[Warning: this post will likely be boring to anyone who does not enjoy Fleetwood Mac]My friend Dan and I are both very passionate about music. Curiously, although we are both rabid consumers of music, we've learned that our musical spheres have only a narrow sliver of overlap. This is not a bad thing. We are both agreeable chaps and very rarely come to blows over things like this. On the contrary, we are often able to expose each other to music that we would normally not come across in our day to day explorations.
Our divergent tastes are epitomized by the band Fleetwood Mac. We are both Fleetwood Mac enthusiasts, but we view the band through entirely different lenses. I see Fleetwood Mac as a tool for Lindsey Buckingham to write and arrange excellent rock music with the help of some very talented musicians. Dan has a much more Stevie-centric view of Fleetwood Mac's contributions to the world. [side note: a recent conversation on this topic prompted Dan to wonder - Are their devoted Christine McVie die-hards out there?]
Dan recently wrote an in-depth post about Fleetwood Mac's double album "Tusk" in which he essentially surmised that he tolerates Lindsey's songs as a necessary price to pay to get some great Stevie songs [I'm exaggerating here for comic effect]. It got me thinking about Tusk from the perspective of Lindsey and Stevie fans. I would hypothesize that Tusk is probably the most difficult album to enjoy in its entirety if you are a strong Lindsey fan or a strong Stevie fan. Both Stevie's and Lindsey's songs on Tusk magnify their songwriting quirks to their extremes. Lindseys songs are extraordinarily strange and not at all commercial (which is exhilarating for a Lindsey fan...and frustrating for others). Stevie's songs can't seem to produce a melody shorter than 30 bars (again...great for Stevie fans, frustrating for others). Tusk was an album in which the two dominant personalities of Fleetwood Mac were speaking directly to their solo fans...and not so much towards the general Fleetwood Mac fans who loved Rumours.
Today I've been listening closely to Tusk's follow-up, Mirage. I've always thought of Mirage as an apology of sorts. Lindsey's songs are radio-friendly again. Stevie's songs are more concise. But, most importantly, the album sounds like a band recorded it, unlike Tusk, which sounds like 3 solo albums mixed together. Mirage hasn't aged as well as Rumours, thanks to a more pop-oriented production, but I will always consider Mirage to be under-rated. Sure, it had a couple of strong hits (Hold Me, Gypsy), but it was also graced with some excellent album cuts. Love in Store, Can't Go Back, That's Alright, and Eyes of the World are among my favorite Fleetwood Mac songs, and they are largely unknown to the radio-listening public. I have no broad point to this post. Just go buy Mirage.
2 comments:
See, now I've never really thought Stevie's songs on Tusk were non-melodic, but I am blinded by Stevie fandom. But I agree, she came back on Mirage with songs that were much stronger (and also rejected from her first solo album) and tighter. Your comment re: Stevie and Lindsey speaking to their solo fans rather than general Fleetwood Mac fans is spot on.
I, too, have always kind of looked at Mirage as an apology for the excesses of Tusk. It also needs a remaster like no other. I wonder why it didn't get a proper remaster when all the other Lindsey-Stevie-Christine era FM albums did. Anyway, mine sounds terrible!
Great post!
Hello! I suppose that if it were not for Lindsey Buckingham, we would not have the Stevie that we know. Ultimately, while she is totally original, she's been heavily influenced by his sensibility.
I am a "Stevie" at heart but LOVE LB. He has perhaps the most flexible voice, or did, in pop/rock. Could sound like anyone or anything.
And there are indeed McVie fans. The odd thing about Tusk is that while it's considered the Lindsey album, Christine and Stevie's work on it is their BEST. But I agree about LB"s stuff on Mirage being so solid - it's aged really well.
Thanks!
Post a Comment