'..it honestly could be years before I do that again..'

[johnfoyle]

This extract from a promo interview for tomorrow's show is the starkest, most explicit account of what Elvis is up to these days. Are is not up to, more specifically. So, in short, he's going to be primarily a live act .


http://www.winnipegsun.com/2012/04/09/e ... kes-a-spin

Monday, April 09, 2012

It's been about 18 months since your last studio album. Is anything new in the works?

No. Nothing. I'm just concentrating on the next show. It hasn't been easy to find time to write. There's been a lot going on away from the stage, like my father's passing. That's not something where I would sit down and get 10 songs out of that. I think it honestly could be years before I do that again. I don't doubt new songs will arrive. But I don't lose sleep over when that might happen. That's not unusual; I've had periods where I've gone years without writing. Everybody thinks I'm tremendously prolific. I'm not, actually; I just work very fast when I do work "¦ Right now, I don't have a record contract and I don't particularly want one.

It doesn't seem like you particularly need one these days.

I don't know that it's necessarily the most rewarding way of putting music in front of the public right now. Not for me it isn't anyway.

Criticizing your label over the $250 price tag of the Spinning Songbook box set probably didn't help.

Ironically, my guess is that the release probably wouldn't have been noticed at all if I hadn't done that. I probably got the record more attention by saying that. I really did think the price was a joke when they said it "¦ It really took me aback that we were so much on a different page. It kind of broke my will to work with that corporation anymore.

So what is next?

Well, I think it's a tremendously exciting time because anything is possible. You could say, 'I'm not going to record for a year,' and then the next year you could make 12 releases, because there's nothing stopping you. But these days, the lack of any kind of shop where you can find records means you're better to just cut out the middleman and not record at all, and just play.

[watercamp]

Say it ain't so.

The digital medium offers you a chance to sell all of your live shows or record 1, 2 or a dozen new studio songs and sell them by download. If anything the net has given the artist more control over his material and really does cut out the middleman.

[migdd]

I think he means it this time. Elvis is tired of howling into the wind as far as recorded music goes. It would have to be a sweet deal to change his mind, one would surmise.

[jardine]

this is awful news, because i live in a place that has seen e.c. visit only once in decades, plus I can't abide listening to low quality phone-captures or wobbly audience vids stuff. you may recall that i'm also the guy who downloads something decent from the web and then treats it as if it doesn't really exist.

just casts back, for me, on the genuine tragedy of national ransom, how the best thing he's done and the thing he promoted as much and as widely and as well as anything in his career, was treated the worst, and now he's spinning his wheels.

too bad.

hoping for the "nothing now, but 12 things maybe in the future." happened before. but again, how can small bands on indie labels feel such freedom and have stuff available, and he can't? is he just stuck with the false belief that the label he is on ought to be commensurate with how GOOD he is, not how "popular?"

[seanpointblank]

Do you think Elvis just sets his expectations too high? While he is certainly an icon, is he aiming to reach the heights of past successes in a way that isn't realistic in today's music industry + and as he continues to fade out of public attention even further. Or is he simply burned by how the recording industry treats him and music? I'm not really certain where exactly Elvis is coming from, but I think he longs for the days where albums were events and that's simply not the market anymore. I long for them, too, but I'd rather see Elvis adapt rather than throw in the towel.

[The imposter]

There's a similar comment in the Graeme Thomson book on Elvis, something about constantly blaming record companies for sales figures and living in an age where Burt Bacharach records still make number one. Excuse my paraphrasing, but that was the general idea.

The thing is, pop charts haven't meant anything for years..The 6 million people who buy Justin Beiber or Lady Gaga are just consumers of popular culture, not specifically music. They probably also feel the need to purchase the latest Iphone, Blackberry, Xbox or lord knows what else.

Then there's the 7 million who buy Susan Boyle, Michal Buble etc, largely these people don't even LIKE music, but own roughly a total of about 15 compact discs in case the need arises for some background music...

I'm rather glad that Elvis isn't in this company.

[jardine]

i'm sure glad he's not in this company as well. just wish he stop acting like he is or should be and that his savvy about current circumstances was as acute as his musical genius. lots of people (and NOT millions) are ready to follow him just about wherever he goes. And not recording doesn't affect anyone except them/us. it doesn't "make a point" about anything.

put the other way around, with the right, small, intimate deal with a good indie label, he can have a version of that older and more intimate relationship with fans. he can make, like he said during the n.r. flurry, "beautiful objects," but he has to realize that most of the world never did like beautiful objects. that penny lane was once number one is, in retrospect, a bit of a miraculous fluke.

