Sunday, April 23, 2017

# 65 Horn From The Heart:The Paul Butterfield Documentary

Every generation has pop music heroes who briefly capture the imagination of the mainstream market with catchy melodies. The marketing departments of their record labels are always quick to provide fans with a shallow biography that employs descriptors like great or ground breaking, but most of that process is about crass commercialism rather the music. Unfortunately, too many of these heroes have careers that just bump and grind across the stage for what seems like only an hour or so before they disappear into the shadows, where they are heard no more.

Then there are our anti-heroes who recoil from that mainstream spectacle in favor the opportunity to create their art on the quieter periphery. It's in that place that they are more likely to create a body of music which resonates with several generations of listeners who are not fooled by the mainstream antics. These artists often become the most significant contributors to popular music, rightfully earning descriptors like great and groundbreaking.  

A good example of this type of artist is America's first guitar hero Michael Bloomfield. When he is a comparatively obscure  guitarist in the mid-sixties, Bob Dylan offers him a lucrative position as the principal guitarist in his band, but the idealist rejects the offer with all the passion of a 19th century French artist who believes in l'art pour l'art. Bloomfield doesn't want the mainstream spotlight, he wants to practice his craft with the fledgling Paul Butterfield Blues Band.

There are many in the mainstream who think Bloomfield's decision is naive, maybe even unwise, but the virtuoso guitarist hears an energy coming out of Paul Butterfield many don't understand yet. He hears the band's 23 year old leader interpret urban blues with the skill of a journeymen communicating the urgency of someone about to commit murder or make love - but never in between. He knows that Paul Butterfield is the real deal, and is quick to publicly announce his commitment telling filmmaker Michael Lerner,  Butterfield is something else, he feels it. He's in there all the way. He is a blues singer. There is no white bullshit with Butterfield.  It is more than just an calculated endorsement from one a colleague to another. This is a recognition from a respected artist in his own right that Paul Butterfield is not just some white kid aping the songs of older blues men, but rather a man able to lead urban blues to the next step in its evolution.

If we compare early Butterfield band recordings with all other young blues bands of the era, we hear an artist reaching for a dream of transcending the confines of genre, race and all other convenient mainstream industry labels. It is a quality that surpasses technique, natural talent, and is intuitively recognized by the listener as something more emotionally complex. As Butterfield confides to one interviewer, The blues to me is any kind of music that has a heavy feeling. Music is a universal thing. You feel music, you play music. It doesn't belong to a black man. It doesn't belong to a white man.  It isn't just the attitude of an artist as a young man that sets him apart from herd, but his desire to travel an ambitious road, one which will not always be paved. If Butterfield is to free himself from these shackles of the status quo, he will need to listen with big ears, employ immense  ingenuity, and demonstrate a unique ability to lead people toward the realization of his dream.

One of Paul Butterfield's most overlooked talents will be his strength as a bandleader. Similar to a few other great leaders like Duke Ellington, he consistently demonstrates an extraordinary ability to recognize skilled musicians, and lead them to a place where they want to create rather than decimate. Consider the numerous musicians he enlists for various incarnations of his Butterfield bands, and you should notice that many of them will permeate popular music for the next two generations, and make their own important contributions as influential instrumentalists, bandleaders, session players, songwriters, inventors. It is this overlooked talent as a leader that often denies Paul Butterfield recognition as one of the twentieth century's greatest bandleaders. 

However, the most significant contribution of Paul Butterfield's legacy is his music. He starts out his career with a dream of a new music, and we now know from his body of work that he succeeded. We have eleven official albums which are always a very hip, yeasty blend of blues, rock, folk, jazz, R&B, gospel, all of it anti-pop. It is this profound legacy that places him in the enviable position of an early pioneer in a new genre of music which will become known as Americana.  Almost as impressive is the fact that three decades after his death, with minimal industry promotion, and no grueling road tours, all of his albums are still in print. It is an monumental feat very few artists enjoy.

These important accomplishments come at a cost to anti-heroes though. Since they are not producing product for mainstream markets, record label accounting departments tend to neglect them, and then many trade journalists underrate their contributions. In spite of the fact that Paul Butterfield is as important an artist as Charlie Parker or Miles Davis, until now, there have been no extensive biographies, or documentaries that single out his enormous contributions to popular music. Outside snippets of shallow biographies found in old trade magazines we know very little of Paul Butterfield the artist. There are distant voices like veteran Jazz writer and broadcaster Jim Gallert who says, This man is so underrated. People talked about Miles Davis as the harbinger of jazz rock, but Paul Butterfield was doing this fusion between jazz and blues in a different way, but those insightful words are scarce. The last three decades since his passing have shown us that the people who keep Paul Butterfield's contributions alive are in fact his devoted fans.

As a testament to the reality, consider this anecdotal evidence: In the mid-sixties a self-described folkie by the name of Sandra Warren has her first encounter with Butterfield's music when buys an Elektra Records sampler called Folksong '65. The album features the band's youthfully bold version of their song Born in Chicago.  Similar to so many other young people of era, something about the attitude conveyed through the music resonates inside her, and she rushes out to buy his first album, The Paul Butterfield Blues Band. Then the band is booked to play several nights at Cafe Au Go-Go in New York City's bohemian neighborhood of Greenwich Village, and she goes to hear them live, not once, but several times. She is transfixed enough that his music will now play a recurring role in the soundtrack of her life. What Warren doesn't know then is that her love for his music will inspire her own dream. One which will demand that she listen with big ears, employ immense ingenuity, and demonstrate a unique ability to lead people toward making her dream a reality. Sandra Warren's dream will be to make a documentary about the story of Paul Butterfield.

Part of her task as the producer is to enlist a talented team who will make the project into a definite success. The key member of Warren's team is award winning director John Anderson. He has documented some of the most important contributors to popular music of the last century, from pop icons The Beach Boys, and Paul McCartney to punk poet Patti Smith, and the king of Chicago blues drummers, Sam Lay, so he is perfect fit for a documentary on Paul Butterfield.  

