Robert Johnson

[danasgoodstuff]

This mastered way too fast stuff is old news isn't it, seems I remember hearing about it some years back. It only makes sense that Clapton would love RJ, they both learned blues the same way - from records, in Johnson's case while he was shacked up with robt Jr Lockwood's mom. Kinda ironical that Clapton's best work, Layla, was also sped up...

[jeffcrom]

This mastered way too fast stuff is old news isn't it, seems I remember hearing about it some years back. It only makes sense that Clapton would love RJ, they both learned blues the same way - from records, in Johnson's case while he was shacked up with robt Jr Lockwood's mom. Kinda ironical that Clapton's best work, Layla, was also sped up...

Okay, I can't quite just let this go unanswered. Yes, Robert Johnson seems to have listened to lots of blues records carefully, and learned their lessons well. When I listen to Kokomo Arnold, Lonnie Johnson, and especially Leroy Carr, I hear lots of stuff Robert Johnson got from them. Yes, RJ learned a lot from records. But it's just as clear to me that a lot of his music reflected what was in the air in Mississippi at the time. The Library of Congress recordings made by Son House, Muddy Waters and others a few years after Johnson's death touch on some of the same musical territory.

And in the end, Robert Johnson's achievements surpass his influences. I have no interest in arguing about whether Johnson was the "greatest" or "most important" bluesman of all time, or of his time, or whatever. To me he, was like Bach - he represents the highest peak of a musical style that was already becoming unfashionable; at the same time, his music pointed toward the future and the next steps in the music's evolution.

Saying that Robert Johnson learned blues from records is like saying Bach learned music by copying Vivaldi - in both cases, it's kinda true, but ultimately not really important. His music, like J.S.B.'s, far transcended its influences.

[John L]

anyone who think Johnson is the "best" blah blah hasn't really listened beyond him. IMO. Besides, the phrase used isn't "most important" - the phrase used is "the best". There's a difference. Ya could argue the first - I'd still disagree. But the second? Nah. IMHO.

Well, Johnson is not one of my absolute personal favorites, but I still do not agree with that. All lot of people who have listened and lived with a lot of blues still think that Johnson is "bla, bla, bla." That includes people like Johnny Shines and Robert Jr. Lockwood.

[danasgoodstuff]

I didn't mean "learned from records" as a putdown, merely descriptive - if anything that fact may have helped him acheive his particular greatness. It also puts a different spin on the 'sold his soul to the devil' if you believe in a romanticist vision of an oral tradition oand that's what you think 'the blues' was...

[A Lark Ascending]

As far as Johnson and Clapton are concerned, it's worth remembering the context in which Clapton heard Johnson.

All those early blues records were hard to come by. As with all the British blues boomers they were hearing this music on hard to find import records, maybe the occasional visitor on one of those Chris Barber type tours and had very little to read to explain it all. Much of the appeal lay in its 'music from another planet' sound in a Britain just coming out of post-war 'austerity' with a soundtrack of recently (so it seemed) rock'n roll, 'trad' jazz, Cliff Richard and no end of MOR and novelty music.

Is it any wonder Clapton's image on Johnson was surrounded in mystery and mythology?

[John L]

Is it any wonder Clapton's image on Johnson was surrounded in mystery and mythology?

No wonder at all, considering the fact that decades of tireless scholarship and the more recent availability of all of Johnson's recordings have really not done much to wipe away that mystery and mythology (despite the heroic claims to that effect in a few recent books).

[A Lark Ascending]

Is it any wonder Clapton's image on Johnson was surrounded in mystery and mythology?

No wonder at all, considering the fact that decades of tireless scholarship and the more recent availability of all of Johnson's recordings have really not done much to wipe away that mystery and mythology (despite the heroic claims to that effect in a few recent books).

Historical scholarship rarely has much impact on embedded historical myths. The need for heroic figures from the past is much greater than the need to understand the complexities of how things might actually evolve.

[John L]

Is it any wonder Clapton's image on Johnson was surrounded in mystery and mythology?

No wonder at all, considering the fact that decades of tireless scholarship and the more recent availability of all of Johnson's recordings have really not done much to wipe away that mystery and mythology (despite the heroic claims to that effect in a few recent books).

