Selling the Stones

Hype and popular music go hand in hand. The Rolling Stones would probably have made the big time without their manager Andrew Loog Oldham, but his creative use of media manipulation certainly helped. Having previously worked for Brian Epstein and the Beatles he had seen how money could be made by moulding and promoting a band. He didn’t hang about. The moulding stage came first. He sacked their piano player Ian Stewart because his looks did not match the image about to be created. He changed the musical direction of the band by encouraging Mick Jagger and Keith Richards to write pop/rock songs to replace the blues covers they were used to performing, at a stroke pushing the Blues purist Brian Jones down the pecking order. Promotion came next. Oldham successfully hyped up the Stones’ “bad boy” image and generated widely quoted headlines such as “Would you let your daughter go with a Rolling Stone?” The press lapped it up. His provocative cover notes on their second album encouraged fans to mug a blind beggar for funds to buy the album. Outrage. The  Stones never looked back. Andrew Loog Oldham was 19 years old.

Pierre-François Palloy was an 18th century chancer, always on the lookout for the next big deal. In July 1789, in Paris, there was no bigger deal than the recently ransacked prison the Bastille. So Palloy acquired it, or at least the rights to demolish it and dispose of the debris. He had a grander plan than that, however. He would sell the stones of the Bastille, but more importantly he would sell an idea of the Bastille, an idea that lasts to this day. It was people like Palloy who turned the Bastille into a national symbol of liberated humanity. Others did it for political gain; Palloy did it to increase the value of his stones. Loog Oldham would have been proud. He did the same.

Palloy promoted the cult of the Bastille as a political tourist attraction with guided tours, historical lectures and accounts which hugely exaggerated the horrors of its dungeons, the numbers of its persecuted prisoners and the suffering they had endured. The truth was somewhat different. No 18th century jail was pleasurable, of course, but the Bastille was by no means the worst. Its most famous inmate was the Marquis de Sade. He had a desk, a wardrobe for his dressing gowns and silk breeches, four family portraits, tapestries on his walls, velvet cushions and pillows, mattresses, eau-de-cologne fragrances, and night lamps to help him get through his personal library of 133 books. He moved out a week before the Bastille was stormed. 7 prisoners were found inside, four of them forgers, one an aristocrat, plus two lunatics. No persecuted, tortured victims of the state. Media hype told otherwise. Prints began to emerge in which bits of armour were revealed as fiendish “iron corsets”, and a printing press as a wheel of torture. Palloy Enterprises capitalised on and furthered such fake news. By November 1789 he had completed the demolition of the prison and the reconstruction of its new image was well underway. So Palloy began to sell his product. Out of the stones of the Bastille he had miniature working models made of the prison and 246 chests of souvenirs which he took on the road, touring the French provinces. The chests were full of stone paperweights shaped like small Bastilles, snuffboxes and daggers. So familiar. Both Oldham and Palloy followed the same plan. Find your product, dismantle it, recreate it, invest it with a “bad boy” image, then take it on tour.

Hype did not appear fully-formed in the 20th century. It has a long history. With our modern know-how we like to think of ourselves as superior to previous generations but, let’s face it, there was not much Andrew Loog Oldham could teach Pierre-François Palloy about selling the stones.

Be careful what you wish for

 

 

In the growing climate of anti-royalist feeling in pre-revolutionary France there was a cult of admiration for republican Rome. Jacques-Louis David, who had a track record of jumping on promising bandwagons, produced these two paintings at that time as a salute to the popular Roman values of heroic, male stoicism.

From their schooldays the French audience would know the stories the paintings referred to. The first, titled “The Lictors bring to Brutus the Bodies of His Sons”, tells of Brutus who led the Roman revolt that expelled the King and brought about the first republic. As consul, one of his first tasks was to pass judgment on conspirators who tried to bring back the king. Among the conspirators were two of his sons. The verdict was death. He did not spare his sons. With the others, they were flogged and beheaded. The painting shows the moment the dead sons are returned to an admirably impassive, stoic Brutus. We are meant to contrast this male strength with the weakness shown by the despairing mother and sisters on the right of the painting. The French public is being given a lesson on the qualities needed to conduct a revolution.

