quotes for the song project

Posted on January 30th, 2007 by Scraps.
Categories: Music, Songs, Quotes.

Charles Thompson (aka Black Francis aka Frank Black) on the Pixies playing their songs in alphabetical order:

You're going to play all these songs tonight. At the end of the day, does it really matter, the order of the songs? All that matters is the one song you're playing at that time. Because the song begins here and ends here. And it's three minutes long. And while that song is going on, it's the center of the universe. Nothing else matters.

I have my favorite albums and whatnot, but in the religion of rock music, the most holy sacrament is the song. More than the bands. More than the solos. And more than the albums. It's the song. That's the experience. That's why it's like, "Eh, let's do it in alphabetical order." Because it doesn't matter what order we play it in. If we're a good band, get out there and prove it. I'd rather not prove it by all this kind of like showbizzy, Now we're going to finish with our big anthem! Let's just do the anthem now. They better all be anthems, right? They better all be amazing.

(from the 33 1/3 book on Doolittle, by Ben Sisario. I've edited the quote down a bit, removing repetitions and some talkinesses from what seems to be verbatim transcript.)

11 comments.

Ellie

Comment on January 30th, 2007.

Songs rule!

Scraps

Comment on January 30th, 2007.

Ha! I almost told that story again. I probably will.

Richard

Comment on January 30th, 2007.

Interestingly, I think this actually indirectly addresses why I like some albums over others--like Surfer Rosa over Doolittle. I generally think in terms of albums, and seem to recall more the overarching sound or feel of an album as opposed to the individual songs contained within. So, Surfer Rosa, for example, sounds fantastic, and gets off to a great start with "Bone Machine"... I don't know. Just makin' this up. Probably has a lot to do with my listening practices over the last several years, where I often haven't had quite the attention to give to individual songs... Even the songs that jump out at me, I don't necessarily remember the titles, but I know the albums they came from. This requires more thought.

Jimmy Ether

Comment on January 30th, 2007.

Oddly enough, I've been listening to my iPod (the contents of which are the shining songs of my overall collection) in alphabetical order lately by accident. And it has been a surprisingly kick-ass sequence for exactly the reason Charles mentions. If they are all great songs, then any order works. It might as well be alphabetical.

Scraps

Comment on January 30th, 2007.

I almost always have my mp3 player on shuffle (because its primary function for me is as Ideal Radio).

Jimmy Ether

Comment on January 30th, 2007.

me too, this was just a case of me flaking out and not turning shuffle on... yet not really noticing as it sorted by song alphabetically. :)

Scraps

Comment on January 30th, 2007.

I wonder how long it would take me to notice that. Days, maybe.

Richard

Comment on January 30th, 2007.

See, I made that comment about thinking in terms of albums, which I think is sort of true for me, but then I remember nodding along to your "ideal radio" post and thinking that that was what I'd always wanted, and is, in fact, how I usually use the iPod. I have a variety of apparently conflicting approaches to music, it would appear...

Gavin

Comment on January 30th, 2007.

I hung out a little with the Pixies backstage in Arizona when they were opening up for U2 on the Zoo-TV tour. I asked Charles if they were going to be doing an alphabetic set. He shrugged, cheerfully enough. "Nah, we stopped doing that a while back."

ethan

Comment on January 31st, 2007.

The thing about playing your songs alphabetically is that that means they always come in the same order. That's not insignificant. Also: I may be wrong, but isn't "Where Is My Mind" the Pixies'...er..."highest" song, alphabetically? And, coincedentally, probably their most last-song-of-the-nighty song? Just some thoughts.

I vaguely agree about the "sanctity" of the song, but...one of the things that makes me most uncomfortable about the iPod revolution is that it seems to be the end of The Album. Now, I'm not big into the whole AOR thing, don't get me wrong, but there's a certain kind of power to a bunch of great songs, arranged in just the right order. Even if they're all verse-chorus-verse three minute pop songs, it almost always ends up being one of those whole vs. sum of parts things.

In other words, to me, while the basic unit of rock and roll might be the 45, its most perfect expression goes 'round at 33.

Scraps

Comment on January 31st, 2007.

I have a variety of apparently conflicting approaches to music, it would appear…

Yeah, me too. I do believe in the primacy of the song, but there are plenty of albums that feel greater than the sum of their parts -- not, usually, because of some goddam Concept, but because the sgons have some kind of feel in common that accumulates.

“Nah, we stopped doing that a while back.”

I heard they also have done sets that moved from slowest to fastest, which amuses me.

one of the things that makes me most uncomfortable about the iPod revolution is that it seems to be the end of The Album

True; but the album as we grew up with it was already severely altered by the compact disc, both because of the increased length and the lack of sides. We take the 33 1/3 LP for granted as though it were a natural form, but it was born in 1949 (more or less). Even in the ipod era, people seem to still want songs grouped in some kind of longer form -- the compact disc album still seems to be hanging on -- but it wouldn't surprise me to see it shake out into something completely unlike the album, with the traditional album relegated to cultural throwback indulged in by nostalgia-heads.

Leave a comment

Comments can contain some xhtml. Names and emails are appreciated but not required (emails aren't displayed).

*
To prove you're a person (not a spam script), type the security word shown in the picture.
Anti-Spam Image