New Interview with Lindsey about Tusk

[Villavic]

Originally Posted by WalkAThinLine.

Tusk is arguably the most punk record of the Seventies; the ultimate in nonconformist, anti-commercial artistic expression with far, far more than a last-minute punt deal with Virgin Records on the line.

I have no professional knowledge of music. So when I hear punk, I simply and immediately think in Sex Pistols, Ramones, The Clash, etc . What does Tusk have to do with the music of those bands? Do you agree Tusk is a punk album? Are Honey Hi and Storms punk songs? Or Walk a Thin Line? I agree Tusk was anti-commercial but is that enough for it to be punk? Please somebody explain me cause I don't get it.

[HomerMcvie]

Originally Posted by Villavic

I have no professional knowledge of music. So when I hear punk, I simply and immediately think in Sex Pistols, Ramones, The Clash, etc . What does Tusk have to do with the music of those bands? Do you agree Tusk is a punk album? Are Honey Hi and Storms punk songs? Or Walk a Thin Line? I agree Tusk was anti-commercial but is that enough for it to be punk? Please somebody explain me cause I don't get it.

Lindsey was a huge Clash? fan. Even though Rumours was the biggest thing in the world, he insisted that Tusk was going to be 180 degrees different from Rumours. It's not punk, but songs like The Ledge and NTF certainly threw the Rumours listener on their ass.

[aleuzzi]

Originally Posted by HomerMcvie

Lindsey was a huge Clash? fan. Even though Rumours was the biggest thing in the world, he insisted that Tusk was going to be 180 degrees different from Rumours. It's not punk, but songs like The Ledge and NTF certainly threw the Rumours listener on their ass.

Definitely. Lindsey’s attitude was punk-adjacent. He was listening a lot to The Clash and Elvis Costello. He was also, like many punk bands, deliberately thumbing his nose at slick studio polish and crass music biz capitalism. However, unlike the punks, Lindsey’s irreverence came from an existential nausea: he was tired of being affiliated with West Coast Rock, didn't want to “compete with Christopher Cross” (from an interview). Like many punks, he adored early rock-n-roll and garage rock, but he also was obsessed with The Beach Boys and elaborate Brian Wilson-style production methods. So half his Tusk songs are zany rock-n-roll parodies; the other are elaborate choral folk tunes. What all of his songs have in common is a decidedly anti-commercial stance and his prioritization of process over product.

[bombaysaffires]

Originally Posted by aleuzzi

Definitely. Lindsey’s attitude was punk-adjacent. He was listening a lot to The Clash and Elvis Costello. He was also, like many punk bands, deliberately thumbing his nose at slick studio polish and crass music biz capitalism. However, unlike the punks, Lindsey’s irreverence came from an existential nausea: he was tired of being affiliated with West Coast Rock, didn't want to “compete with Christopher Cross” (from an interview). Like many punks, he adored early rock-n-roll and garage rock, but he also was obsessed with The Beach Boys and elaborate Brian Wilson-style production methods. So half his Tusk songs are zany rock-n-roll parodies; the other are elaborate choral folk tunes. What all of his songs have in common is a decidedly anti-commercial stance and his prioritization of process over product.

and Talking Heads

the inspiration he took from the new wave/punk movement of the late 70s and early 80s was that of songs stripped down to their bare essence.

Given the lush layers of his production style up to that time, I can see the appeal to him-- this new style forced him to rethink his "palette" as he might say... and he welcomed it

[Macfan4life]

Thanks for posting in its entirety Walkathinline. Its an interesting detail that even though Mirage went to #1 it sold less than Tusk. I wonder how long ago Stevie's comments were about how stupid it was to order so much champagne during the recording of Tusk. I doubt she was interviewed recently so are these old comments? Gurl, you spent over a million dollars on blow during the recording of your solo albums and complaining about the excess of champagne?
One question I would love to ask Lindsey about Tusk is about the tracking. This used to be debated here too. I've heard Tusk too many times so it all sounds familiar to me now to have an opinion anymore. But I remember a theory or allegation that Lindsey purposely arranged the songs to have a sporadic flow. Is it a coincidence that album's most radio friendly song follows the most quirky song? Chris sort of disappears and then reappears on the album. I would love to get Lindsey's take if he even remembers. I have heard the album too many times so it all seems natural to me now. But hearing it for the first time does peak your interest.
I totally get his irk of "not prioritizing commercial intent." Sadly after Tusk that is exactly what the band did for Mirage and especially Tango. In some way the blowback from Tusk put them on the path towards exactly what Lindsey was against. I would love to ask him about that too. I suppose this is why I like and appreciate Say You Will. It has so many Tusk like features. It was too long and definitely stepped out of the Mac's comfort zone on many songs.

[David]

Originally Posted by aleuzzi

Definitely. Lindsey’s attitude was punk-adjacent. He was listening a lot to The Clash and Elvis Costello. He was also, like many punk bands, deliberately thumbing his nose at slick studio polish and crass music biz capitalism. However, unlike the punks, Lindsey’s irreverence came from an existential nausea: he was tired of being affiliated with West Coast Rock, didn't want to “compete with Christopher Cross” (from an interview). Like many punks, he adored early rock-n-roll and garage rock, but he also was obsessed with The Beach Boys and elaborate Brian Wilson-style production methods. So half his Tusk songs are zany rock-n-roll parodies; the other are elaborate choral folk tunes. What all of his songs have in common is a decidedly anti-commercial stance and his prioritization of process over product.