It should be noted that Anderson's new film Horn From The Heart: The Paul Butterfield Story is not concert film, or a story about Paul Butterfield's music, we already have his impressive body of work. Anderson uses extensive historical research, fresh insightful interviews with family, close friends, and former colleagues to peel back the multiple layers of Butterfield's life to tell us the story of the man who created the music.  
  
Paul Butterfield belongs to a very elite group of artists in history because of his unique gifts, but he was human too. Viewers will hear very poignant stories of battles between his passion for music, and own his emotional frailties. They will feel his deep love for family which is complicated with his self destructive obsessions. Then there is betrayal of his trust by his associates which places him on a painfully tragic journey. All of it is peppered with wry humor, and heartwarming anecdotes from people who really knew him well. After viewing the film, the viewer will realize that while Paul Butterfield really did belong to an elite group of artists, he was also one of us.   
  
Paul Butterfield never did succumb to the trappings of the mainstream pop music heroes, always preferring to practice his craft in the relative quiet found in the periphery. He didn't bump and grind across the stage for what seemed like only an hour performing flamboyant stage antics, nor did he write cute pop songs.

Similar to other important anti-heroes in music such as Charlie Parker, Mike Bloomfield and Bob Dylan, Paul Butterfield refused to submit to mainstream expectations, and instead set out to create a new music, one that was not shackled by genre or race, and he succeeded. We have always had his music, but until now, we have known very little about the man who created the music. John Anderson's  Horn From The Heart: The Paul Butterfield Story fills that void with his documentary about one of America's most important artists. It will delight fans, and finally give Paul Butterfield his rightful place in history.

  https://www.hornfromtheheart.com/







Sunday, December 18, 2016

#64 Paul Butterfield's North South

It is a testament to an entrepreneur's talent when he no longer needs to seek out customers because they are coming to him. This is the enviable position Albert Grossman achieves during his career as the manager of several very successful artists. His greatest strengths are the ability to sense artistic talent, and then sell it. Many businessmen of his stature might choose to stay in the city to show off symbols of their success, but he decides to move to rural New York instead. It is here that he settles in the hamlet Bearsville, and begins building a comparatively modest, yet impressive empire.
  
Similar to Chess Records in Chicago, or Motown in Detroit, Grossman designs his Bearsville Records empire to be a one stop shop for the 1970s music industry. It is replete with temporary housing for his growing collection of employees, restaurants, a recording studio, a support staff who skillfully attend to every need of his growing stable of artists, and a head office for publishing.  All of this points a man with a well developed business acumen fueled with raw ambition. If he were less sophisticated, he might hang a shingle outside his office that says, It you aren't growing, you're dying.

More specifically, his most obvious strength is boardroom negotiating, but then there is his often overlooked talent of refraining from micromanaging the careers of his artists. The unwritten bargain he has seems to have with his artists is they are free to create music and he sells it. It is a powerful combination, but it is also his greatest weakness. Of all the careers he manages, Paul Butterfield's is a good example of everything that is both good and bad about Albert Grossman's management style.

Remember, in 1965 he agrees to manager Butterfield's career
because he hears something visceral in the twenty three year olds brand of blues. Then, in spite of the fact that Butterfield never becomes a comparatively strong commercial success, he remains loyal to him, always treating him as an artist of remarkable distinction. The fact is Paul Butterfield probably would never have sustained success if it were not for Albert Grossman.  As Danny Goldberg remembers, On the few occasions I saw him with Butterfield,  Albert treated him with the greatest respect,  as someone who, regardless of whether he was making money from him or not, was to be regarded as a major figure.  However, their relationship must come under intense questioning between 1975 and 1980, as Butterfield stops living up to his end of the manager/artist bargain.  

Butterfield's downward spiral seems to begin during the collapse of his second band Better Days. It is here that the young blues man begins to fall prey to his own demons. The solace he seeks through self medication with alcohol and street narcotics strips away most of his self confidence, and then slowly chips away at both his personal and professional life. His first solo project, Put It In Your Ear, shows fans what happens when one of the century's greatest bandleaders abandons his role to outsiders. After that failure, the only two projects that seem to keep his career floating are his impassioned performance at The Last Waltz, and then his brief, yet high profile position in Levon Helm's RCO All stars.  

Then there is the failed attempt to resurrect  his solo career with an appearance in September of '78, on
the very successful Germany television show Rockpalast, but that too is failure. Former Butterfield Blues Band guitarist Buzzy Feiten agrees to act as band leader, leaving Butterfield to just show up,  but he can't seem to muster the courage to make more than a minimal contribution. He arrives at rehearsals in New York with no material, and a reluctance to even participate in the project.  Later, Grossman plans to resurrect Butterfield's career by releasing the concert recording as new blues rock album similar to his original Paul Butterfield Blues Band, but he deems it inferior Butterfield, and the project is shelved. 
When Butterfield returns stateside, he forms the Danko/Butterfield Band with friend and fellow addict Rick Danko. They turn in some adequate shows but mostly, the short barroom tours are a manipulation of the system to support their alcohol and narcotic fueled lifestyle. It isn't long before rumors and eye witness accounts of personality conflicts cause their performances to become unreliable. At one gig, Danko plays only harmonica and Butterfield strums guitar, enraging the fans. Eventually, every show becomes a potential powder keg of unpleasant surprises for promoters, bar owners and fans. In the tightly knit music industry the two former rock stars become known as the dangerous duo.  

It is this pattern of self-destruction that Butterfield tries to address when he confesses to Rolling StoneI
did go through periods of drugs during the seventies. I was doing coke, drinking tequila , some heroin. Right down to the nitty-gritty. Unfortunately, his confession is too little, too late as his marriage has disintegrated, and his career is not far behind. 

These situations often prompt questions from outsiders about the behavior of the bystanders who seem to simply watch catastrophe unfold, so it is fair to wonder about Grossman's role during these years.  It is possible that he is demonstrating a blind loyalty, or looking for opportunities for a final payday. After all, it is common knowledge that he does purchase a life insurance policy on Janis Joplin shortly before she dies of a drug overdose. Maybe he was plotting ways to posthumously capitalize on Butterfield's decline  too- we will never know.

