Tom Waits: Bad as Me
Douglas K. Barclay, Tower Staff
October 28, 2011
Filed under A&E
I truly do beleive that knowing Tom Waits is a keen sign of how serious a fan of music someone is. You don’t even have to like him, it’s really easy to despise his music actually, yet just knowing who the man is gives someone about ten times higher a value of cool.
Why does this matter? Because not enough people in the world are aware that quite possibly the greatest living singer/songwriter not named Robert Zimmerman (Bob Dylan) has released his first record of original new material since 2004. The record is Bad as Me and if you consider yourself a fan of interesting things, it should already be in your collection.
Tom Waits first hit the music radar in 1973. His songs of the time are quite different from what he does now, however just as brilliant. At the time he was a man who could have walked out of a time machine from 1945 Los Angeles. The black fedora, worn out, wrinkled suit jacket, chain smoke, and purely sublime piano ballads epitomized his new-found noir cool.
In the over twenty albums since his first, Waits’ music has evolved into an infathomable array of musical expression. His voice, once tired and weary, has evolved into what reviewer David Durcholz once described as one that sounds like it “was soaked in a vat of bourbon, left hanging in a smoke-house for a few months, and then taken outside and run over with a car.”
His voice to say the least is rough. However, if one can see through the gravelly tones and beyond into some of the most poignant lyrics and interesting music out there, it truly is a real treat.
How many artists can you think of whose music has been the subject of their own short films, whose lyrics are routinely released in book form, who has had his songs played on “So You Think You Can Dance” and who has received notoriety from acting in film? Waits has appeared in “The Book Of Eli” and “Bram Stoker’s Dracula,” to name a few. This isn’t to say that I believe that being featured on terrible prime-time dancing shows is the epitome of a musician’s success, but it is useful to note how diverse his words and sounds can be.
On his new record, Waits fans can expect a return to order in contrast to his southern/blues avant garde expositions of the last decade. Gone are the xylophones and tin can drums on most tracks, having been replaced by a more classic piano or Gibson guitar sound.
Waits, who has not toured the northeast since the early 1990’s, is considered by some to be a bit of a recluse. Last year, it took someone as prolific as Neil Young to induct him into the Rock ‘N’ Roll Hall of Fame.
His work has been covered by a wide range of artists including Violent Femmes, Pearl Jam, Scarlett Johansson, and perhaps most notably Bruce Springsteen. It was in fact Tom Waits who wrote one of Springsteen’s most popular tracks, “Jersey Girl.” The song originally appeared on a Waits album in 1980. The “Jersey Girl” in question was Waits’ future wife, Kathleen Brennan.
Is this Waits’ best album? No, but what this is, is a keen return to form for a man that at 61 years old deserves as much praise as could possibly be given to an artist.
Check out the last track on the album, “New Year’s Eve.” Try to dislike it. I dare you.
Loading ...
I realise you may want to introduce the sound of Waits a little in this piece, but I thought this was an album review. I’m trying to be objective, but you gave very little justification on your critical reception of the album, just vague opinion. Plus; the description of the new album, “On his new record, Waits fans can expect a return to order in contrast to his southern/blues avant garde expositions of the last decade. Gone are the xylophones and tin can drums on most tracks, having been replaced by a more classic piano or Gibson guitar sound.” While I understand where you’re coming from on this one, you should maybe refrain from such a narrow categorization of the sound. Although the xylophones are not at the front of most of the mixes (can drums certainly are) there is a wide range of interesting musical instruments and extremities on this album – one of which being the actual recorded sound of chicken on a barbeque, simulating old vinyl noises, just to name one. The context you give Waits is admirable (though the style change with the Swordfishtrombone album should have probably been mentioned) but more attention should be turned towards this new album if you are attempting to show the importance of this artist.
[Reply]
Adam,
Where does it say that the piece is an album review? Are you a student at this fine school? If so, would you agree that the majority of college-age kids in 2011–especially at CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY–would have no clue who Tom Waits was if he was an obstacle they tripped over on the way to class? Cause that’s a pretty fair assumption, I think. The purpose of this piece–mind you, in a college newspaper–isn’t to critque the album, it’s to expand the taste of the student body, if only a little bit. I don’t see much objectivity in your comment, whatsoever. The purpose of an A&E section in a college paper is just as much for the burgeoning young writers to work out their kinks, which admittedly there are in this piece, as it is for the readers to be exposed to something that may have been left off their radar previously.
A narrow categorization? Who cares what guitar company is mentioned in a piece as small as this? Are you a Fender rep?
And lastly, why would attention need to be turned towards the new album if someone is attempting to show the importance of an artist, in your words? I like the Cure a whole lot, I consider them very important, but why would I want to point people in the direction of their recent, sub-perfect, material when there’s a whole treasure trove of albums available that prove the point more efficiently?
Personally, I think your comment is a baseless attack and mine is a justification of this work’s existence against your mostly unfounded and unusually pointless criticism of a small piece in a small section of a college newspaper. Learn to weigh media outlets for what they’re worth. This isn’t Pitchfork, sir. Enjoy your own narrow-categorizations.
Sincerely,
A friend of the written word.
[Reply]
Adam Taylor Reply:
November 7th, 2011 at 12:07 pm
@Steve, Wow, that was a rather harsh response. I suppose I really did forget that this was a catholic university. I’m sorry if I touched a nerve, but I thought this was an album review based on the title of the piece being the name of the most recent album from Waits and that I had just come across it from searching for the album reviews. I was just going through various media outlets and thought it might be interesting to look at some from a smaller (perhaps more honest) source. I was also unaware that due to the size and scope of this piece that it is part introductory to Waits, part grammatical and stylistic target practice. I am not trying to be sneaky or underhanded in this post, or my original, but as a student I can safely say that there would be many people of my age who would already be very familiar with Waits and his previous work in music and film.
Your issue with me picking up on the ‘narrow-categorization’ left me slightly bewildered though. I was not nit-picking that you had mentioned a particular brand or whatever your wild justification was, I only wanted to mention that the new album does have a very wide range of sounds and tones and musical textures – just straight out offering a different interpretation of a source material.
I am frankly confused by your very defensive response, when part of me was hoping to find someone who was going to be willing to discuss the music – maybe even talk about how this is good music that (by the sounds of it) needs to be explored by more people in your university. Instead we have been weighed down by a discussion on discourse, semantics and other ********.
Sorry to have offered a ‘baseless argument’ that I backed up with a few facts drawn from having listen to Waits for some time, I figured that using the Harvard citation system would have made this measly little comment even harder to penetrate. However, if I’m going to get condescending and patronizing to in-keep with the style of your response, then I suppose I would have expected this catholic university to be much more familiar with the idea of baseless arguments.
Sincerely taking things and blowing them way out of proportion
Adam
[Reply]