *tap tap*.... OI YOU
LOT!! :)

I would also say that you can turn what you said around - when you know
the songwriter, their life, their beliefs and their passions, a song can
take on a whole new, much deeper meaning.

If I thought Honest Men were the greatest lyrics Eric had written then I
would say so.  They are not.  He's written some amazingly beautiful
words for the Young Astronauts Council.  If he'll let me I'll reproduce
them for you all to see.


                                **********


Subject: Re: *Roll Up Yer Sleeves*
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 17:20:02 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Lucas 

On Wed, 8 Oct 1997, Jules McNab wrote:

>I've always seen certain aspects of songwriting, along with acting and
>the arts, as being melodramatic, though.  I mean, they don't have to be
>melodramatic all the time, but what's wrong with that line?

Well, it's... it's.... it's hard to criticize someone else's work, that's
what it is.  :)  But if I were to be perfectly honest, it's kind of 
cliche'. Now if he'd thrown in, say, a "brim-stone's throw" to play 
against the "hellfire", I could sing praises; as it is, well, the brain 
just *records* it, it doesn't *process* it.

>I'm not saying that the lyrics are going to go down in history as some
>of the greats, and I'm sure that Eric wouldn't either, but personally I
>think they are OK.  Maybe it's because I'm English, but I had a mild
>feeling of glee that he'd written such words about some of the corrupt
>politicians we have in this world of ours.

!? I thought the same thing, because I'm an American!  Never said I don't
agree with the song's sentiments....

>Strange that.  I love Need Her Love, and Wishing.  I think they're
>beautiful songs.  Excuse me whilst I drip a bit.

*sigh*  [mop, mop]   ;)

>Is that aimed at me?  I may be close to Eric and Part II but I pride
>myself on being objective.  I'll always say if I don't like something.
>Ask the people that know me... if they're out there *tap tap*.... OI YOU
>LOT!! :)

[reads from cue card]  Jules may be close to Eric and Part II but she 
prides herself on being objective.  She'll always say if she doesn't like 
some. Thing.  ;)

>would say so.  They are not.  He's written some amazingly beautiful
>words for the Young Astronauts Council.  If he'll let me I'll reproduce
>them for you all to see.

Yes, by all means, I want to see them!  :)


                                **********


Subject: Re: *Roll Up Yer Sleeves*
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 22:58:05 +0000
From: Maurice Dockrell

> I've always seen certain aspects of songwriting, along with acting and
> the arts, as being melodramatic, though.  I mean, they don't have to be
> melodramatic all the time, but what's wrong with that line?

a lot is wrong with it - the next line for instance. Its just that all
these the world is going to end tomorrow songs are so depressing  and this
one jsut is so bad at expressing the sentiment.

> Well considering it's the only Part II single to chart in the British
> Charts, then yes, probably.

I seem to recall that the only reason it charted was that it was being
used to help advertise the Telestar greatest hits compilation which sold
OKish - the Part II album sold a few too but nothing else by Part II has
been promoted since - ever wonder why - could it be that Part II on
strength of honest Men were considered to be really pretty bad.

> Strange that you mentioned OrKestra as your favourites then.  Kelly's
> most used topic (and he did write The Fox) is ecology-saving-things, and
> violence.  Look at the latest one which he performed at the Tamworth
> Castle gig - No One Was Saved. - i haven't heard that one yet.

I like Orkestra (not my favourites but a good band who got the mix about
right) - because they have good tunes and the lyrics aren't so
instrusive where they are bad and that is very rare.
- somehow they appear to fit the songs - Honest Men just grates - and so
does the rest of that album - the songs are just no good no matter how
good the musicians or strings

> Is that aimed at me?

AMONGST OTHERS YES

> I would also say that you can turn what you said around - when you know
> the songwriter, their life, their beliefs and their passions, a song can
> take on a whole new, much deeper meaning.

that confirms what I thought if you know the person it is harder to be
objective - if my sister, who happens to be a songwriter, wrote Honest men
I am sure i would love it to bits because I would be less objective.

> If I thought Honest Men were the greatest lyrics Eric had written then I
> would say so.  They are not.  He's written some amazingly beautiful
> words for the Young Astronauts Council.  If he'll let me I'll reproduce
> them for you all to see.

I know Eric can write good lyrics he has done it on other songs - they fit
the songs - i don't care what he sings about as long as it is good and
Honest Men is not good lyrically - musically it is superb and i have no
doubt that live the strings are amazing - i jsut think the lyrics wreck
what could have been a great song - think of Jeff he got rid of Dead End
Street and ended up with Sweet Talking Woman

Ok take aim and fire back.



End of Showdown #003
********************

Back to: Top of Digest | ELO Archive Index | Showdown Home Page

Back to October 1997 Archive Index