However,  in Grossman's defense, Danny Goldberg remembers,  Albert Grossman stayed loyal. He really loved Paul, and it broke his heart to see him fall apart the way he did. But Albert never presumed to tell people  how to live their lives. His philosophy was self-reliance. It is easy, to smugly look back at the seventies, and wonder why the common error of bystanders to addiction catastrophes justify their lack of intervention by professing loyalty, but the 70s is a different time. It seems that in his own way, Grossman thinks the best remedy for Butterfield decline is to encourage him to get back in the studio, and solve his problems through hard work.

Contrary to Butterfield's career prognosis, Grossman's career is still on a steady ascent. In the late seventies he is expanding his business into new markets. Similar to Woodstock, the music scene in Memphis is also a melting pot of great American music, only with a richer history that easily dates back into the 19th century. The success of postwar labels like Sun, Stax, and Hi are a testament to the vibrancy of the Memphis scene, but as the industry fragments to other urban centres during the seventies, the Memphis labels become vulnerable to corporate takeover.   

It is during this period of decline that Grossman negotiates a deal with Willie Mitchell, and his label Hi Records. The agreement comes with the option to employ the talents of the famed singer, songwriter, arranger, producer, and businessman, and in the process help the Bearsville artists. Mitchell has an impressive production resume that includes luminaries such as Ann Peeples, and of course his star achievement, Al Green, so the transaction is a coup for Grossman. While the deal to expand into Memphis does serve several Bearsville's artists well, for Butterfield it spells disaster.  

One of Mitchell's first Bearsville projects is with Butterfield's girlfriend Elizabeth Barraclough, who in 1979, records her second album Hi with Mitchell in Memphis. She is happy enough with the results of the project that she returns to Woodstock, and suggests to Butterfield that he and Mitchell might be a good fit. It has been five years since he has released any product, so he goes to Memphis with Barraclough, and according to Joe Perry,  ...the Hodges brothers and Memphis horns would come around, and Paul knew of them. He fit right in with these guys. The Butterfield/Mitchell team should be a winning combination, but in spite of Mitchell's pedigree, the project will become yet another Butterfield disappointment.   

Similar to the Germany project, Butterfield has no sustainable ideas, and again recoils from his responsibilities as a leader, deferring decisions to Mitchell. Unfortunately, Mitchell is not familiar enough with Butterfield's music or public persona, and so, he erroneously decides to record  an album of what is suppose to be Memphis funk , soul and R & B album, but the idea is doomed.  As Barraclough remembers, It would have been nice to say to Paul and Albert, 'Let's wait a year and get some good tunes together, 'Albert was always ready to go with an artist if he said he had songs together, so he let Paul. I would later learn from other A&R guys that stopping projects for lack of material wasn't uncommon..... And I would do it myself with some projects at Bearsville. But Albert's word final word was often, 'I don't care - let them make the record.' We'd had a few disasters with Paul that we had to shut down, but the Memphis thing got made anyway.  At this point, most might conclude that problems are the material, lack of involvement by Butterfield, and apparent neglect from the people at Bearsville Records, but they will be pale in comparison to what happens next.  

Butterfield's relentless abuse with alcohol, various narcotics, combined with poor dietary habits take a toll on his body. In 1979 he develops an inflammation in his lower intestine called diverticulitis, which he does not address properly, and it develops into a more serious infection. The untreated inflammation causes a perforation of his intestine, which then allows puss and waste to enter the abdominal cavity. This damages the membrane which protects the internal organs known as the peritoneum, creating the condition known as peritonitis

If his condition sounds dire, that's because it is. Peritonitis is painful, and if not addressed quickly, will lead to certain death. While in the Memphis studio, he collapses, and is rushed to the hospital. He later will reflect that at the time, he thinks the pain is the result of too much barbeque, but he is running out of that kind of good fortune. Once a doctor diagnoses his peritonitis,  he is hospitalized undergoes immediate surgery where his colon is severed, and a colostomy bag connected, allowing the damaged intestine area to heal. Then,  the recovery advice by the doctors is that he remain stationary, discontinue his abusive lifestyle, and alter his diet, but these sound instructions are lost on someone armed with Butterfield's almost childish sense of invincibility. It will not be long before a returns his old lifestyle.  

A couple of years later he will confide in Don Snowdon of the L.A. Times, To make a long story short, my
intestines burst...... I ended up having four operations and you don't realize  what it takes out of you, energy wise., he said, You think you can come right back , so I went back to work and herniated  the scar tissue in my stomach. I had three hernias from playing the harmonica, so it was a vicious circle. Sure it occurred to me that might not be able to play anymore, but I got that Irish ornery thing going and said, I'm going to make it through this and I did with a lot of help from God. I came through the wars there. Most rational people will interpret these events as a dire warning from the body to the mind that it is time for a lifestyle change, but just because people have the ability to reason does not preclude that they use that ability.  

In spite of the health tragedy, the album is completed, and Bearville releases in January of 1981. It will prove to be a tough sell to fans of the once great blues man though. This writer can't help but wonder if at some point, the marketing department at Bearsville is at a loss for what to do with the album. Then in a desperate attempt to put a positive spin on it, conjure up the idea of masking its obvious weakness by comparing it to his ground breaking album East West by calling it North South.  It is a nice try, but no one is fooled by the marketing shell game.

Firstly, the album has none of the gutsy boldness of East West, or as one critic laments, Butterfield's 1980 album North-South was neither bold or brash, just sterile and irrelevant. Only the slow closer Baby Blue sounded like authentic Butterfield.  Then there are other critics who dwell on its use of strings, synthesizers, and pale funk arrangements, or use words like fluff to describe the contents of North South.