I miss it too. I feel deep longing as well. that makes me love those miracles even more, and I have looked, on occasion, to e.c. for a wee glimmer of that miraculous beauty and been well served since 1977.

THIS is the real work, and there are ways to stop the sorrow and anger, I think, practical ways that can work. A beautiful website is no 12 album cover, it is no replacement for Like a Rolling Stone being number one in 1965, but it can still be beautiful. Making beautiful cds. and 78s to order is possible to do and it isn't a failure if it doesn't sell proportionate with how good it is.

must add that this letter is to myself, of course, because of wearisome job circumstances where the business has taken over the beauty as well. heartbreaking times, perhaps, but we could be doing all of this in Syria.

[cwr]

Honestly, I feel like this was baked in the cake over a decade ago. There was a window for Costello to embrace the idea of using the Internet to distribute his music, and he has resisted it for so long now that it seems highly unlikely that he ever will.

It's a shame, because the Elvis Costello of the early years was an innovator-- he would look for every fun way to release or promote a record. If the Internet had existed in the days of Stiff Records, you could bet that Costello would have been on the forefront of using the 'net to get tons of new songs out there in the most creative ways imaginable.

But he's set in his ways. And he's right to think that there isn't much fun to be had in releasing another album like National Ransom-- a terrific double LP that he plugged the hell out of via the traditional media but which disappeared almost as soon as it was available. (He refers to it as "deleted" in the liner notes of the new live album, and although he makes no further comment you can feel how much it stings.)

What's the point? Those of us who care will still mostly go see his concerts, and if we don't there are plenty of people who will take our place and yell out for "Pump It Up!" and "Alison." And he will happily oblige, and all will be fine.

But the Elvis Costello who released a ton of records between 1977 and 2010 is probably over now. Maybe not-- he's cried wolf a dozen or more times before, and I always fall for it-- but this time feels real.

He's happy playing concerts. No one buys his records. National Ransom got decent reviews but was forgotten by the time critics got around to naming their "Best 50 Albums Of The Year" so he's essentially transitioned into "living legend" status where everyone acknowledges he's great but even the critics don't pay much attention to his newest songs.

Gene Hackman made movies non-stop for three decades and then quit all of a sudden and never made another movie. Elvis Costello might have done the same thing. Oh well.

[verbal gymnastics]

Let's say that Elvis means it this time.

What will he do?

His life and love is music. He's knowledgeable, passionate and gifted. Can you see him playing his back catalogue for the next 15 years and just interspersing these shows with cover versions?

Will he just turn up and play at events and become "rentable"?

Elvis is simply not going to attain the level of commercial success that he once enjoyed. His music is bought by a different market to those who only attend shows (the latter consisting in part ofthose who drunkenly sing out loud to Alison, Oliver's Army etc).

It's difficult to know what Elvis wants or expects. Does he want commercial success; would be prefer critical acclaim; does he want both or neither?

[watercamp]

whatever happened to:
I wanna bite the hand that feeds me
I wanna bite that hand so badly
I wanna make them wish they'd never seen me!

[Dr. Luther]

He'd never be able to handle not doing studio work.
It's part of the package.

He is, first and foremost, a songwriter.
And, for the most part, the studio is where that process is most fully realized.

[Poor Deportee]

If I were running a record label, setting aside my own fandom, I wouldn't want a whole lot to do with Elvis. He seems chronically disposed to burning every label he works with. They are ALWAYS, sooner or later, publicly derided as incompetent boobs unworthy of him, on the apparent assumption that his ideas about marketing are instrinsically infallible. It's all based on a fundamental denial of his own commercial irrelevance, an irrelevance compounded by his own outrageous and recurring penchant for commercial self-destruction (Columbus, MLAR, SP & S, etc.). All of this would be as true of any 'indie' label he were to sign with as any other. Besides, I highly doubt EC would sign with such a label. He does not seem truly capable of conceiving of himself as a boutique item for a smallish but deeply loyal fanbase rather than a wider 'star' in the popular culture (and never mind that almost every other working musician in existence would kill for a fanbase the size of EC's - a point he appears incapable of appreciating).

