I find it rather phallic.
My avatar or the song?
Your Own Special Way
-
It's pleasant enough. I don't skip it, but equally it's unremarkable and an obvious attempt to appeal to an audience that didn't like its ears challenged.
I seem to remember it being used in a TV add for cat food in the lae 70's. Can anyone confirm that??
W&W has some incredible highs for me, and a couple of lows.
-
an obvious attempt to appeal to an audience that didn't like its ears challenged.
An interesting point. I don't think there was any sort of appetite amongst their fan base for a song like that but perhaps they were starting to think about branching out. Am I the only one who cannot imagine Peter singing something like that? Interestingly enough Mike referred to W&W as their 'feminine' album,. I wouldn't know about that, although there is, at places, a feeling of blandness or excessive smoothness pervading it imo. I just find funny that his individual contribution is by far the most 'feminine' song on the album, to put it in his terms.
-
An interesting point. I don't think there was any sort of appetite amongst their fan base for a song like that but perhaps they were starting to think about branching out. Am I the only one who cannot imagine Peter singing something like that? Interestingly enough Mike referred to W&W as their 'feminine' album,. I wouldn't know about that, although there is, at places, a feeling of blandness or excessive smoothness pervading it imo. I just find funny that his individual contribution is by far the most 'feminine' song on the album, to put it in his terms.
Yeah, I don't really know what he means by 'feminine' in relation to that album. If he's suggesting that a couple of love songs equates to a more feminine album, then surely ATTWT and Duke would be considered more feminine than W&W.
I think W&W could be considered more 'prog' than ATOTT It falls into what could be considered symphonic prog rock cliches at times, with the big keyboard chord progressions and 'predictable swirling dynamics' (Tony Bank's words - not mine) I still love it though. Certainly, One for the Vine, EEOM, and Unquiet Slumbers/In that quiet earth are up there with the very best of Genesis for me.
-
Yeah, I don't really know what he means by 'feminine' in relation to that album. If he's suggesting that a couple of love songs equates to a more feminine album, then surely ATTWT and Duke would be considered more feminine than W&W.
I think W&W could be considered more 'prog' than ATOTT It falls into what could be considered symphonic prog rock cliches at times, with the big keyboard chord progressions and 'predictable swirling dynamics' (Tony Bank's words - not mine) I still love it though. Certainly, One for the Vine, EEOM, and Unquiet Slumbers/In that quiet earth are up there with the very best of Genesis for me.
I really don't know what he meant by that, I just find funny the fact that he, himself contributed heavily to a feature that, apparently, in his mind is a flaw.
Duke, a couple of love songs notwithstanding, has imo much more grit, energy and edge to it than W&W and ATTW3. I like W&W a lot myself, not as much as Trick though and although some songs are brilliant, it is imo the moment where things began to be a bit formulaic, not as fresh as they were and they were starting to drift towards a certain 'blandness'.
-
It was a radio hit for Steve Hackett with Paul Carrack when he covered it on Genesis Revisited in 1995. By radio hit, I mean it was on "heavy rotation on BBC Radio 2, the most listened to station in the UK.
Fair enough, Steve's version is vastly superior.
Strange, it doesn't immediately spring to mind. Will have to check it out, thanks.
-
I like both versions. In fact I always thought it was some kind of early commercial era ballad "draft", but it's far more than that. I also like the 1986 live version. It somehow shows a different side to the band. Remember, it's a 1976 song and somehow it's more accessible than prior ballads sich as Entangled.
-
I love it
-
I like it a lot. There are better songs but it's a love song to Mrs Rutherford & that's sweet.
Angie Rutherford is not a mermaid!
-
Phil...was still a bit 'green' as a singer.
Only when he was smoking with Chester!
-
Only when he was smoking with Chester!
That too.
-
Fair enough, Steve's version is vastly superior.
In what way? To me, it sounds like the most desperate bid for commercial success. Ironic, given Steve's sniping reference to "permissive rather than progressive" music in the liner notes. I guess if your favourite band is Chicago then I can understand the claim of Steve's version being "vastly superior". If not, then I think we can safely dismiss your comment as being simple hyperbole.
