Gaffaweb > Love & Anger > 1986-16 > [ Date Index | Thread Index ]
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]


The Elvoid -- Is He (gasp) Mainstream ?

From: Bob Krajewski <lmi-angel!rpk>
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 86 18:17:35 est
Subject: The Elvoid -- Is He (gasp) Mainstream ?

Speaking as fan of Mr. Costello/McManus/Dynamite, I'd have to say that, in
intention, he's mainstream.  I'm not talking about sales figures, but about
the general base of the music he makes.  Elvis Costello works from the base
of ``good'' songwriting and American popular music from the '40s on.  He has
never made a texture record, or an industrial record.  Although labelled
part of (yawn) new wave, he hasn't really tried to change rock and roll the
way groups like then Gang of Four, Wire, PiL, the industrial complex, the
Eno-ites, the core dudes, &c. tried to.

That doesn't mean the music isn't exciting, it just means you can never
plunk an EC platter onto the turntable and impress your friends with how
``progressive'' (oh boy) or weird it sounded.  Well, actually, I can think
of three near-exceptions:

* Parts of _Armed Forces_: This is mostly because (according to an
  interview), on their American tour for 1978, they (EC and the Attractions)
  were listening to a lot of ``rootless'' music by Iggy Pop, David Bowie,
  and Kraftwerk.
* B-Sides, especially from the _Armed Forces_ and _Get Happy_ period.
* And, to be a little snide here for a moment, any time he went from
  sounding ``progressive'' to American: _Get Happy_, _Almost Blue_, and
  _King of America_.  Granted, the second wasn't a success (and it sure
  stiffed commerically in the USA), but in my opinion _Get Happy_ has aged
  much better than _Armed Forces_.  Anyway, what could sound more alien to
  an American posing as a Euro/Anglo-Wavo than reverberations of Stax or
  Sun ?

Anyway, given the Elvoid's orientation, it's clear that once they get past
(maybe) his voice or (maybe) his past combativeness, a lot of normal types
(not wavo or gnarly) are going to notice what a craftsman and fundamentally
good artist he is, as seen from a pre-progressive perspective.  So I'll
hedge it by saying that he's part of the mainstream because of his emphasis
of songs and their structure, two things which even parts of today's pop
mainstream still preserves.  (Though not much, and not too strongly, I'll
admit.)