The current tour, fun as it is, is slightly disturbing in this respect. Not only is he repudiating recording, but he is reverting to a concert format that basically eschews the kind of creative re-imagining of his older work that we saw, say, during the 'Costello and Nieve' tours. It's almost as though he is quite happy to play to the middlebrow half-attentive 'fans' who are nostalgic for his 1978-85 output, as long as he can throw in a few covers and newer/obscure tracks here and there, which they patiently put up with until they can hear 'Alison' or 'Everyday I Write the Book.' What's going on here? Is he, perhaps, just tired, perhaps burnt by the death of his dad, and basically taking a working vacation from the artistic ambitions of yore? Is he just trying to make money while having a few laughs?

I don't want to seem too smug. Lord knows, it's easy to criticize from the outside looking in, and no doubt, the grind of a long career in music makes it hard to take the attitude we're all advocating - 'just be an artist, make beautiful objects, do interesting work, stop worrying about all this other crap.' I do find it puzzling, though, that he's got his mentor Nick Lowe offering what is basically an object lesson in how to grow old gracefully as a pop artist, and he seems utterly hostile to the model. Bit of a stumper, our boy is.

[bronxapostle]

i agree 100% with Dr. Luther here...our hero can NOT NOT write and record. i bet we have a new LP or 2 before 2013 ends!

i agree about 25% with poor deportee...pretty rough critique of it all. though certain aspects you bring up ARE on the mark, i think you overdid the beating you handed out today. you make it sound horribly bleak artistically, when i'm sure he just needs a mental break, CLEARLY a result of his father's passing. he'll be fine in due time. must be his grieving process....

[sweetest punch]

I think we forget something important here: nowadays Elvis has to earn his money with performing, not with selling records.
In this view it's perfect to understand why he keeps on touring with the Spinning Songbook.
And why invest in recording an album when it sells only a few ten thousands?
But in the end, to keep on touring you have to record a new album with new songs every now and then.

[Dr. Luther]

i agree 100% with Dr. Luther here...

What the hell is wrong with you?
(This rarely happens. Ask my wife...)

[the_platypus]

his own outrageous and recurring penchant for commercial self-destruction (Columbus, MLAR, SP & S, etc.).

Not sure I follow. SP&S was his biggest commercial hit of the last 10 years. What about it constituted "commercial self-destruction"?

Was it that the record included a bunch of morose ballads instead of more jaunty fare like "From Sulphur to Sugarcane"?

[jardine]

i guess, in the end, I hope he's having a bashing good time with the spinning wheels and doing whatever he needs to do to accomplish whatever this time might provide. in the past, for the most part and eventually and reasonably consistently, he's gone through similar processes that have ended up with him coming back with more beautiful things. a strange sense of "f&*% this" fallow that I sort of understand in my own life, a bit. so, odd as it may look and sound, power to him to do whatever he needs to do. and whatever the circumstances that kicked this round off (n.r. weirdness, or ross' departure or whatever other mysteries that ain't none of my business), go to it, boy, and we'll see ya when yer back.

[bronxapostle]

i agree 100% with Dr. Luther here...

What the hell is wrong with you?
(This rarely happens. Ask my wife...)

does YOUR wife know MY wife???
GOD GIVE US STRENGTH!!!!!!!!!!!!

[docinwestchester]

we'll see ya when yer back.

And he WILL be back. No doubt.

[wardo68]

Pretty much. When he has songs, he'll record them, and find a way to distribute them. It would be in his best interest to distribute them himself, a la the Internet, but if he hasn't figured out how to do that in the past 10+ years, I don't know if he ever will. (Mostly because he likes the phyical aspect of records.) Then again, if the Stones can put out official bootlegs for $5 a download, maybe he'll have that eureka moment and say he though of it first.

[Poor Deportee]

his own outrageous and recurring penchant for commercial self-destruction (Columbus, MLAR, SP & S, etc.).

Not sure I follow. SP&S was his biggest commercial hit of the last 10 years. What about it constituted "commercial self-destruction"?

Was it that the record included a bunch of morose ballads instead of more jaunty fare like "From Sulphur to Sugarcane"?