Historical scholarship rarely has much impact on embedded historical myths. The need for heroic figures from the past is much greater than the need to understand the complexities of how things might actually evolve.

The case of Robert Johnson is interesting from that point of view. In this case, there really has been a revisionist campaign in recent years to debunk all of the myths surrounding Johnson. More than one book claims to do this. When I read these books, however, I am amazed by how little they have to show for their "noble" quests.

[A Lark Ascending]

The case of Robert Johnson is interesting from that point of view. In this case, there really has been a revisionist campaign in recent years to debunk all of the myths surrounding Johnson. More than one book claims to do this. When I read these books, however, I am amazed by how little they have to show for their "noble" quests.

That might be because the myths are constructed on so little substance. So when a bit of careful research takes place it tends to suggest that there isn't very much evidence surviving to build a substantial case. It's a bit like searching for Robin Hood. You quickly come to the conclusion that it is all myth - but possibly of more interest is why that myth has proved so sustainable and universally appealing.

Though not specifically about Johnson, I was absorbed by Marybeth Hamilton's book 'In Pursuit of the Blues' (possibly one of those you are alluding to) - made a convincing case to me about how one aspect of the past (the history of the blues) has been constructed.

Although I must have heard rock versions of Johnson songs prior, I know I'd read a lot about Johnson (and Coltrane and Mahler....) before I actually heard their music. So I was predisposed to enjoy his music! I find it hard to disentangle those expectations from the reaction I actually get listening to the music.

[cih]

I think he was also really creating music for records - I mean with Patton you get the feeling that these discs just captured something that was there already - sort of a snap shot of a larger reality, but with Johnson you get a sense that he had the three minutes all worked out and that the drama was totally contrived (not a criticism). At the end of Malted Milk, when he sings “.. the hair rising on my head” - it actually makes the hair rise on my head (although I have none to speak of). Even that photo of him with the cigarette seems to indicate that he was totally aware, after the fact (the few years he has on the older guys is crucial), of this myth of the ‘Mississippi Bluesman’ as some kind of existential wanderer... maybe he wasnt but it sure looks like it to us now, and the fact that he never grew old means that younger listeners today never have the image 'spoiled' by seeing him on stage in footage from the sixties as an old man. In fact, all the other legendary Mississippi bluesmen, are, in the subconcious maybe, older men - even Patton, though he died was already older - or had something of the ‘lived’ about him...

Johnson is a convenient stepping stone for modern listeners, because he was in some ways a few years behind, and therefore stands in relief against the background of mid-late 30’s Chicago blues singers like Bumble Bee Slim, Bill Gaither, Joe Pullum etc... so people tracing a line back through Muddy Waters to Mississippi or ‘country’ blues can avoid ‘urban’ blues by going directly through Johnson and then back to Son House, Patton etc...

[AllenLowe]

"Yes, Robert Johnson seems to have listened to lots of blues records carefully, and learned their lessons well. When I listen to Kokomo Arnold, Lonnie Johnson, and especially Leroy Carr, I hear lots of stuff Robert Johnson got from them. Yes, RJ learned a lot from records. But it's just as clear to me that a lot of his music reflected what was in the air in Mississippi at the time. The Library of Congress recordings made by Son House, Muddy Waters and others a few years after Johnson's death touch on some of the same musical territory.

And in the end, Robert Johnson's achievements surpass his influences. I have no interest in arguing about whether Johnson was the "greatest" or "most important" bluesman of all time, or of his time, or whatever. To me he, was like Bach - he represents the highest peak of a musical style that was already becoming unfashionable; at the same time, his music pointed toward the future and the next steps in the music's evolution.

Saying that Robert Johnson learned blues from records is like saying Bach learned music by copying Vivaldi - in both cases, it's kinda true, but ultimately not really important. His music, like J.S.B.'s, far transcended its influences."

I'm reprinting Jeff's comment because it's the most accurate thing in this thread - thank you, Jeff, this sums it up.

Edited June 4, 2010 by AllenLowe

[jeffcrom]

Don't know about that, but I have visited all three of Robert Johnson's graves in Mississippi.

[AllenLowe]

well, he was killed in that suicide bombing, and they did the best they could - a hand here, a leg there.....

