Patti Smith, "Horses", released December 1975

Some things are great because they're first, some thing are great because they're just indescribably "great", and the best of the very best happen to be both.  It's my opinion that this album lies somewhere in between all of that.  This was one of the first punk albums to feature a female lead singer and in that role Patti Smith definitely did a very convincing job.  Punk was in its relative infancy in 1975 and Patti Smith is considered one of its pioneers and key influencers. For those reasons, it makes sense that this album is in the Top 50 list.

Her sound on this album has the stripped down, basic punk grit that convinces so many youth that they too can pick up an electric guitar, learn 3 chords, write a few songs (perhaps not as poetically as Smith) and form a rock and roll band. The band sound is pretty great and I actually enjoyed it more than I did the vocals/lyrics.  But I tend to connect to the music before the lyrics when I listen to new albums.  And punk music has never been my favorite genre anyway.  The guitar playing is good but not otherworldly, played by Lenny Kaye.  The other musicians are also very capable and help create a solid sound for Patti to build her vocals around. This is a unique album in that there are sections where she is simply speaking her poems and they merge into a song.  She puts all her emotion into her performance, sometimes for good and sometimes for bad, including maniacal screaming on several tracks. 

Patti Smith has definitely influenced artists beyond her time.  REM, Morrisey, The Smiths, U2 and Courtney Love have all cited her as an influence. As music has primarily been made by men, for women and teenagers it must have been inspirational to see and hear someone with Patti's abilities move to the front of rock music at the time.  I can't say it was my favorite album or even one I'd listen to again, but I can definitely appreciate the music and her effort to play it the way she wanted it to sound. She's obviously a talented artist (literally), poet, photographer and a rock music icon.

Additional reading:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horses_(album)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patti_Smith
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6QNOPYpIa3Q&list=PLF3f9p4TI4j21qf-DPJiDiDKGbLuGSM67 (one of the tracks that best gives you a feel for the album)

The Birth of a Nation, released February 1915

I'm sure that in 1915 sitting down for a 3 hour silent film was a pleasure looked forward to by those that could afford it.  In theaters, the film was shown into two sections with an intermission in between. Seeing pictures move and put to a story must have been a real thrill. We take this for granted today and I find it hard to know what to compare it to in modern terms.  In 2017, having seen 'modern' films, watching this movie turned out to be an arduous task.  In fact, I had to fast forward through some of the sections just to make it through. 

As I undertook this '50 Weeks, 50 Greats' challenge, I legitimately wanted to watch all of these movies in their entirety.  But watching a silent film is a difficult thing to complete, particularly one of this length.  For me, the storytelling screens can only do so much to explain the story and the odd acting style distracted me to the point of not being able to follow the story completely.  I read the Wikipedia and AFI explanation of the film and I got an understanding of the film and also clarification on why this film is historically controversial.  The inference that the Ku Klux Klan is a heroic force was clearly off base.  And portraying black people as unintelligent and sexually depraved towards white women is why there was outrage at the films release and efforts were made by the NAACP to stop it altogether.  

In 1988, this movie was ranked #44 in the first list compiled by the AFI (American Film Institute).  In the 10 year updated list, this film had completely dropped off the list.  I'm guessing that has something to do with either the general racist content/statement made by the film or by the changing nature of how critics understand and judge modern movies.  The movie has historic significance as it was the first motion picture to be screened at the White House (under Woodrow Wilson).  Sadly, it also sparked a resurgence in Klan participation, It also has film making significance with director D.W. Griffiths pioneering new techniques like "close-ups, fade-outs, and a carefully staged battle sequence with hundreds of extras made to look like thousands.  It also contained many new artistic techniques, such as color tinting for dramatic purposes, building up the plot to an exciting climax, dramatizing history alongside fiction, and featuring its own musical score written for an orchestra."

In summary, silent movies are a unique watching experience in our day and age.  I don't fully understand -and am too lazy to read- why if they could record sound (there is a soundtrack to the film) why couldn't they just record the actors speaking and tell the story that way.  Either way, it was cool to see something that old, something that changed the film industry and I did actually think parts of it were interesting (the war scenes looked surprisingly real).   I'd recommend watching it in parts though as three straight hours for a silent film proved to be difficult.

Additional reading:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Birth_of_a_Nation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Birth_of_a_Nation#Significance
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Birth_of_a_Nation#Ideology_and_accuracy
http://www.afi.com/members/catalog/DetailView.aspx?s=&Movie=1826 
 

Next Week, #43

Pink Floyd, "Dark Side of the Moon"

 

 

 

 

 

 

King Kong