That's just it. Whenever EC finds himself in a position to really win over or win back a significant audience, he whiffs. The archetypical case is of course the Columbus Incident, where, poised on the cusp of a truly massive breakout, he blew his foot off in a fashion that took years to recover from. Later versions of this self-sabotage are less egregious but still glaring. SP & S may have sold well, but why? Because the public was primed to give EC a try after the success of 'Spectacle' had put him back on their radar, along with the reasonably accessible TDM and Momofuku in the background, and the whole Starbuck's tie-in. So how does he respond to this window of opportunity? With a difficult set of 'austere' songs that likely could not be further from what many of these purchasers were hoping to get. The apparently total commercial failure of NR is likely the real indicator of how this wider public felt about SP & S.

He did the same thing with MLAR: following the unexpected smash of 'Spike' with what was easily his least approachable and accessible album up to that point. Sure, it sold well - no doubt among people who had enjoyed 'Spike' (or at least its first side). But how many of those fans stuck around thereafter? From the beard to the music, EC could not have gone further out of his way to alienate the casual fan.

Such perversity doesn't trouble me in the least from an artistic point of view. But it does make a lot of his fuming about the record business - his incessant blaming of others for his commercial failures - ring somewhat hollow to my ears.

[cwr]

Two things I'd disagree with:

ONE: The MUSIC of MLAR was self-sabotage

I disagree-- STRONGLY. I think if EC had maintained his "Buddy Holly" look that he had when promoting Spike, MLAR would've done much better. I don't think that album is nearly as inaccessible as people make it out to be, but growing a giant black beard and wearing dark sunglasses really did fuck with the Elvis Costello "brand."

I was not a fan at the time that album came out-- I didn't own any records-- but I had enjoyed the single "Veronica" and liked seeing the music video and remember liking his SNL appearance. But when I saw him on TV with that big black beard, I remember thinking "man, what happened to Elvis Costello?"

I think the BEARD was self-sabotage, definitely. But if he'd looked like "Elvis Costello" then I think people would've welcomed an "angry" album with songs like "Invasion Hit Parade" and "The Other Side Of Summer."

TWO: The MUSIC of SP&SC was self-sabotage

SP&SC did well because it was in Starbucks. National Ransom came out a year later and it was NOT in Starbucks. That's pretty much the only major variable. If NR had been featured at Starbucks counters, it would've sold much, much better. This one wasn't Elvis' fault. He was the beneficiary of good "product placement" and then he suddenly was without it. (Having cool Tony Millionaire cover art also helped, and this is down to Elvis' good taste.)

I'm fine with him having fun doing fun concerts like The Spinning Songbook for as long as he wants to. He's earned it. There was a time when it would have really annoyed me that he was wasting his gift for making awesome studio records of new songs, but I think the failure of NR to get even a satisfactory amount of critical attention made me feel the same kind of burnout that Costello must have felt in spades. To have such a fine effort so quickly forgotten would make me want to haul out the Spinning Wheel, too...

[Poor Deportee]

Two things I'd disagree with:

ONE: The MUSIC of MLAR was self-sabotage

I disagree-- STRONGLY. I think if EC had maintained his "Buddy Holly" look that he had when promoting Spike, MLAR would've done much better. I don't think that album is nearly as inaccessible as people make it out to be, but growing a giant black beard and wearing dark sunglasses really did fuck with the Elvis Costello "brand."

I was not a fan at the time that album came out-- I didn't own any records-- but I had enjoyed the single "Veronica" and liked seeing the music video and remember liking his SNL appearance. But when I saw him on TV with that big black beard, I remember thinking "man, what happened to Elvis Costello?"

I think the BEARD was self-sabotage, definitely. But if he'd looked like "Elvis Costello" then I think people would've welcomed an "angry" album with songs like "Invasion Hit Parade" and "The Other Side Of Summer."

It's an interesting thought. You may be right. Speaking for myself, though, I had discovered EC in my first year of university during the Spike days, and I found the music on MLAR pretty difficult at first, much more off-putting than the previous album. EC's self-presentation honestly didn't matter a lick to me - I had the thing on cassette and barely noticed The Beard. So I tend to figure that if a relatively open-minded guy like my 20-year-old self was rebuffed by the record - I only stuck with it through loyalty, and gradually came to appreciate its eccentric charms quite a bit - surely the less fanatical listener would be outright turned off. Either way, though, the point stands: EC sabotaged himself.