[paul secor]

This mastered way too fast stuff is old news isn't it, seems I remember hearing about it some years back. It only makes sense that Clapton would love RJ, they both learned blues the same way - from records, in Johnson's case while he was shacked up with robt Jr Lockwood's mom. Kinda ironical that Clapton's best work, Layla, was also sped up...

Okay, I can't quite just let this go unanswered. Yes, Robert Johnson seems to have listened to lots of blues records carefully, and learned their lessons well. When I listen to Kokomo Arnold, Lonnie Johnson, and especially Leroy Carr, I hear lots of stuff Robert Johnson got from them. Yes, RJ learned a lot from records. But it's just as clear to me that a lot of his music reflected what was in the air in Mississippi at the time. The Library of Congress recordings made by Son House, Muddy Waters and others a few years after Johnson's death touch on some of the same musical territory.

And in the end, Robert Johnson's achievements surpass his influences. I have no interest in arguing about whether Johnson was the "greatest" or "most important" bluesman of all time, or of his time, or whatever. To me he, was like Bach - he represents the highest peak of a musical style that was already becoming unfashionable; at the same time, his music pointed toward the future and the next steps in the music's evolution.

Saying that Robert Johnson learned blues from records is like saying Bach learned music by copying Vivaldi - in both cases, it's kinda true, but ultimately not really important. His music, like J.S.B.'s, far transcended its influences.

Yeah, I agree completely - Robert Johnson was a sponge, a thief, or whatever you want to call it. BUT - he turned whatever he took into something his own. That's some of what artistry is about.

Whether Robert Johnson was "the best" is strictly a matter of opinion. As far as I'm concerned, someone who says any musician is "the best" is pretty foolish.

[kenny weir]

As far as I'm concerned, someone who says any musician is "the best" is pretty foolish.

This was the very nub of my initial barf. However, had the blogger linked at the start displayed the same sort of big ears as have become obvious on this thread, I may have been a bit more sanguine!

So I'm hip with RJ's achievement, no matter how realised. In fact, I'm happy to consider it even more laudable for the chutzpah and brilliance of it.

But I am interested in this: Leaving the 78s alone as a sort of stand-alone prize, did he have any or much influence on the future course of the delta blues and blues in general?

My guess is "no", or at least no more than any other individual participating in what seems like a sort of collective tradition.

Edited June 5, 2010 by kenny weir

[Neal Pomea]

If in Cajun music we held it against someone because he studied earlier records, what would that mean for Iry LeJeune, perhaps our greatest artist of all? He studied records by Amédé Ardoin and Joe Falcon quite closely and transformed some of their tunes and themes.

[kenny weir]

If in Cajun music we held it against someone because he studied earlier records, what would that mean for Iry LeJeune, perhaps our greatest artist of all? He studied records by Amédé Ardoin and Joe Falcon quite closely and transformed some of their tunes and themes.

I hear you - I am quite familiar with his music. But there's a difference: It'd be hard to argue that Iry hold the same sort of mythical status in cajun, IMO, as RJ does in blues. Or that cajun is any way comparable to delta blues in the context of this sort of multinational myth-making.

I LOVE tradition-based but ever-evolving music - these days I really don't listen to much else. But for many, RJ is perceived as The Beginning, The Big Bang. Check out the reviews for the box set at Amazon, for instance.

[Neal Pomea]

If in Cajun music we held it against someone because he studied earlier records, what would that mean for Iry LeJeune, perhaps our greatest artist of all? He studied records by Amédé Ardoin and Joe Falcon quite closely and transformed some of their tunes and themes.

I hear you - I am quite familiar with his music. But there's a difference: It'd be hard to argue that Iry hold the same sort of mythical status in cajun, IMO, as RJ does in blues. Or that cajun is any way comparable to delta blues in the context of this sort of multinational myth-making.

I LOVE tradition-based but ever-evolving music - these days I really don't listen to much else. But for many, RJ is perceived as The Beginning, The Big Bang. Check out the reviews for the box set at Amazon, for instance.

Thanks for reporting how insignificant my culture and its music is. Was that even necessary? I was only remarking that there's no point in holding it against an artist for having heard records.

[John L]

As far as I'm concerned, someone who says any musician is "the best" is pretty foolish.

