Nick Drake Cover- Place To Be

[Chapman123]

 

Can you critique  

[KillerKu]

I wrote you a post that got removed in the transition from the old forum. Basically, I showed your self penned tune to a known Nick Drake fan and she was feeling it. I think you're closer than you think to capturing a kind of vibe that his fans would appreciate.

 

The issue basically is: Nick Drake was a very subtle guy, and subtlety was a really hard art form to be heard in those days. Nick Drake wasn't heard too much until after he died, so it was hard back then, and even harder now. In the modern age people are always moving, with a constant stream of 'stimulation' from the internet, from their phones, from work life, driving, there's constant movement, constant stimulation.

 

To catch people's attention, it usually takes a spectacle. Neon lights, loud bangs, naked people, meat dresses, frog suits, cosmetic butt surgeries. To sum up the difference to me, it feels like we live in the kind of world that is no longer fascinated by Mona Lisa's smile, but is genuinely confused why she isn't naked.

 

My thing is I hear you, and if you're content to be a subtle artist, it's cool stuff man. It sounds fulfilling and like a deeply personal journey for you. On the other hand, I hear something else in you, that maybe with a bit more hook might capture more attention. I mentioned in another thread, if Radiohead never wrote Creep, it's very possible few people or even no one would have heard Kid A, or liked it if it was released. they basically gained 'license' to do material that required a bit more effort to digest, by first gaining a fan base.

 

One way would be to try to write hookier songs at some point. Supposedly even Drake made sacrifices to try to achieve that goal, as even the folk listeners found his stuff too subtle, without major choruses, and practically booed him off the stage. I'm just wondering if there is a way you can make a bit of a bang or spectacle to catch attention in this life. It could be musical, it could be visual (dunno if Gaga has done a lizard dress yet, ).  It'd just be cool if you could capture some of Drake's inspiration and reach more audience than he could in his life. I know my friend has listened a lot to Pink Moon. She digs subte, vulnerable sounding artists.

 

But it's about what you want as an artist. You're pretty good at what you do. Either way, I'd recommend you keep writing your own tunes as well as covering 
Drake and being inspired by him. You him well, but he had enough trouble himself getting heard. At least with your own tunes, maybe people will discover you at a later date.

[KillerKu]

Was a surprise to see some Nick Drake pop up. Nice job on this!

 

Chapman is a huge fan. It's awesome. Make sure you listen to his original here:

 

 

He's got his own identity while still channeling some similar emotions. He's onto something, maybe more than he knows.

[ronws]

I have to differ a little from Killer. I always wondered why Mona Lisa wasn't naked but I thought it was impolite to ask. Not that I am afraid to be impolite but you pick and choose the right places and times.

 

I agree with Killer about Radiohead. I don't care who the audience fancies themselves as, they want verse and chorus. Maybe not always in the same order, but they still want them. And you can be different, like the Police, and make the chorus low and the verses high, but there is still a verse and a chorus. "Creep" was just enough pop with that crunching guitar coming in on the pre-chorus. Not to forget mentioning, the subject matter is something felt by everyone. Talk about shooting a wide spray with a shotgun. You can't get much more pop.

 

All this blah blah about statement, etcetera, well, one could create the musical equivalent of elephant droppings on a canvas. And some pretentious yahoo, like me, will say, ah yes, it is art. Well art does not have to be commercially successful. And so, if one creates the musical equivalent of poop, that artist should also not be surprised if only one or two people "appreciate" it.

 

I am reminded of the pretentiousness of Kurt Cobain. He referred to "something about a girl" as a pop song and he did not intend to write pop. I find that pretentious because it shows that he desired so much to buck the trend and get attention, that made him just as hungry for fame as anyone else, despite his claims to the contrary. And really, the same successful songs he had were, after cleaning up the tone of the guitar and singer, just as pop melody oriented as anything. Something of a musical James Dean or Marlon Brando. Now that had to burn ...

 

like the movie, "The Wild Ones."

