Customer Reviews

Worst Rock-And-Roll Records of All Time: A Fan's Guide to the Stuff You Love to Hate

5 star:		(10)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

This book seems torn between being an entertaining list of fascinatingly awful music and mere invective against artists the authors don't like. When the book focuses on curiosities like Elvis' hilariously cringeworthy "Having Fun with Elvis on Stage" and Think's generation-gap stinker "Once You Understand", it is witty and enjoyable. On the other hand, the authors' swipes at so-called "sacred cows" is often mean-spirited and not very fun to read. While I applaud anyone who takes shots at bloated soft-rockers like Billy Joel, I really don't think that U2's "The Unforgettable Fire", whether flawed or not, is worthy of inclusion in a list that contains howlers by Bruce Willis and Richard Simmons. Also, the authors' satisfaction that Elvis Costello and Paul McCartney's songwriting collaboration yielded a bigger hit for Costello doesn't really help to justify Macca's inclusion as one of the worst rock and rollers ever.
I fully support iconoclasm in rock journalism, but placing a mediocre Bob Dylan album on a list with William Shatner's insane "The Transformed Man" says more about the authors' tastes than it does about Dylan's lapses in artistic judgment.
In short, the book only half-delivers on its subtitle of "the stuff you love to hate". Its occasional wittiness is cheapened by its overwhelmingly smug, bitter tone.

Do not consider this book as a reasonable critique. This is a mess of spite from two people who fit the phrase "Those who cannot, will criticize."

Although I don't agree with every choice the authors make, and think that some of their entries descend into nothing more than pure venting (the latter keeps my rating at 4 stars), this is a very funny, very informative, and very intelligent book.

The authors make no bones about being nearly (nearly?) malicious when dealing with such overblown performers as Phil Collins and Billy Joel, and are completely unafraid to sacrifice sacred cows or to speak ill of the dead, such as Jim Morrison. The book came out over a decade ago and still doesn't come across as dated, save for a few minor points -- i.e., one of their Rules includes "Do not die before Albert Goldman," which is moot now that Goldman is dead. But overall, the book does what it sets out to do: shows that rock and rollers are human and can make missteps just like the rest of us, and thankfully pierces the pretensions of overrated (written in a suitably snooty font in the book) artistes.

However, where is Volume II, which is hinted at, if jokingly, when they decimate one of Pat Boone's "white bread cover versions"? Surely there are enough ghastly records to fill another volume.

The entry about William Shatner's foray into the world of vinyl in the chapter 'the Worst Dylan Covers Ever' is almost worth the price of the book by itself. You will not agree with everything, but that's sort of half the fun.

The tradition of "The 50 Worst stuff" started with The 50 Worst Films by the Medved Brothers. The stuff the Medveds chose films that were horrible but they clearly were having fun with their attacks. In fact, they invited the reader to join in the fun as the reader would sit and think how could any sane person come up with this junk. After films, it was natural that someone would choose the category of the rock'n'roll. And Guterman and O'Donnell took on the task. They claim the material was meant to be amusing or to infuriate. They also claim this book was an attempt to get rock criticism away from being pretentious and stuffy.

Do they succeed? I did laugh with Richard Simmons' Reach or John Travolta in Travolta fever. I was infuriated with their attacks on The Guess Who and Jethro Tull. But if they're trying to come off as unprentionous, casual and lighter than other rock critics, they fail.

The Medved Brothers maintained a light and funny tone throughout their "50 Worst Films" because they see Bad Cinema as cause celbre. Not the case here. Guterman and O'Donnell aren't always out to have fun or infuriate. A good deal of the time, they seem to use the book as a platform to vent their frustations which is neither funny nor infuriating and makes the authors sound serious as the rock critics they attack here. At least 2/3 of the book is spent on major artists(i.e,Bob Dylan,Stones Chuck Berry) lesser moments. They'll review something as Dylan's "Live In Budokan" or Berry's "My-Ding-A-Ling" and come off like a hardcore fan who was disappointed and expected something better. Now granted, "Live In Budokan" or "My-Ding-A-Ling" were neither Dylan nor Berry's high point. But if only your ears are the issue here(and not your heart or expectations), this stuff isn't all that bad.

Other times they vent their frustations on popular artists who they don't like. When they review The Doors' Alive She Cried, a good deal is focused is on how they can't belive that Jim Morrison is still popular long after death. The attack on Morrison sounds more like a parent asking his kid "How can you listen to that crap?" than someone who wants to annoy a Doors Fan. Another case is where Billy Joel is listed as the worst rock'n'roller, but most of the attack is dedicated to how much his attitude annoys the authors. Graham Parker in one line alone makes his attack more amusing or annoying (if you're a fan) than anything the authors come up with, "In Russia, they are so misinformed about America, they think Billy Joel is a rock'n'roll star!"

Finally, some details are flat out wrong. The book starts off with 33 1/3 rules of rock'n'roll. One of them is that Heavy Metal should be fast". Well, if you take Black Sabbath or Led Zeppelin as pioneers of heavy metal, you'll find a good chunk of classics that were not fast. How did you explain "Iron Man" or "Dazed and Confused" whose pace is slowed down to a crawl? In fact, Black Sabbath, influenced gazillions of metal bands with their dark riffs AND SLOW RHYTHMS. I did mentioned Graham Parker. Well, his live Parkerilla made the list and they attack Parker for making a bad record so his record label Mercury would drop them. Graham has said in interviews and on his web site, his decisions on making Parkerilla had nothing to do with Mercury.