But I am interested in this: Leaving the 78s alone as a sort of stand-alone prize, did he have any or much influence on the future course of the delta blues and blues in general?

My guess is "no", or at least no more than any other individual participating in what seems like a sort of collective tradition.

Well, he was a strong influence on Muddy Waters, Elmore James, Johnny Shines, Robert Jr. Lockwood and several other Chicago post-war blues figures. Sonny Boy Williamson and Calvin Frazier covered his songs on records even before the war. So his ghost was clearly present in the creation of modern Chicago blues. Most likely, he would have been physically very present in Chicago too if he had survived.

As far as the Delta Blues is concerned, you can hear him echoed in a number of the performances captured by Modern records in the South in the early 50s (currently available on the fabulous CD series Modern Down Home Blues). Still, Tommy Johnson probably had a stronger continuing influence on Delta blues (and maybe even Chicago blues) than Robert.

In my mind, a focus on the many sources of Johnson's material only serves to strengthen the case for his profound originality in the way that he put it all together.

Again, I write all that as someone who does not count Robert Johnson among his personal favorite blues artists. I see it as objective truth.

Edited June 5, 2010 by John L

[kenny weir]

Thanks for reporting how insignificant my culture and its music is. Was that even necessary? I was only remarking that there's no point in holding it against an artist for having heard records.

Apologies for offence where none was intended. I was agreeing with you. I have spent countless thousands of dollars and months at a time paying homage to your culture over multiple trips to South Louisiana. I have spent much again on South Louisiana records over the past four decades, playing many of them on a weekly radio show here in Melbourne. Insignificant? Not in my world.

Maybe it'd be cool if it was otherwise, but I figure the idea Johnson has an international footprint far beyond that of Iry is self-evident. Stating so is not any way meant to be a comment on their respective merit or worthiness or genius.

As far as the Delta Blues is concerned, you can hear him echoed in a number of the performances captured by Modern records in the South in the early 50s (currently available on the fabulous CD series Modern Down Home Blues)

I have the first two of those - and I agree.

Edited June 5, 2010 by kenny weir

[MomsMobley]

1) Allen Lowe is mostly correct*

2) John L is correct

3) Greil Marcus is an intellectual fraud, a musicological nothing

4) Robert Johnson was a brilliant ** MUSICIAN **

5) Robert Johnson's LYRICS were bullshit, or folk, or train schedules, or menus, bills of lading, Vicksburg brothel price lists.

6) So let me get this straight, Robert Johnson records, almost uniquely among records of the era which are known, are thee ONLY ones regularly speeded up 20%?

7) Get the fuck out of here!

8) Anyone who ever learned to play fingerstyle guitar in the middle era between just records and mostly digital jerked around w/a variable speed tape recorder-- helps you learn Blind Blake better, sure, but SLOW Blind Blake is like slow Bird-- an interesting physical exercise, perhaps, but self-nullifying. If you (we) can't keep up, eventually, QUIT.

9) Fuck Clapton, all of him, including all guest appearances, including Sandi Shaw's juices on John Mayall's beard, including dead Duane's overdubs, including Bonnie Delaney crotch shots-- all of it!

* Bach far far far far far far surpasses Robert Johnson as a musician, while acknowledging he had longer life and greater context to do so. Cut Robert Johnson from history and really, we lose little. Please see Bach's entry Nicolas Slonimsky "Baker's Biographical Dictionary of Musicians" for the immensity, both as summation and visionary challenge, of J.S. Bach's achievement.

[Tom Cat]

ha what a nonsense, i heard the slowed versions and like them more, and for me the man thing about johnson's music is his rawness, the feeling he put on writing and interpretation and not his speed. However all we know the thing that made him famous was his supposed deal with the devil.

[cih]

Elijah Wald's new page on the speed theory. (for benefit of anyone who doesn't visit the Blindman's forum)

Edited June 18, 2010 by cih

[medjuck]

Is it any wonder Clapton's image on Johnson was surrounded in mystery and mythology?

No wonder at all, considering the fact that decades of tireless scholarship and the more recent availability of all of Johnson's recordings have really not done much to wipe away that mystery and mythology (despite the heroic claims to that effect in a few recent books).

Well, as they say in The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance: "When the legend becomes fact, print the legend. "

[AllenLowe]

he was the greatest of them all -