The second more famous painting, titled “The Oath of the Horatii”, instructs us with the same contrast. Strong males and weak females. Rome is at war and this war will be settled by three champions selected by both sides. The three sons of the Roman Horatius will fight for Rome. We see them proudly receiving their weapons from their father while mother and sisters again despair. An 18th century audience might also be aware of the events following the oath. Rome wins but only one son returns. All the enemy’s champions have been killed, including one who happened to be engaged to one of the Roman sisters. When her surviving brother returns, she weeps for her fiancė. For this crime against Roman stoicism, the brother kills her. His sister.

With hindsight, knowing what we know about the subsequent course of the French Revolution, it is a shame the French are unable to ask Jacques-Louis David a question. What were you promoting with these paintings? Simply the strength of character to pursue the cause? Dutiful, patriotic determination? Surely you didn’t mean we needed to kill our sons, daughters and sisters In the name of Roman virtue? Or did you? Because that’s what happened next.

After the fall of the Bastille, at first aristocrats, royalists and moderates, as long as they swore allegiance to the republic, lived safely. What David and other armchair revolutionaries could not have foreseen, however, were the events of 1793 and 1794. The Terror.

The Terror, that time of fanatical infighting and bloodletting, was the time when David’s ideal of Roman stoicism was pushed to it’s appalling limits. Factions competed with each other to be the ultimate Brutus in the way that they dealt with royalist conspirators. Thousands of so-called conspirators were imprisoned simply for their unacceptable beliefs. In September 1792 around half of them were massacred by the Paris mob. Women were not spared. Prisons which had been reserved for women suffered the same fate. The Princesse de Lamballe, a companion to Marie Antoinette, was, like many others, brought to an impromptu tribunal in prison. When asked to swear an oath of hatred for the king, she refused. At which point a door opened and she saw the fate awaiting her; men with axes and knives. She was led out and butchered.

At the height of the terror whole families were guillotined simply for being aristocratic. Like Brutus and Horatius before them, Jacobin leaders purified those families that did not live up to the Roman/revolutionary ideal by slaughtering sons and daughters. Chrétien de Malesherbes had committed a double crime. He was aristocratic and, as a lawyer, had conducted the defence at the king’s trial. On the day he was executed he was made to wait and watch while his daughter and a granddaughter were guillotined before him. Soon after, his 76 year-old sister followed him to the scaffold.

Be careful what you wish for. In promoting Roman stoic virtues perhaps Jacques-Louis David and other pre-revolution idealists did not foresee events such as these. But that suggests they did not fully appreciate the messages within the paintings. It’s not even as if these messages were coded. They were hiding in plain sight. When the mob rose, the writing had been on the wall for some time. And so had the paintings.

When Charles met Fyodor

 

“Two souls live within me, each trying to pull away from the other” (Wolfgang Von Goethe)

When Charles Dickens met Fyodor Dostoevsky in 1862 two worlds collided. Two views of human nature. A traditional one and a modern, psychological one.
Whatever the undoubted merits of Dickens novels they are, for modern tastes, simplistic. Their characters have little, or no, psychological depth. They are either paragons of virtue, innocent victims such as Little Nell and Tiny Tim, or evil monsters such as Uriah Heep and Bill Sykes. This is perhaps surprising, since Dickens was well aware of the complicated nature of the human personality. He recognised it in himself. On the one hand he backed up his reputation as a morally upright person with many examples of selfless good works. But he knew he also had a dark side, a side to his character which he skilfully kept from his adoring public. He admitted as much to Dostoevsky. Dostoevsky later said that Dickens “told me that all the good simple people in his novels….. are what he wanted to have been, and his villains were what he was (or rather what he found within himself)”.
Dickens’ view of inner conflict was traditional in that he explained it in religious terms as a battle between Good and Evil. In characters such as Raskolnikov in Crime and Punishment Dostoevsky eschewed such simplistic notions and explored how conflict, anxiety and guilt worked. The claim that his novels prefigure the work of Sigmund Freud is not unjustified.
Dickens wouldn’t have known that of course, but Dostoevsky did give him a clue. When Dickens declared there were two people inside him, Dostoevsky replied “Only two?”

