« Back to blog

Deep Blues

I finished reading Robert Palmer's Deep Blues earlier this week. It was a frustrating read, particularly in the latter chapters where the narrative got bogged down in repetitive exposition attempting (unnecessarily IMO) to cover the biographies of the Delta pantheon. This tendency towards biography, and cultural rather than musical history, meant that key developments in the sound and style of the blues were subsumed into accounts of performers domestic arrangements – relevant but not always helpful when trying to contextualise variations in musical style / sound / lyrical content. Palmer also makes some interesting distinctions relating to authenticity and what constitutes 'deep' blues that I didn't think were sufficiently supported / justified and unhelpfully echoed a high / low art dichotomy.

I'm probably being unfairly critical however (also known as being a dick). Palmer's discography swelled my listening list to purchase point and there are more than a few insights that made the leg-jiggling plough through the books final chapters worthwhile.

Palmer's discussion of Charley Patton's 'Pea Vine Special', for example, is supremely useful in framing discussion of the creative use of sampling:

"If the song is broken down into individual phrases it becomes evident that most and quite possibly all these phrases were unoriginal. They were floating formulas, some of which came from older ballads and spirituals while others were folk sayings or everyday figures of speech … [A]ny formulaic or partly formulaic line could be placed at the beginning or the end of a verse and joined to another line that was either a formula, a combination of a formula and an original turn of phrase, or entirely original" (Palmer, 1982, pp. 8–69).

And, for me, the kicker:

"Originality in the blues, then, is not a question of sitting down and making up songs out of thin air. Yet a blues singer whose songs consist entirely or almost entirely of borrowed phrases, lines, and verses will claim these songs as his own, and he will be right" (Palmer, 1982, p. 69)

Fascinating too was the vitality and influence of performers who didn't begin professional music careers (if at all) until well into middle-age. One of my favourite anecdotes related by Palmer is seeing Chester Burnett, the Howlin' Wolf, perform in the mid '60s:

"Suddenly he sprang out onto the stage from the wings. He was a huge hulk of a man, but he advanced across the stage in sudden bursts of speed, his head pivoting from side to side, eyes huge and white, eyeballs rotating wildly. He seemed to be having an epileptic seizure, but no, he suddenly lunged for the microphone, blew a chorus of raw, heavily rhythmic harmonica, and began moaning. … Finally, an impatient signal from the wings let him know that his portion of the show was over. Defiantly, Wolf counted off a bone-crushing rocker, began singing rhythmically, feigned an exit, and suddenly made a flying leap for the curtain at the side of the stage. Holding the microphone under his beefy right arm and singing into it all the while, he began climbing up the curtain, going higher and higher until he was perched far above the stage, the thick curtain threatening to rip, the audience screaming with delight. Then he loosened his grip, and in a single easy motion, slid right back down the curtain, hit the stage, cut off the tune, and stalked away, to the most ecstatic cheers of the evening. He was then fifty-five years old" (Palmer, 1982, p. 233).

Fifty-five years old! 

I had to leave the Cafe where I was reading, unable to stifle my incredulous (and very loud) admiration.

Also noteworthy was the role recording, advertising and performance revenue (as well as patronage) played in establishing 'The Blues' as a commercial 'product'; and, more broadly, how this fits into the broader growth of the American 'Music Industry' as a construct. 

Thoughts for another day.

wheretonow