In an effort to bring some context to the next criticism, it might be useful for readers who are not familiar with 70s pop to take this short digression. By 1981, the dance music trend known Disco has run its course in U.S.. Part of the reason for its demise is because of a nationally run campaign by radio stations, and trade magazines which often pokes fun at the pop music as being too artificial. It isn't long before kids are wearing t-shirts emblazoned with loud insult such as Disco Sucks. So, by 1980, the word Disco is a word millions use to insult, not compliment, an artist's music. This relates to North South  because there are critics who hurl the ultimate insult at it. They take it one step further than just calling it Disco pushing it to next level calling it Bad Disco. For an artist of  Butterfield's caliber, such criticisms must be devastating. Histrionics aside, North South  is technically excellent, and actually boasts some great grooves like Get Some Fun Out of Life. 
There are not many positive reviews of North South, and some critics seem more disappointed with the audacity of Butterfield's willingness to deviate so far from his established persona as a blues man of great distinction.  The final nail in the coffin for his new album is when David Fricke pens this one star review for Rolling Stone, Considering that East West is the title of one of the best albums Paul Butterfield ever made, it's ironic that North South should be the title of his worst.
The combination of Butterfield's blues savvy and former Al Green producer Willie Mitchell's once magic R&B touch undoubtedly looked good on paper. But Butterfield's  singing is barely a smoky shadow of  its old husky roar. Though the artist can still blow blues harp with the same spirit and soul he displayed he displayed in his Butterfield Blues Band days,  there simply isn't enough harmonica playing on North South to make wading through Mitchell's anemic production, the spineless  arrangements  and hopelessly lame material.
Catch a Train, Slow Down, and the nonsensical Footprints on the Windshield Upside Down are lukewarm funk, with Butterfield and his harp fighting a losing battle against  an army of clichéd horns and strings. The star's one harmonica showcase turns out to be a syrupy instrumental ballad , Bread and Butterfield. And his token  blues workout is - of all things - a Neil Sedaka number, Baby Blue, which closes the record. It's a sorry ending to a truly sad LP. The problem with album is that, it is the right material, just recorded by the wrong artist at an inappropriate time.

In an effort to promote album sales Bearsville releases Living in Memphis/Footprints on the Windshield Upside Down in the U.S., and they even attempt to crack the European market with I Get Excited (Me Excito) and Bread and Butterfield, but nothing gains traction. Sadly, in the minds of critics  Paul Butterfield is no longer seen as a trailblazer in American music, only an opportunistic follower of passé trends.

In spite of his doctor's advice, Butterfield does mount a tour with a five piece band, often with his girlfriend on keyboards, even sporting matching black t-shirts that advertize My Father's Place eatery in New York, but even those shows are hit and miss. Similar to so many other artists from the 60s who survive into the 80s, Butterfield is starting to feel the financial pinch of dwindling audiences. He puts  together a tightly planned one hour show that promoters milk by taking in two audiences in one night. It is grueling way to make a living any artist, but especially for a ill musician without a critically acclaimed album to promote.   


It is a testament to an artist's talent when people constantly reach out to them with support for their art, but that encouragement is futile when the artist rejects it. The chronology of Paul Butterfield's mental and physical decline seems to begin around the middle of the 70s when he loses his artistic vision.  Even the business acumen of Albert Grossman can't seem to penetrate Butterfield's desire to self-destruct. The obvious question is Why? Possibly, the New York's Lone Star Cafe owner Mort Cooperman shows some insight when says, Paul had the charm of a child,  but he was always fighting these demons.... A lot of people worked hard for him, because he was their hero, but he was on a self-destructive bent. It is a frustrating and emotionally draining dynamic that millions of families and friends experience every day.  Fortunately, Butterfield's his health and career will take a turn for the better, but unfortunately, the worst is yet to come. Stay tuned!

                                      
                                                                                

Saturday, December 3, 2016

# 63 Paul Butterfield @ The Last Waltz

  The disadvantage of living inside a culture is that it's next to impossible to fully appreciate it without some outside help. It's one of the reasons we often seek the insights of professional outlanders like comedians, artists, and tunesmiths.  More specifically, a skilled songwriter can create a two or three minute vignette which can be captivating enough that it becomes the soundtrack of our lives.

For example, during the sixties and seventies, those great pioneers of Americana music, The Band, compose songs which not only become a backdrop for a whole generation, but they also change the direction of American popular music forever. 

It is too easy to simply conclude that their music is just a synthesis of country, blues, gospel, presented in a rock format; their songs are more than just a sonic mosaic. Actually, their artistry is the product of the more complex feat of creating images of American culture which are insightful enough to transcend cultures, and generations. One of the secrets of their success is the fact that they have the outsider's advantage, four fifths of The Band are actually Canadian with only one member coming from the culture they sing about.  

Another interesting thing about The Band is that they don't achieve success the same way most artists of the day do. They're actually a reclusive unit. They  hunker down like monks in a remote house on the outskirts of the tiny New York state town of Woodstock where they carefully craft near mystical tales of life outside the mainstream. When you listen to many of their songs they seem almost part historical document, and yet are also current enough to capture the imagination of millions of young people in several countries. As American scholar Greil Marcus notes, they have a magic feel for history. They came out of Canada, but had a love affair with the American south, minstrel shows and blues singers.  
This self-imposed reclusive profile also serves as a marketing campaign concocted by their label when they hire the brilliant American photographer Elliot Landy to photograph them in Woodstock. At a time when color film is all the rage, he photographs them in black and white, crafting an image of young men who may have just walked out of a civil war painting, or some other period in ancient American history. Then there is their name, The Band, simple, yet distinct, and boasting both notoriety, and humility.  

Unfortunately, their magic doesn't last long.  Most of their best work grows out of a five year period before they begin to repeat themselves, and finally fizzle like an evening bonfire in late November. By the mid-seventies three members are preoccupied with debilitating heroin and alcohol addictions. The frustration with this social dynamic pushes their clear thinking principal songwriter to look at options outside the group. It is Robbie Robertson who proposes a halt to the self destruction, and then offers a very public celebratory wake for The Band.  