(A more unimportant note, I have noticed a couple of entries seem to have orignally come from reviews that Jimmy Guterman wrote for Rolling Stone. The entries on Bon Jovi's Slipper from Wet, Bruce Willis' Return of Bruno or Anderson, Wakeman, Bruford or Howe are a couple I noticed that is an exact word for word copy of Guterman's Rolling Stone review. In fact, 3/4 of the Billy Joel attack is lifted from Guterman's review of Billy Joel's Greatest Hits Vol I or II. Wonder what Owen's role was in the book? Hmmmmm!)

Written on 1991, this book is extremely funny at mocking at much of the sacred cows of rock music. Let's face it, much of rock music is terribly pretentious and immature (which is a natural thing to happen when a twentysomething person, probably without much education, is encouraged to make grand statements about the state of the world). Since this book was written 15 years ago, the ouevre of the rock "artists" of the last 15 years is not included here (we are therefore spared of the mockery of such pretentious contemporary artists as Chris Martin, to bring forward a name). Schlock recordings are disparaged, but much space is dedicated to attacks on such pretentious and overrrated bands of the seventies such as Yes, Queen, Jethro Tull, The Doors, Genesis, etc. (Though I have to say that I like Queen; what the book says about them is a bit unfair). And even good artists like the Rolling Stones or Bob Dylan are mocked when they put out a bad album. A criticism might be put forward that this book has its own bias toward roots music. The authors have very little use for pop or techno, but this can be legitimate music in its own right. Squibbles and all, this is a very funny book for those who like rock.

This extremely funny book mocks much of the sacred cows of rock music, and allows you to realize how pretentious and inmature most of rock music is. I especially love the authors attacks on such pretentious overrated bands of the seventies such as Yes, Queen, Jethro Tull, etc. A good antidote to the policy of magazines such as Rolling Stone of taking rock musicians terribly seriously.

The first time I got this book out of the library, I thought it was going to be dry and dull. It was anything but. Just within the space of the introduction, I was laughing out loud. I continued to do so during almost every chapter and review.

Now, they hit some of my favorites as well as some clear and obvious duds. One of the things specifically pointed out by the authors is that not everyone agrees on what constitutes good taste to begin with. Also, it would be too easy to go to the other extreme and just buy every dog-eared used album with bizarre pictures on the cover. So if you're going to view the book with constant pique and say, "They can't hit this, it's sacred," you may need to take a step back. It's all in jest. At the end of the day, you still retain your auditory freedom, so no harm done. Take everything with a grain of salt, and have a good time.

The authors sometimes find it more interesting to discuss a misstep by, say, Bob Dylan, rather than a release you know is going to stink because the artist never had much talent to begin with. Talking about boy band records is like shooting fish in a barrel. Far more helpful to take a look at why someone with real skill makes the occasional "What were they thinking?" gaffe, then gets back on track.

The writing is very clever and features plenty of anecdotes. You'll learn about the recording process, the atmosphere of the times, and a lot more than just, "Oh, this stinks." It's well-informed. Both authors have years of experience in music writing.

Guterman and O'Donnell also cover a wide variety of genres, from classic rock to funk to pop to tv themes, and they move from singles to albums to Christmas tunes and beyond. There is so much information, you can sit down and read the book throroughly like a novel, or flip through it now and then whenever you are looking for some trivia with which to stump your friends.

So, be a good sport and pick up this book. It is essential for anyone who loves music and good comedy.

I had something else in mind when I began to write this, but then I thought, "Why not just provide samples from this book and let it speak for itself?" (Whether or not you agree with any of the following, this book digs deeply and is also tremendously entertaining.)

Samples from the list of the Fifty Worst Rock-and-Roll Singles of All Time: Jack and Diane, by John Cougar; The Horizontal Bop, by Bob Seger; Do Ya Think I'm Sexy?, by Rod Stewart; Wonderful Tonight, by Eric Clapton; You Can't Hurry Love, by Phil Collins; All by Myself, by Eric Carmen; Love the One You're With, by Stephen Stills; Back in the U.S.A., by Linda Ronstadt; and My Ding-a-Ling, by Chuck Berry.

Samples from the list of the Fifty Worst Rock-and-Roll Albums of All Time: Sgt. Peppers Lonely Hearts Club Band: The Original Soundtrack to the Motion Picture, by Various Performers; History/America's Greatest Hits, by America; The Return of Bruno, by Bruce Willis; Live, by Iron Butterfly; 70's Hits: Great Records of the Decade - The Original Recordings, Vol. 1, by Various Performers (one atrocity followed by another atrocity, including You Light Up my Life by Debbie Boone, Kiss You All Over by Exile, The Candy Man by Sammy Davis Jr., and Daddy Don't You Walk So Fast by Wayne Newton); Travolta Fever, by John Travolta; Alive She Cried, by The Doors; Chicago at Carnegie Hall, by Chicago; American Dream, by Crosby, Stills, Nash, and Young; and Self-Portrait, by Bob Dylan.

Let me leave you with this. This book contains more than just "record reviews." It's more along the lines of art criticism. It contains a vision of what rock 'n' roll could be and should be and explains very meticulously how the records that are scrutinized miss the mark by many, many miles. This book contains aesthetic standards, philosophy, politics. This book is about...life. And not to mention that it also includes some major belly laughs (yes, it's about life, but they manage to keeps things loose).

I've owned this book for a long time, and it's brilliant. The commentary is dead-on (at last, someone else thinks Billy Joel is HORRIBLY over-rated). It also explains WHY great artists such as David Bowie and Paul McCartney have put out so much [junk]. It pulls no punches, I love it. It also itroduced me to the wonderful world of the Shaggs. I can't say enough about it, so I'll stop. Just buy it.