58A5F685-14BD-4923-8899-B41F31404147

In search of live music

26F7CE36-18C8-4DCF-B505-DF1E30061F2A

Marcel Proust was born in the wrong century. For a man who loved listening to music but who for periods of his life was reluctant to leave his bed, let alone his flat in Paris, getting himself to concerts was a chore. He tried two solutions to this problem. In 1911 he became a subscriber to Théâtrophone, a service that held a telephone receiver up at a concert and relayed it to people’s homes. Phones then, of course, had sound quality one step up from tin cans joined by a wire. It wasn’t that the reproduction was low-fi rather than hi-fi. It wasn’t even fi. What he really wanted was live music at home. And so it happened that one night in 1916 the French violinist and quartet leader, Gaston Poulet answered the doorbell at 11p.m. to find Marcel Proust on the doorstep. Proust had an unusual proposition. Would Poulet round up the rest of the quartet and come and play Cesar Franck’s String Quartet in D major that night at Proust’s flat? He had a taxi waiting. So that’s what they did. They played the piece in Proust’s candlelit bedroom while Marcel reclined on a green divan. It must have been good. When they finished at 2a.m. Proust asked them to play it again.

Proust was born about 100 years too early. Spotify would have been a godsend. But then again, if he’d lived in the era of video cameras and social media he might not have seen the point of recreating the past in written form. We don’t see the need to go In search of lost time. We carry it around with us.

The most beautiful walk in the world

IMG_0905

There is a book, written by John Baxter, called The most beautiful walk in the world. He’s not talking about an Alpine trail or a hike in the Scottish Highlands. He reckons it’s in Paris. And I would tend to agree. I much prefer walking round a town to hiking in the countryside. I don’t think it’s laziness; I did some strenuous fell walking as a young man. I just find more of interest to look at and photograph in the city. I’m impressed by spectacular views in nature but the wonder wears off. So I smiled when I found these quotes:-

“I like a good view, but I prefer to sit with my back to it” (Alice B. Toklas)

“Je suis incapable de m’attendrir sur les végétaux.” (I am incapable of being moved by vegetation) (Charles Baudelaire)

I suppose those words are not surprising coming from the flâneur Baudelaire. You just couldn’t see him with anorak, map and compass. Cognac and cigar, yes. Hiking boots, not really.

The power of art

There was a time when a painting could make or break a government. It could serve as propaganda for a political movement. In 1830 Liberty leading the people by Eugène Delacroix promoted the republican cause:-

D8163CB3-C202-4FBA-B84C-5EC79571F9CB

Or it could express defiance in the face of an unwanted establishment. I know of no more shocking anti-war statement than Goya’s Disasters of War, which shows the barbarity of the conflict during the Spanish uprising against the French at the beginning of the 19th century:-

240040AE-95DA-4096-B5AE-8ACD6230B59F

But those days are gone, aren’t they? Painting no longer has this power.

Or does it?

In February 2003 an American delegation to the United Nations was making its case for armed intervention in Iraq. The press conference following Colin Powell’s presentation to the Security Council was about to take place live on TV. Then someone noticed that on the wall, in full view of the cameras, was a large reproduction of Picasso’s Guernica, his powerful protest against the 1937 German/Italian bombing of a defenceless Basque town. Screaming women, dead babies, burning houses, suffering animals. So they covered it up. Who’d have thought it? The most powerful government in the world threatened by a painting. In the 21st century. Maybe those days are not gone after all.

FD167062-5C7A-40F0-AA3A-DC11F623D667

The Bash Street Kids

8C3F7232-2B0C-4E26-AF4F-4FF4236C2A5C

Leo Baxendale, the creator of the Bash Street Kids, died recently at the age of 86. When I was a paper boy I read every comic in the bag – Beano, Dandy, Topper, Beezer, Tiger, and more. I loved the names created by Baxendale. In the Bash Street Kids you found Smiffy, Spotty, Toots and, my favourite, Pug. Elsewhere he introduced us to Clever Dick, Grimley Feendish and the amazing Sweeney Toddler.
It’s a lost world and one I have a lot to be grateful for. My granddad Bill taught me to read before I started to go to school by reading comics to me. He used to walk up from work for lunch, sit me on his knee and introduce me to the Bash Street Kids. Thanks Bill, and thanks Leo.