 

"What are you rebelling against?"

 

"What do you got?"

 

So, now, we're having this discussion and I am sure Chapman was saying, "wow, it was just a song I covered because I liked it."

 

None of my ramblings are a judgement against Chapman, just against pretentious artists so struggling for fame that they appear to struggle against it to maintain their "credibility."

 

In the end, Kurt Cobain was just as selfish as anyone else. It was all about him. Not the health of his kids, not the health and enjoyment of his fans. Only all about Kurt, the most important person in the whole, wide world.

[Bono]

I`ll give you some emotional feedback cause a can not put my thoughts in a clear way. I see a route, a kind of desert with some trees and stones, could be that is dawning or dusk, i hear some radiohead, some country, something special, you are special man... I like it

[Chapman123]

Thanks everyone, I wasn't expected such kind encouragement and enlightening feedback. I understand what you're saying Ronws, I also get annoyed when an artist becomes more diplomatic or fame hungry; they lose their sense of intimacy with their music, and they stray from their original work. But, we must also account for the fact that many artists enjoy trying new things and experiment, because that's an element of art as well; however I do notice that to many it becomes more impressions than progression and their incentives are selfish. I do notice this with Kurt Cobain; however we could be wrong. His act of suicide is unarguably selfish, but I do feel sympathy for him because he was an extremely sensitive individual. Such sensitive people in history have been extremely introspective and have provided great messages and a place of solace for other hurting souls. It's truly a shame that the weight of the world can sometimes be too much to bear for these individuals- Nick Drake, Elliot Smith, Kurt Cobain. Nick Drake and Elliot Smith I admire very much because although both were extremely sensitive and suffered from depression, they managed to find comfort in their music and never really strayed from their style too much. To Elliot Smith fame didn't really matter much to him and I love him for that mindset, but for Nick Drake he would always gripe about his lack of popularity- how can we blame him though, producers and many people proclaimed that he was a genius, but yet he had absolutely no money. This is depicted in his song Hanging on a Star. He tried to market his music, as KillerKu was stating, with his Bryter Lyter album, but to no avail at the time. The problem with these artists, who are all very sensitive, is that they become too introspective that they can't minimize the clamor of their mind...coupled with rejection and different demands for music, they start to feel like an outcast or different than the world. If only they looked towards a solution, such as love, instead of their problems...then maybe they would have lived longer- maybe someone would've saved them. I know before Nick died(whether incidental or intentional who knows) he was very frustrated, because he felt like his music wasn't reaching anyone or helping anybody's lives. That thought alone can be heartbreaking, because that's what artists strive for. If only Nick stayed alive just a little longer I think he would've been fine if he saw his popularity explode and his music shaping peoples lives and helping them through things. 

[ronws]

Good point, Chapman. I don't think any artist simply lives in a vacuum, no matter how arcane or obfuscating their art can be. At some point, they are expressing and someone is likely to receive that expression.

 

I realize Kurt was hurting. But when you have children, their welfare becomes more important than your sense of comfort. It would be one thing if Kurt was completely alone. But he left his kids in a wrong situation. For that, as a fellow human, I cannot forgive him. And it has to do with how I was raised. The least a parent must do is see his child through to at least legal adulthood.

 

I know of a few people considered so very talented and by people who I find opinions to be valuable. And yet some of those people are just not "big" stars. But their music is good and art, to me. Nor am I only a fan of top 20 pop. I happen to know of a group from decades ago called Commander Cody and the Lost Planet Airmen. And, in the early 80's, I was friends with the drummer from the Hole in the Wall Band. I knew him in 1982, when I was attending University of Texas at Arlington. 

 

Talk about obscure ...

[Chapman123]

Ah Yes, I completely agree with you; he had a responsibility to the health of his family, sadly he just disposed all of his sadness onto them. I feel sorry for the family and the heartache it must have caused, and how lost his children must feel. I have not heard of Commander Cody or Lost Planet Airmen, I'll check them out .