An ardent film buff with ambitions to merge his hobby with his career, Robertson tables the idea of inviting twenty one of the artists who play an important role in their career to join them in   a final performance at San Francisco's Winterland auditorium, and then filming the event for posterity. The idea will become The Last Waltz and like so many of their songs, it will become a historical document about the creators of the soundtrack for a whole generation. One of these key performers will be an important historical figure in his own right, Paul Butterfield

Similar to his colleagues in the The Band, Butterfield too earns much of his notoriety because of his time as a cultural outsider. Remember, he is the white middle class kid who penetrates the social fabric of Chicago's south side, charms the locals into teaching him their craft, and then emerges a journeyman bluesman. It may seem an uneventful feat now, but in the early sixties, it is quite an accomplishment for a young white man from Hyde Park.
In spite of the fact that most historians agree on Butterfield's contributions to post-war blues, it is probably a remote reason for him being invited to perform at The Last Waltz. Firstly, every member of The Band shares a similar opinion of him that Levon Helm confides, Paul was there for any blues based thing we wanted to do. Boy, he could really make it go. I really loved playing with him anytime. He was a good bandleader: He loved being the harmonica player; especially with Muddy. Just like all of us, I'd rather drummer, and would rather be the harmonica player. Those aren't just crass marketing blandishments either, almost every member of The Band works with him in the studio, or in live concerts. (See blog # 61) 

Of all the musicians who appear on stage with The Band at The Last Waltz, Butterfield shares the closest social bond with all the members. Robertson remembers, We knew him from Woodstock. He actually had taken us around Chicago. We had a long relationship with him up until this point. However, as Butterfield's social relationship with members of The Band deepens it also becomes darker. By the seventies there are people in Woodstock who refer Butterfield, Manuel, and Danko as the chemical trio for their excessive abuse of hard drugs.  

However, it is Butterfield's talent as a blues singer and historian that should be remembered the most. Firstly, as producer of the concert Robertson chooses Muddy Waters' 1956 hit Forty Days and Forty Nights for the great blues man's performance, but Butterfield interjects, insisting that Waters performing Mannish Boy will be most memorable. It proves to be wise advice, and a testament to Robertson's respect for Butterfield's opinion. As Waters' guitarist Bob Margolin remembers, Muddy loved the way Butterfield played on that song, setting up a warble that "holds up my voice" rather than just playing the song's signature lick. Decades later and Muddy Waters' performance still remains a highlight of the concert.

(As a side note, Robertson identifies Butterfield's harmonica on Mannish Boy incorrectly. He says Butterfield is using circular breathing during the song, but it is probably best described as extraordinary breath control. He is playing the three hole blow, the four hole blow, and then drawing on the two and the five hole, using the tongue blocking method. Circular breathing is the ability to hold a single endlessly, Butterfield is not using this technique.) 

The song chosen for Butterfield's performance is a song which both he and The Band share a history, but it comes with an intimidating lineage. Mystery Train is an old folk song which has been traced back to the Celtic tradition, then reworked by the Carter Family to earn them their biggest selling record of 1930. In the early 1953, Memphis bluesman Junior Parker reworks the song into a more urban interpretation and then two years later, twenty two year old Elvis Presley explodes into the young country market with Mystery Train as the B side of his 1955 hit,  I Forgot to Remember to Forget. Twelve years after Presley records it, Butterfield offers his own version of the Parker hit, only this time turning up the volume, and tempo to capture a whole new audience. Eight years later, The Band will attempt to mold the song into their own interpretation when they record in on their 1973 album Moondog Matinee. So, Mystery Train is logical choice for Butterfield to sing as a duet with Helm. 

Another interesting point about the version of Mystery Train from The Last Waltz is that it includes additional lyrics for which Robertson had to secure clearance from the publisher in 1973. As great chronicler of American popular music, Geil Marcus says,  It's a song that goes all the way back. Nobody knows where it began. Of Course it's a song that Elvis recorded in 1955, at the Sun Label, maybe his greatest recording there. A couple of year before Junior Parker did it a blues singer at Sun. Before that it a song called Brain Cloudy Blues by Bob Willis and the Texas Playboys, before that it was a song called Worried Man Blues by the Carter Family. When Paul Butterfield sang the song in '65 he followed the Junior Parker version which is kind of defeated, well so what, whatever, it's all fatalism. Elvis Presley completely changed that song. When he sang it, ''That train took my baby and I'm getting her back'  Well, that's how they do it tonight. I didn't see every show Paul Butterfield ever played, I only saw a couple of 'em.... I don't believe he ever played or sang this song with anymore fervor, with half the fervor that he did this night. One of the things you see in the Last Waltz is the absolute joy of performing, of people saying everything that's in their minds, hearts and bodies. It's putting everything out, leaving nothing behind, leaving not a word unsaid, and that's what you get in this performance. It's impossible to believe that there's anything more that Paul Butterfield could give this song or that there is anything more that this song could give him or the song and the performer could give to the audience. This is one of the absolute highlights of the Last Waltz. It is important to remember that a song with such a rich pedigree also demands respect, so the pressure to perform it flawlessly must have been intense, and as Marcus suggests, they nailed it!


Indeed, the performance of Mystery Train at The Last Waltz should not disappoint any of the artists who have recorded it in the past, and this version will serve as a benchmark for all twenty artists who will attempt it in the coming decades.  Fortunately, the audio portion performance is not jeopardy during the concert, but the video comes very close to ending up on the cutting room floor.

One of the unique technical features of The Last Waltz is that director Martin Scorsese chooses to document the concert with 35mm film, (a gusty choice for 1975), but he doesn't anticipate the strain the format places on the cameras. During the filming, there are constant shut downs due to overheating, and so when Butterfield begins Mystery Train, all but one camera is not operating properly. Fortunately, the unintended consequences of this catastrophe will actually serve to enhance the visual atmosphere of the performance, and catapult it into what many critics call a highlight of the concert.  

When The Last Waltz is released to movie theaters in April of 1978, it injects new life into the careers of most of the performers, including Butterfield's. In spite of the fact the early reviews are mixed, the film gains respect, and is generally regarded as the best music documentary ever made. Some calling it an important time capsule, or the greatest rock concert film ever. Even the cornerstone of Rock journalism, Rolling Stone, says of all the coffee-table albums to date, The Last Waltz is in many respects the most impressive... These accolades make the end of The Band as a creative force in popular music a tragic loss for fans. When the group leaves the stage that Thanksgiving night, even the future attempts to regroup in later years will be overshadowed by their past triumphs as creators a small, but important body of work.   