-
That too.
You're familiar with the story? I'll expand for the benefit of those who might not know.
In 1978, Chester had some especially potent grass and Phil, being an enthusiastic toker back in the day, joined him for a pre-gig joint. Chester said that the grass was so strong they'd really only need one toke each. So they took two! Then they took to the stage. The first song was Earl Of Mar. During the instrumental opening, Phil looked out at the audience, desperately trying to remember the words - again, anyone who has had a quick pre-gig smoke to relax the nerves knows how counteractive this can be; the lyrics just fly away from you like so many migrating birds. Right on cue, the first line came back to Phil and he got through the rest of the gig with no problems. But that fear, looking out at thousands of people (who were probably more stoned than he was) was enough to put a stop to any further pre-gig smoking. As far as I know, he's not smoked a joint before a gig ever since. Afterwards? Well, you'd better ask him that...
-
Not this story in particular which btw. is quite funny but I heard they used to have fun in that department.
-
Not this story in particular which btw. is quite funny but I heard they used to gave fun in that department.
Have you read Not Dead Yet? Phil used to make passing remarks to smoking the herb (Hugh Fielder's Book Of Genesis and a Phil Donahue interview in 1988 spring to mind) but he didn't brag about it in the tiresome way that some rock stars do. But in Not Dead Yet, he's practically puffing on the weed for the whole of the seventies (especially with Richard McPhial). I can't remember where I read the story about the '78 gig but it is totally legitimate.
-
In what way? To me, it sounds like the most desperate bid for commercial success. Ironic, given Steve's sniping reference to "permissive rather than progressive" music in the liner notes. I guess if your favourite band is Chicago then I can understand the claim of Steve's version being "vastly superior". If not, then I think we can safely dismiss your comment as being simple hyperbole.
Personally, I believe Steve fixed one of the problems the song had with the different time signature but the final result confirmed imo that the song itself wasn't worthy the effort. It certainly is more radio friendly and as someone said very much in Mike&the Mechanics style. I would still maintain that Carrack does a better job with it than 77 Phil.
-
Have you read Not Dead Yet? Phil used to make passing remarks to smoking the herb (Hugh Fielder's Book Of Genesis and a Phil Donahue interview in 1988 spring to mind) but he didn't brag about it in the tiresome way that some rock stars do. But in Not Dead Yet, he's practically puffing on the weed for the whole of the seventies (especially with Richard McPhial). I can't remember where I read the story about the '78 gig but it is totally legitimate.
I haven't actually.
-
I haven't actually.
You can hear him read the whole thing on YouTube Not Dead Yet
-
Personally, I believe Steve fixed one of the problems the song had with the different time signature but the final result confirmed imo that the song itself wasn't wothy the effort. It certainly is more radio friendly and as someone said very much in Mike&the Mechanics style. I would still maintain that Carrack does a better job with it than 77 Phil.
Paul Carrack can (in Phil's own words) sing the telephone directory and it would still sound great. I'm just coming to the end of Paul Blake's Pigs Might Fly and there's a moment in there where Waters calls Paul and asks him if he knows Huey Lewis's number because he wants him to sing on his latest performance of The Wall. Carrack asks if he can be involved and Waters tells him he's not famous enough! Of course, Paul would eventually be involved in the production so all's well that ends well.
As for Hackett's take on Your Own Special Way, I find it curious that he claims it to be "one of Mike's finest" and yet didn't perform it on his much vaunted Wind And Wuthering tour last year. Was he afraid of brickbats from the prog fans?
-
As for Hackett's take on Your Own Special Way, I find it curious that he claims it to be "one of Mike's finest" and yet didn't perform it on his much vaunted Wind And Wuthering tour last year. Was he afraid of brickbats from the prog fans?
I actually find funny he would say that too but for another reason: he was fighting at the time to have more songs on the album and YOSW is arguably one of the weakest on W&W. It probably cost him one of his songs but hey, he can still like it and decide some audiences are not receptive to it. I see no evil in that.
