Why aren't the Shadows cool?

[barnettiuk]

Hello from a "newbie". I don't mean to cause any offence with this question, but it puzzles me.

I was born in 1960 so I just sort of missed the Shadows, although my big brother had a couple of their singles and I remember thinking that Stars Fell On Stockton was an odd and strange title.....

No, my point is this. All manner of music that for years and years was generally considered quite irredeemably naff, at any rate by music fans, has in recent times become 'retro-cool'- as some examples;

*post-army Elvis
*Frank Sinatra
*Andy Williams (now the '"Emperor Of Easy")
*Burt Bacharach

- I'm not comparing the Shadows to these people, it's just that it's now considered quite acceptable to like them when for many many years no self-respecting music fan would dare to admit a sneaking soft spot for any of the above...................certainly over time the Shadows were thought of as very cabaret and MOR, but no-one holds that against Sinatra......

......but the Shadows still aren't 'retro-cool'. They get a certain level of respect from the first generation of rock musicians who remember them first time around, but their profile among music fans in general is much, much lower than they deserve, given how massive, and how influential, they were.

I wonder why people think this is.

Is it because they're still alive? (It's unfortunate that you hear much more about some musicians once they've passed on)
Is it the Before The Beatles There Was Nothing myth?

I'm curious........

Only one man's opinion, of course.

cheers
Ian

[MartcasterJunior]

Is it because bands/artists who are seen as "cool" way after their initial popularity very often have something dangerous/rebellious about them?

Elvis was tied up in the whole "rock'n'roll will bring about the end of society" thing. The Beatles pushed new musical boundaries and were involved with new politics, drugs and on the fringes of hippydom. Even Sinatra was a hard-drinking, womanising gambler with links to the Mob.

The Shadows (and particularly Hank as the front-man) have - as far as I can see - always portrayed the image of being just very...safe (even their equivalent of Elvis turned into a Christian you wouldn't think twice about introducing to your Gran). That's great for them as people but it just doesn't make you "cool". Obviously in musical terms they were massively influential but that doesn't really do much for you in the public eye either.

Just a thought...

Matt

[bgohara]

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-enter ... 95616.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/musi ... eview.html

http://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/region ... -1-1890335

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/enter ... 97505.html

I've just plucked out a few of the reviews from the 2009 concert tour . The thing that strikes me from the reviews is that while some of the reviewers / media snipe at Cliff - they all are very complimentary / reverential towards the Shads.

to me - the shads stole the show on that tour. their association with Cliff probably doesn't do them much good in the 'coolness' stakes.

But I do agree with you up to a point - while 'cool' shows such as Later with Jools get people like the rock n roll pioneers on and make a big deal of it - or even people like Duane Eddy or Chris Isaak - they never seem to give the same reverence to the Shads..

But does it really matter what the legacy of the Shads is in the eyes of the media of those who consider themselves cool? They were the band that launched a thousand groups - that inspired thousands of young lads to pick up a guitar. They are the people that matter. Listen to Jimmy Page in that Radio 4 docu 'the thing about Hank' - 'Hank was and is, so cool'. Even look at him today - he still looks great, he still plays great - the guy just oozes coolness.

[MikeAB]

For me it's the 'walk' - now seen as a sort of 'puppet/Dad dancing' , the 'smile' - hardly rock 'n roll, the big hits - with clearly simplistic, melodic tracks apparently easy to play. And Eurovision - but then they never get a mention for that either!

You maybe have to delve into them a lot deeper eg for 'Little B/Hot Rox/A Thousand Conversations to see what great and versatile artists they actually are - and if you aren't a particular fan you simply don't do that. The 'sound' alone and its difficulty is perhaps not fully appreciated by the casual listener either, or even by some rock critics, and certainly not as I recall by Rita Tushingham.

Also I don't think their stage presentation has been 'moody' enough - not since that first Apache video anyway. I thought they almost did it circa 1984 with some great lighting effects for Equinoxe and Chariots of Fire etc, but like the Final Tour 'bright and happy' lighting was the norm.

The 'coolest' Shads thing I've seen on stage was the marvellous Rapiers appearing in natty 60's suits out of a dark smoky stage a few years ago in Liverpool - a 'goosebumps' moment and they hadn't even played anything. Adds a lot of magic I reckon!

[Paul Creasey]

Hello all,

I'm with Bernard on this one! "Does it really matter".
At my age (and most - not all, though - of our Band's audiences are similarly aged) "Cool" is the last thing on my mind - and not only in the musical sense, either.
As far as I'm concerned, The Shads were the greatest single influence in my musical development, gave me (and still do!) the most listening enjoyment, and all-in-all were a great influence for good in my younger days.
If most "Cool" musical commentators require rebellion, a particular style of dress and/or presentation, a "Post Beatles" timeline etc. etc., then "Frankly, my dear - I don't give a damn!"

Regards
Paul.

[ecca]

I've had many guitar heroes in my life but it's Hank that's most impressed me always with sheer finesse.

He just oozes class ,polish, fluency , musicality and many more such big words.

Cool ?

Who cares .

[MikeAB]

I for one do care - because OBE's notwithstanding it does seem to sometimes get in the way of them receiving their just dues from the media regarding recognition of their achievements, abilities and influence.

[GoldenStreet]

Certainly, 'cool' has never been an issue for me, not really caring what other people may think of my musical tastes... I shall always be a Shadows admirer.

I've heard it said that Abba's S.O.S. is one of Pete Townshend's favourite songs!

Bill

[jimbojet]

for me the shadows and cliff were as cool as you get in the rock n roll days, how cool was apache ( especially the video ) fbi, mean streak, dynamite, but when the coolest of the band Jet Harris ( who was blonde, moody and magnificent in the words of jack good) and a bit edgy left, and in the words of bruce "the shadows went a bit rat pack" and then of course Licorice left due to his beliefs, and cliff revealed his beliefs the coolness had long gone, just my opinion as somebody born in 1961

[EJK]

I suppose it's all a matter of opinion.

For example which Shadows group do people think of when discussing them? They suffered from line up changes early on with half of the band leaving within 6 months of each other. As a result The Shadows lost that hard edge (and coolness)which Jet Harris and Tony Meehan gave them. The "sound" and style of these early days was in no small part due to their driving style of play which was often overlooked and after that a more softer style became the norm. (the difference in style of the first two LPs highlight that).

Once John Rostill joined and became a great asset in particular to Brian Bennett's drumming yet another style developed with the Burns sound etc. and became more into, as Bruce Welch stated, "Show business". From 1958 to 1968 there were three different styles of band all with the same name but different personnel in the rythym section with an entirely different image and sound. After packing up and then reforming it was different yet again!

Looking back to all these years ago we wondered at the time in disbelief as to why Tony then Jet left as that band was really motoring along and to those of us playing in bands this was a great disappoinment and mystery. This in no way detracts from Brian Locking, Brian Bennett and John Rostill as they all are first class but it shows that a band can rarely be the same with so many changes in a short period.

In addition with Cliff Richard being encouraged by his management to move into middle of the road ballads etc. that left The Shadows in two camps with their backing him for part of each year then doing their own dates the rest of the time. Also as previously mentioned with Cliff Richard highlighting his religious feelings, which attracted a lot of publicity and sneering comments, no doubt some of that, in the minds of many people, rubbed off on The Shadows.

All very complicated!