Travelling Light

5CD3D0A3-1E0A-4A7F-903E-20ED046C0DAD

I have always thought that there was something wrong with me. Is it right that a person should get more pleasure from planning a holiday than going on it? Why have I got a clip- board containing the detailed plans of at least ten trips abroad that were never embarked on – mileage lists, fuel costings, hotel and campsite bookings (thank goodness for the “free cancellation” option), web searches on restaurants, places of interest. Google street is a godsend for someone like me. I have done so many virtual tours of St Remy in Provence that I feel there is little point in going there since I know it so well. Is it a sickness? And if so, is there a cure? But the more I read the more support I find for this admittedly minority point of view.
Here then, in my defence, are three quotations which give me comfort:-

Logan Pearsall Smith “People say that life is the thing, but I prefer reading”

Gustave Flaubert “Do not participate: happiness lies in the imagination not the act. Pleasure is found first in anticipation, later in memory”

Honoré de Balzac “How can one prefer the disasters of your frustrated desires to the sublime faculty of summoning the universe to appear before the mind’s eye”

They say travel broadens the mind. I agree, particularly if you only ever travel in your mind. Travelling light? You can’t travel any lighter than I do.

Skiffle

In the summer of 1954 the popular music world was continuing in its usual easy listening way. Doris Day and Perry Como were riding high in the charts on both sides of the Atlantic. But, within a two-week period in July two events happened, one in Memphis, the other in London, that lit a fuse which a year later would blow that cosy music world sky high.
On the 5th July a certain unknown singer called Elvis Presley was larking about in Sam Phillips’ Sun recording studio in Memphis, jokily singing a Blues song, when Phillips recognised something he’d been looking for for years, a white guy who could sing black music without losing its sexual energy. Elvis was on his way. Within a matter of weeks, on the 13th July, the Chris Barber Jazz Band was recording an album in London when they realised they were short of material. Their banjo player, Lonnie Donegan, suggested they did some of the skiffle material they sometimes played. One of these songs was Rock Island Line. In 1955 it became the first British debut single to attain gold status and, as a result, skiffle spread throughout the UK. Skiffle was roots music played on cheap basic, sometimes home-made, instruments.
The two events were unconnected but had a combined effect. Young people in the UK saw Elvis as a far-off, unattainable dream. Skiffle gave them a means of at least striving for it. John Lennon in 1950s Liverpool, at the moment he heard Heartbreak Hotel, wanted to be Elvis. Now, with skiffle, he could do something about it. What he did was form the Quarrymen and use his skiffle band to play rock’nroll. And he wasnt the only one. Hundreds, probably thousands, of British teenagers did the same. At exactly the same time as Lennon formed his group I watched my two uncles, only five years older than me, rehearsing in Leeds with cheap acoustic guitars, tea-chest bass and washboard. They progressed to drums and electric guitars, as did Lennon and McCartney, in order to play Chuck Berry and Shadows music. They didn’t make the big time but they enjoyed the ride.
There was an ironic outcome to all this. Skiffle was always small fry compared to Elvis. It was rough, cheap and amateurish. But out of it came the 1960s British music invasion of the US, led by the Beatles, which swept all before it, including Elvis.
I saw it happen, without at first realising what was happening. I went from skiffle to rock’nroll to the Beatles. And I never shed a tear for Doris Day or Perry Como.

Just give me some of that rock and roll music

F29FE726-C228-4807-B0AD-CF32F8B40129

In 1977 the Voyager 1 space probe was launched by NASA. On board was the Golden Record which contained information designed to inform anyone out there who we were. Some of it was music – Bach, Beethoven and Chuck Berry’s “Johnny be good”.
A reply from space has finally been deciphered.
4 words.
“Send more Chuck Berry!”