The Clash blueprint…just do the opposite of what is expected
Good day to you once more, how was the sanctity of your weekend then? I hope calm, busy, productive or whatever adjective you had in mind and not the steaming opposite. I’ve been reading a lot about The Clash lately and taking it all in for future regurgitation in hopefully some presentable form. I have to say that The Clash band upon entering an industry that was full of rules and accepted ways of getting things accomplished (then far more so than now) were never really suited to play that game, which is fortunate for us in terms of the output but in my opinion was also probably the underlying reason we only got about seven years longevity from the band. All the decisions they made compiled together to make an implosion pretty much inevitable or at least likely, especially when their growing popularity was never offset by some time to take stock and then organise what to do next.
Image courtesy Pennie Smith
Every facet of The Clash story contains now well-documented decisions that seem to have been made with little concern for how it might be perceived by critics or label management. I won’t call the decisions they made mistakes, they were the key notes that shaped exactly what The Clash became but many skilled observers would say that The Clash were a success despite the decisions they made, not because of them. I think that everything does happen for a reason ultimately and its from those odd pairings that the best chemistry can happen. You never know when you are about to meet someone who might change the direction of your life forever, you can’t plan for that and if you do it will be less of a life anyway. Just look at the four members of the band, they weren’t friends before but gelled to compliment each other, you can counter that with Bernie Rhodes ‘made’ them work together, but they could have each walked out, others did. I’m just finding myself fascinated with some of the facts about the band and when you lay them end to end it makes for a series of huge gambles, each one becoming arguably more risky and counter intuitive. I wonder do the actions of a band we really like perhaps permeate our own sense of risk taking, if not a band then who – a parent or a teacher I guess…or are we programmed to do what we do and that’s the end of it?
I’ll finish my thoughts I’m sure in other posts but you can’t help but be amazed at the collective decisions The Clash took. A few things run true and familiar throughout which shows that the consistency you see was in actuality quite consistent. The Clash took great efforts to provide value for money to their fans, whether that started due to Mick being an obsessive music fan and lover of pop culture or Joe and Paul having been so broke for so long that they wanted to ease their fans financial involvement. The band wanted their gigs to cost less than other bands, were one of the last to really jump on the merchandising bandwagon and then keeping prices low. Releasing albums and singles at prices that didn’t make for the profit margins the label wanted but appealed to Joe’s sense of value. They also weren’t living the high life, the CBS contract and constant change of management meant cash was spent before it was earned and decisions were made to tour as it brought in needed cash. They also took risks with the music they recorded and
Ray Jordan and Paul Simonon (image courtesy Chelsea Space)
released. Making sure singles weren’t on albums initially at least and wanting to take risks with the sounds and influences they channeled. I don’t see many calculated moves throughout their career…I mean ‘Hitsville UK‘ as a single and on a triple album? As time wore on they took more risks not fewer, managing and producing themselves for a time…Guy Stevens as a producer, embracing rap and esoteric guests for vocals or poets to read over a track. Nothing safe…and nothing as expected.
They worked with people they liked rather than people they needed. They toured with their mates and girlfriends, they let friends become roadies and drivers, technicians and promoters. They didn’t pay attention to what was the easiest way to do things…and therefore make more money. They lost money by having acts they admired support them in the US – and also lost it in the UK by putting too many bands on the bill at too low a price. See a rule and do the opposite…just do what sounds interesting and will appeal to the fans.
Indie music/labels as a phrase didn’t exist before punk came about….the independent record label and the freedom that came with it was a thing of the future. Although The Clash signed to CBS, one of the biggest labels, they really set about their work as if it was Factory or Rough Trade. More to the point it was the fear of contract as a noose that allowed the indies to take off immediately after punk. Where would be without those labels? Well…we’ve seen the benefits ever since (current charts not withstanding). It never changed either…Strummer choosing a small label for the Mescaleros because ‘he liked them’ and Carbon Silicon giving music away online both are in keeping with the opposite of shrewd and the definition of inclusiveness. I like that Joe bought albums and cds from record shops wherever he might be…that Mick collected films and comics. I’ll even try and pull this all together by saying I think its exactly why Paul and Mick are touring with Gorillaz, nobody would have expected it nor called it a likely idea to bring immediate credit and yet they’ve pulled it off in my opinion. Its all part of the fabric of a band that would face a big decision by doing what felt right. Not a bad way to do it…
I’ll be back later with Clash Cup and more Gorillaz stuff. Tim
I just heard about this…and am saddened. RIP Solomon Burke – What a voice that man had…passed away today at age 70.
Solomon Burke…the voice