There is another sad postscript to the concert and film. The Last Waltz is also a signal from the stage wings to the artists standing in the spotlight that they should prepare to move from the center stage so a new generation can move into position. By 1978, there are new forms of music capturing the imaginations of young people the same way The Band does a decade earlier. In only a couple of years, the eighties will begin; Punk, then New Wave will invade the airwaves, and eventually, so will a new urban folk music, Rap. Similar to so many songwriters before them, these fresh artists will act as outlanders, composing their own two or three minute vignettes which will become the soundtrack of a new generation.   



                                                                 

  




 









Friday, October 28, 2016

# 62 Paul Butterfield's Put It In Your Ear

Almost two decades after white middle class Americans develop their infatuation with post-war blues, a new generation of suburbanites are falling under the spell of another urban folk music called Rap. Similar to blues, Rap boasts vivid tales about the pursuit of unrestrained and gritty pleasures on the lawless side of a big city.

There is another similarity that Rap and in particular Gangsta Rap shares with urban blues, in particular, 1960s white blues. It is the emphasis on a journeyman's profile as a badge of respect, or as the Rappers call it, Street Cred.  The marketing departments of every record label know of its importance, and go to great lengths to secure it for their artists.  Street Cred is seal of approval that Paul Butterfield enjoys for the first ten years of his career, but after he releases his ninth album Put It In Your Ear in February of 1976,  seal of approval is starting to peel away like the paint on a neglected ghetto window sill. 

By the middle of the seventies critics applaud him as the first white bluesman to interpret blues with an authentic conviction usually reserved for African-American counterparts. Part of the reason is that he carries the prestigious credentials is that almost every article written about him devotes about fifty percent to his past accomplishments before any discussion of his current work is given mention. 

Unlike so many of his contemporaries, most of the accolades critics shower on Butterfield are actually a product of talent and hard work not a fabrication of the press. He really does have the documentation to prove his apprenticeship and journeyman's papers. In addition, his resume cites years of grueling road tours, film and television performances, and innumerable studio appearance that enhance his own catalogue of recordings. Street credentials aside, Butterfield also proves himself to be a pioneer in popular music, an innovator, and a respected bandleader. He is the real deal.  As journalist Albert Goldman notes in his 1968 essay on the bluesman, Butterfield has always had always true sense of the real thing....

As an example of one of his many historical contributions to popular music, his band Better Days is part of a select group of artists who pioneer the new genre of roots music which will become known as Americana Music. Part of the widespread appeal of his music as a skillful blend of very hip, urban blues, folk, rock, and jazz, which strives to be anti-pop is still popular decades after release. As one critic notes,  His blues collage is pasted together out of black New York jazz of the sixties, blues Memphis soul of the late sixties and moire-screen orientalism from Frisco '67. 

However, in spite of any grand honors an artist's receives, they are really only as good their last performance. Even though every Butterfield project proves to be yet another example of a clear artistic vision for a new music, that ability seems to be fading by the time he records Put It in Your Ear. It is here that his artistic acumen falters under the weight of his gnawing drug addiction. If there is a point where his fans and critics begin to question his street cred it is with this album. 

The most recent stage of his artistic decline seems to begin in early '75 when hires the new Woodstock production company RCO to produce the new project. RCO (Our Company) is a business venture that music industry legend Henry Glover, and his rock star friend, Levon Helm concoct as their second career. Their first production contract The Muddy Waters Woodstock Album puts their company on the spotlight with a Grammy for Best Ethnic or Traditional Recording. The prestigious award generates some industry interest, enough to convince Butterfield to sign up as the company's second client.

One of the appeals of the project to Butterfield is that offers him an opportunity to shed the weighty responsibilities of being a bandleader, leaving the heavy lifting to the businessmen. However, this decision will prove to be a mistake because once he submits to the seduction of RCO, he loses control of any vision he may bring to the transaction.

It could be his desire to break free of past projects, or his inflated ego, but Put It In your Ear is definitely an error in judgement. While he considers Helm to be the best drummer he has ever played with, he seems more enthralled with Glover's curriculum vitaeHenry's done a lot of work over the years for people like Diana Washington, Ray Charles and Hank Ballard. He's a black man in his 50s, and I've known him for about three years.  We met on some session in New York.  He worked with me and Garth Hudson and Levon Helm on that Muddy Waters album we did for Chess. However, the two factors that Butterfield neglects to consider are that Glover's past accomplishments are redundant to most in the mid-seventies rock scene, and while Helm is ambitious, he also suffers from inexperience.

There is another factor to consider in the failure of this project though. The communication between an artist and his label is crucial for the ongoing success of both parties. In spite of what an artist wants to record, their label knows what will sell, and will often nix projects that look unprofitable. However, Albert Grossman's new label Bearsville Records is different from most other labels. They maintain a hands off philosophy with both the personal lives of their artists, and the projects they want to produce. It seems like an unorthodox business model, but it proves very successful for most of their stable of artists.   


It could be that the success Bearsville has with Paul Butterfield's Better Days is a signal tot them that anything Butterfield touches will reap financial rewards for the label. However, this time their laissez faire attitude is will cost them revenue.  The recording of Put It In Your Ear is expensive by the standards of blues singers of the day, Butterfield confidesWe used 25 pieces (actually 48) on the sessions and almost everything was done in one take. At $4000 (18k in 2016 dollars) a session you can't screw around. We did the whole thing in three days in New York plus two three hour session in L.A.  These are premium rates in the seventies, and so it is a surprising that no one at Bearsville questions the project spending.