I also think you're too forgiving of EC's 'casual' audience. The idea that they grooved to the music of SP & S just rings false. Heck, a substantial portion of even his hard-core fanbase was lukewarm about that album. If the fair-weather fans HAD grooved to it, then prima facie NR would have had a bit more interest. Those seem to me to be indisputably two of EC's less accessible efforts, and asserting that they did not turn off the casual listener is exceedingly generous. So I think the charge of commercial self-sabotage stands in that case too.

Anyway, yes, Elvis has all the right in the world to do whatever show he wants, and I enjoyed myself at the Vancouver show. But there's no denying that he is not pushing himself artistically on this tour. And it's not record sales that matter to me - it's just the whining about it I find a bit tiresome.

[cwr]

I think we're both in agreement as to the "self-sabotage", although I think if NR had been for sale on every Starbucks countertop in America (the way SP&SC was), it would have sold much, much better. Because nothing else explains that particular record being his highest charting debut since Get Happy!! (I know that it also has to do with record sales in general being lower-- the WB era albums like Spike and even MLAR probably sold more actual copies than SP&SC, I'd reckon.)

I also agree with the notion that there is something in EC that doesn't allow him to move to an indie label and act like a "niche" artist. Even though he sees artists like Tom Waits do it and do quite well, Elvis seems to hunger for that bigger mainstream deal, with a big company.

If he ever DOES come to his senses and start doing his own thing, selling music through his website, cutting out the middleman, he's probably going to think "Why didn't I do this YEARS ago?"

Radiohead, in the latest issue of Rolling Stone, talk about how King Of Limbs was their lowest-selling release, but probably the one that was the most successful for them personally, because they didn't have to settle for what was left over after the record company took its share. Obviously, Elvis isn't Radiohead, but I'd venture that if he/when decides to follow The Rolling Stones' lead and start selling live downloads for 5 dollars, he'll quickly discover that he does significantly better using that model than he did having Hip-O Records selling concert CDs of shows that were bootlegged decades ago.

[johnfoyle]

More of the same -

http://www.floridatoday.com/article/201 ... ck_check=1

Apr. 16, 2012

Q: With piracy and file sharing, recording artists and record companies have been forced to change their approach to the music business. What are your thoughts on the state of the recording industry today?

Costello: I don’t really have any thoughts in it. I’m not in that side of the business. I play music, that’s what I do.

Q: What role do you think record companies will play in the future of music?

Costello: I really don’t even think about that. Interview a record company and see what they say.

Q: I have heard you say before that you were considering giving up recording your music and sticking to touring. What inspired that feeling?

Costello: I don’t have any plans to record right now. I don’t have any plans for the future. I will be in Seattle tonight and will soon be down in your neighborhood. I think a live album is a good snapshot of my music from night to night. We are always scheming new ways to make our show different, but I have given no more thought to recording right now.

Q: Last year, you told fans not to buy your limited edition box set. Why?

Costello: Compared to other box sets available it was not comparably priced. I think the makers accepted that now, and it was short-sighted thinking on their part. Some good came of it, though, because the box set I recommended people buy instead (Louis Armstrong) sold out.

Q: What up-and-coming artists in music are you impressed with these days?

Costello: I don’t like to name names, because they already know who they are.

Q: You have always been outspoken with your opinions, did you ever make a comment or quote that you wish you could take back?

Costello: I’m sure I have said something offhand before or said something that I didn’t mean the way it came across, or the people didn’t see the humor in it. Sometimes you say something that could come across as very cold when in print. You don’t want to be a robot, so it is important to speak your mind. I have no real big things to say. If someone wants to know what I am thinking or feeling, all they have to do is listen to the songs; that’s pretty much everything I have to say. There will be folks that come along and love everything you do and some that don’t care what the words to the songs are. The appeal is something I can have no control over and no manifesto to follow.

Q: What do you think of the reality-based music shows that make instant stars out of an artist?

Costello: I don’t think about them at all. I don’t even watch TV.

Q: What’s next for Elvis Costello and the Imposters?

Costello: Tonight we play in one of the most famous and heralded theaters in Seattle, the Paramount. Then after that on to a new town where we see lots of friends and give a good show. Right now, the road is all we have ahead of us.