That’s exactly how I see his mindset, Tony. The movement was a liberation movement to him, and Brian Wilson setting out on Smile was also a liberation movement. The fact that it never materialized in its time seems to have inspired Lindsey even further, not less, as if a failed project were the ultimate statement in personal musicmaking.

I have no doubt he was listening to many of the punk bands in 1977, and despite what he said, he probably borrowed bits and pieces of the music as groundwork. But Tusk doesn’t remind one musically of the 1977 Clash album, unless you’re looking for individual grunts and patches. The punk bands in 1977 were heavily political, and maybe that’s what made Lindsey decide not to rehash their sound — that, and the fact that he knew asking Fleetwood Mac do to that would have been a grotesque fiasco. The movement was (British) working class rebellion. Lindsey characterized Chrissie Hynde in 1981 as having no professional discipline, which I always thought was odd coming from him, given his admiration for musical rebellion (this was in an interview with Jim Ladd for Law and Order when they were discussing the title). That could be his epithet: spontaneous discipline.

[Macfan4life]

Originally Posted by David

That’s exactly how I see his mindset, Tony. The movement was a liberation movement to him, and Brian Wilson setting out on Smile was also a liberation movement. The fact that it never materialized in its time seems to have inspired Lindsey even further, not less, as if a failed project were the ultimate statement in personal musicmaking.

I have no doubt he was listening to many of the punk bands in 1977, and despite what he said, he probably borrowed bits and pieces of the music as groundwork. But Tusk doesn’t remind one musically of the 1977 Clash album, unless you’re looking for individual grunts and patches. The punk bands in 1977 were heavily political, and maybe that’s what made Lindsey decide not to rehash their sound — that, and the fact that he knew asking Fleetwood Mac do to that would have been a grotesque fiasco. The movement was (British) working class rebellion. Lindsey characterized Chrissie Hynde in 1981 as having no professional discipline, which I always thought was odd coming from him, given his admiration for musical rebellion (this was in an interview with Jim Ladd for Law and Order when they were discussing the title). That could be his epithet: spontaneous discipline.

That's another interesting feature of Tusk. The album cover could be the cover of any punk band. But the music is not punk (as you say) except those grunts and other oddities thrown in.
Besides the music, the cover was another element to be unconventional and different.

[Villavic]

Originally Posted by Macfan4life

That's another interesting feature of Tusk. The album cover could be the cover of any punk band. But the music is not punk (as you say) except those grunts and other oddities thrown in.
Besides the music, the cover was another element to be unconventional and different.

This made me asking another question. What is punk? When I read in the article Tusk is arguably the most punk record of the Seventies, I thought in punk rock, punk music. and I thought WHAT? But reading wikipedia it summarizes punk subculture, that includes a diverse and widely known array of music, ideologies, fashion, and other forms of expression, visual art, dance, literature, and film.

So I don't relate Tusk music, Tusk sound, with "punk rock" music genre, but definitely it was a different form of expression or art.

[David]

Originally Posted by Villavic

This made me asking another question. What is punk?

From the point of view of this particular article, think of punk as an attitude toward creativity — dumping commercial aspirations and letting your id fly freely without business considerations.

I’m not sure Fleetwood Mac did any of that on Tusk, not even Lindsey, so the punk characterization is pretty loose. Lindsey always wanted an audience and never said otherwise. He didn’t always get an audience, but he always wanted one. He wanted to bring the public along on his little journey. But he got screwed out of that because the pop audience always had a built-in stodge factor, thanks to mass-market radio play. Independent-minded movie makers always had the same problem in a mass-market art. The problem has always been how to take steps in a new direction but retain an audience. It took Lindsey many decades to find peace with a drastically reduced audience for his solo albums (assuming he ever found peace).

Beethoven used to write fiendish, somewhat crazy and bizarre new music in his later years, and then when they told him that the work wouldn’t be understood or appreciated, just say, “It isn’t intended for your audience, it’s for an audience in the future.”

[Macfan4life]

Originally Posted by Villavic

This made me asking another question. What is punk? When I read in the article Tusk is arguably the most punk record of the Seventies, I thought in punk rock, punk music. and I thought WHAT? But reading wikipedia it summarizes punk subculture, that includes a diverse and widely known array of music, ideologies, fashion, and other forms of expression, visual art, dance, literature, and film.

So I don't relate Tusk music, Tusk sound, with "punk rock" music genre, but definitely it was a different form of expression or art.

I think that is what David was trying to express. Lindsey was inspired by punk but clearly the music is not punk except for the attitude towards the corporate commercial record companies. IMHO much of Tusk is folksy and very soft. It was totally not what the record company and the fans expected. Having said that its the album that we look back on and appreciate more and more. I think Mick said IN THAT BLOODY BOOK that Tusk was his favorite Fleetwood Mac album. However at the time the band really disliked Lindsey's plan to do so much himself. I read an interview with Chris many years ago that Chris said their fear was Lindsey leaving the band so they placated his motives.
I sometimes wonder what that band would have been like if Tusk was different. Would Mirage be different? Would they have disbanded? Did Tusk ground them? Regardless Tusk changed the band forever. It made the members hire their own manager and accountants. It made them fade from rock stations. It made them get flamed by music reviewers. It also changed their philosophy to try and be more commercial and pop radio friendly. I love Tusk but the blowback from Tusk irks me and makes me sometimes wonder what would have happened.

[sue]

[QUOTE=David;1297645.

That could be his epithet: spontaneous discipline.[/QUOTE]

I think that’s a marvellous description of Lindsey.
That sums him up in a nutshell and why he might be so difficult to work with….for Stevie.