Part of the cost of the album is the expensive use of some of the most skilled studio musicians in the business. When you look at the lineup of  talents, you can see that Butterfield is really asserting his reputation as a artistic force in the industry. Among the supporting forty-eight musicians are some of the industry's important luminaries: Chuck Rainy and James Jamerson on bass, Garth Hudson, Eric Gale, and then there is the flock of  11 string players,  and bank of 12 horns. The magnitude of the project is not lost on Butterfield either, he boasts to one critic, Fred Carter, who's a great Nashville guitarist and a terrific song writer, was on that one also. He wrote one of the songs on the new record. Henry wrote two, Aaron Banks, who wrote 'Ain't that a lot of Love' write one, there's Hirth Martinez song, and one song that was written by Bobby Charles and Robbie Robertson. There' also one of mine. However, Put It In Your Ear should also be viewed as an example of how albums often fail in spite of the quality of the individual components of the project.

It only takes one listen of the album to understand that this is technically an excellent album. Even the euphemistic album title Put It In Your Ear, and the product packaging demonstrates clever marketing, but those incidentals don't have much staying power with fans or critics, who mostly recoil when hearing it. One critic erroneously says,  ...his talent is undermined by flaccid arrangements and atrocious material. Even Rolling Stone's Kit Rachlis writes Even a career predicated on experimentation, Paul Butterfield breaks a number of precedents with Put It In Your Ear. However, while most critics focus on the songwriting and production, they neglect to address the real issue of  a mismatch of material with artist persona.

There is another more subtle reason for the failure of Put It In Your Ear . There are some historical trends developing in the mid-seventies which might contribute to Butterfield's decision to record this album. Consider, he is respected as a trailblazer in history of popular music, but with this album he becomes a follower of mainstream fads.  

The historical pattern in popular music tends to be that every decade gives birth to a new generation of young people who feel disenfranchised from the offerings of the mainstream, and so, seek out a new music. There are many examples of this pattern, from Dixieland in the 20s, Be-bop in the 40s, Rock and Roll in the 50s, and then the melding of Folk/Blues and Rock in the 60s. However, as a new music gains popularity, the music industry sniffs out ways to capitalize on its popularity. One thing they usually do is strip away any unique characteristics, (i.e. country music) and then promote a pasteurized version to the mainstream audiences. Finally, when the music becomes part of the mainstream market, the original audience recoils from its redundancy, and so the cycle continues. Remember, it is this dynamic which introduces The Paul Butterfield Blues Band to the world in the mid sixties.

So, how does this pattern tie in with Paul Butterfield's album Put It In Your Ear? Well, by 1975, genuine post-war blues has been marketed to mainstream audiences for a decade, and audience interest is stagnating. Butterfield, and many of his white Blues/Rock contemporaries have  established audiences, enjoy the very envious position of signing lucrative recording contracts, and participating in big budget tours.  As a reaction to this trend a younger generation are starting to seek out a new music.

Disco, is a loud, exciting, fresh music which employs, in-your-face vocals over a steady four-on-the-floor beat, prominent syncopated electric bass lines, string sections, horns, electric piano, and electronic synthesizers. It becomes so popular that many of the more ambitious blues/rock acts like the Rolling Stones, David Bowie, Pink Floyd, Rod Stewart, and Paul Butterfield will attempt expand their market share by capitalizing on the popularity of the new pop music. Many acts will have some success pandering to the disco craze, but others will not, and Paul Butterfield is one of them.

Herein lies the main problem with Put It In Your Ear, it should be a musical event, by a historically significant artist, but it sounds like a feeble attempt at pandering to the disco fad. Remember, Butterfield's public persona is of a progressive blues singer, who composes and interprets gritty blues based music, and then adventurously bridges genres of music, so his new album seems crassly superficial. Listen to Day to Day, Breadline, I Don't Want to Go with their very distinctive 70s social commentary, but then notice how Butterfield's once evocative harp solos seem to doze just at the surface of the mix.  

Then there is Fred Carter's saccharin based syrupy If I Never Sing My Song, which sounds more like an attempt to turn Butterfield into a lounge singer at a two star motel bar on the outskirts of Las Vegas rather than that of the white boy who masters Muddy Water's Just To Be With You at Smitty's Corner. If there is a single song on the album that damages Butterfield's street cred as a blues singer, it this track.

It gets worse. One of the highlights of Paul Butterfield's Better Days two albums is their interpretation of the Charles/Danko composition Small Town Talk. It is an insightful social commentary on the incestuous, mostly melodramatic social scene that Woodstock becomes by the mid-seventies. Now, compare it to what sounds like Butterfield's attempt at a sequel. Glover's Watch'em Tell a Lie, replete with a Barry White intro, and very unconvincing spoken introduction by Butterfield, and an anonymous female stand in. Similar to so many of the other songs on the album, they are so distant from the Paul Butterfield of the last ten years that they sound contrived, and consequently pathetic.


Then there is one of Butterfield's compositions The Flame. It too is another blatant opportunity to capitalize on the disco fad. In case you are curious, he is using the trendy 70s synthesizer invented by Alan Robert Pearlman called ARP. It is one of those instruments that becomes so popular in the 70s that you can hear it in many of the pop songs of the decade. (Edgar Winter uses one on his hit instrumental Frankenstein) When you listen to The Flame, and compare it with an earlier Butterfield composition Song for Lee, it is difficult not to be struck how directionless The Flame is as a piece of music. 

However, the whole of Put It In Your Ear is not a failure. There are three tracks that offer some redemption for Butterfield: You Can Run But You Can’t Hide, The Animal, and Ain't that a lot of Love. These are examples of material which are better suited to Butterfield persona, and can fit very neatly in any one of his concert setlists. As a side note, You Can Run But You Can't Hide is often attributed to either Freddie King or Luther Allison because both cover it in the 70s, but it is in fact Butterfield/Glover composition. Royal Southern Brotherhood, and Welsh singer Philip Sayce will cover the tune in the 2000s.

It is one thing to record an album of new material, but quite another to promote the project to your fans with a road tour. The live shows need to compliment the album, and Butterfield can't afford to ever offer Put It In Your Ear to a live audience. The logistics of mounting a tour with the weight of all the studio musicians will simply be too costly. It's one of the reasons why major artists like Frank Sinatra or Celine Dion hunker down in Las Vegas. 

However, Butterfield is either deluded by his own wishful thinking, or he is desperately overselling the album when he says, But everything we did in the studio we can do on stage. I'm forming a new band, and we'll be doing a lot of the new songs. I'm not precisely sure how many people are going to play, but I'll use Chris Parker and Richard Bell (drums and keyboards), probably two guitars and maybe a girl singer and one horn. My playing doesn't change much, though. The musical concepts change but my playing is always the same. I think people still crave that good old like music. Sure there la lot of theatrics around now, but I think a lot of people really identify with straight happy shows. Man, when I play I'm happy. It is a boast that will never materialize.

However, he does manage to form a modest road band, and then mount a sporadic tour; one which will take him to areas on the south that only a decade earlier he swore he would never play. His touring band is made up of out-of-work rock star sidemen Goldy McJohn   keyboards), young upstart Rick Reed (bass), and fellow alcoholic Dallas Taylor (drums). They do appear at the July 1976 edition of the Montreux Jazz Festival, and while it has yet to surface, there is a video made for a television special, and apparently a live recording. I have part of one recording from that tour Live at the Pipeline Tavern in Seattle Washington, July 29th 1976 where Butterfield demonstrates that his harp playing is better than ever, but the set list is made up of blues standards, nothing from Put It In Your Ear.

The album could be a product of Butterfield's frivolous artistic folly, or Bearsville's neglect, but in the end, it never does capture the imagination of his fan base. Shortly after its release Grossman hires Ian Kimmet from Britain to run the day to day affairs of his studio operations and assigns the Butterfield account as his first file. During his first meeting with Butterfield, Kimmet recalls I remember quite clearly the first time I was with Paul, in a bar in Woodstock, and he was looking me right in the eyes and asked, 'You didn't like my record with Henry Glover? Do you know who Henry Glover is?' .....He said to me, 'Why don't my records sell over in Europe?,' and I answered quite clearly that nobody was getting a buzz over them. He laughed at my terminology. I told him that I thought he needed better material, and I told him I thought the record just wasn't enough. He was clearly amused by all of my comments. 

While Butterfield might be smiling on  the outside, he seems to be aware of his loss of street cred as critics are looking for answers to several questions about his activities. He puts on a brave face, and defensively excuses his recent behavior, I've really been taking it easy for the past year and a half...... Well, I really needed some time to think things over, to work on my life and my music. A lot of people take themselves too seriously. I try not to, I live to laugh at myself, and that's good because it takes work to stay open. But it's a necessity to stay open. A while ago I got to a point where I knew I didn't have to play all the time, when I felt good about myself. When you're 19 things are very intense, but when you're 34 , like I am, their intense in another way. I've always tried to believe in my fellow man and believe in myself.
You see, the time I've spending hasn't been wasted. I've been listening to Pablo Casals. I've been sitting in with Taj or Muddy or doing a little session work for friends like Happy and Artie Traum. It's more fun, and it's better than getting paid a lot to do sessions in New York. I've been writing on piano, playing more piano. And the record company's been great; I've always had a lot of  faith in Albert Grossman and Mo Ostin. I'm going to be playing music all my life, just like Casals. I'm in no hurry. 

Butterfield's career is no hurry to recover after Put It In Your Ear either. His substance addictions are continuing to drain his financial resources, his wife leaves him, he still doesn't want to tour, and he only has one album left in his four album contract with Bearsville. As mainstream audiences continue to lose interest with new blues artists Butterfield is fortunate to still possess some important street cred as draw to the shrinking venues he is forced to play.

The one bright light will come when he appears with his friends and neighbors the Band at their farewell concert.  In the film The Last Waltz  he will be immortalized singing material more suited to his persona as a legendary bluesman. After the Band decides to dissolve, Helm will form his dream group called the RCO All Stars, and Butterfield will be the group's first call soloist. However, as both his personal and professional life is fraught with declining health and professional failures, the late seventies will continue to be a stark unforgiving period for the once great bluesman. During these years the only thing he seems to have left is his  street cred .

Paul Butterfield   Put It In Your Ear  Bearsville BR-6960  February 1976
You Can Run But You Can’t Hide, The Flame(If I Never Sing) My Song, Day To Day, Ain’t That A Lot Of Love, The Breadline, The Animal, I Don’t Wanna Go, Here I Go Again, Watch’em Tell A Lie.

Paul Butterfield - Vocal, harmonica, keyboards (ARP and Synthesizer)
Strings: Sidney Sharp, Richard Kaufman, Karen Jones, Bernard Kundell , Jack Pepper, Paul Shure,
Meyer Bello, Norman Forest, Jess Ehrlich, Raphael Krammer, Christine Ermacoff  
Woodwinds: Frank West, alto, Seldon Powell, tenor, babe Clark, Baritone, Mel Tax, baritone ,
Jerome Richard, alto, Clifford Shank, alto, Wilbur Schwartz, Gene Cipriano, David Sanborn, alto/soprano              
Keyboards: Henry Glover, Garth Hudson, Richard Bell.
Brass: Lloyd Michels, trumpet, Irving Markowitz, trumpet, Al DeRisi, trumpet  Sonny Russo - Trombone
Reeds: Garth Hudson              
Bass Sax: Howard Johnson
Electric bass: Chuck Rainy, Tim Drummond , James Jamerson, Gordon Edwards.
Guitars: Fred Carter Jr., Ben Keith, Eric Gale, John Holbrook, Nick Jameson
Background Vocals: Gail Kanter, Chris Parker, Bernard Purdie, Steven Kroon
Drums and Percussion: Levon Helm, Erin Dickens, Ann Sutton, Evangeline Carmichael, Lorna Willard, Julia Tillman, Andrea Willis.
Conductor/Arranger/Producer: Henry Glover,
Recording Engineers, Angel Balastier/TTG Studios (L. A., Cal.), Ed Anderson/Shangrila  Studios, (Malibu,Cal.), John Holbrook /Bearsville Studios, (N.Y.), Tom Mark, Assistant Engineer, Bearsville, Mixed at Bearsville Studios,
Mastering Engineer: Mark Harmon,
Contractors: Mel Tax, George Berg,
Photography: Barry Feinstein,
Cover Design: Milton Glaser.