Well, we've got two songs this week that I don't recognise whatsoever. Like, absolutely nothing. Both have vaguely interesting titles that give me absolutely no idea what to expect.
Ebb Tide - Frank Chacksfield (peaked at No. 9)
Well, it's an instrumental, and even before looking it up, I'd bet this is from a film, like Terry's Theme, the last think we heard from Frank Chacksfield. It's grand and undeniably orchestral, but a quick look suggests that no, this was just an original composition. Huh. How often do you get that, nowadays?
It's by a composter called Robert Maxwell, who was primarily a harpist, and it's had a surprisingly busy history, with versions recorded by Frank Chacksfield, ut also vocal versions by artists such as Frank Sinatra and the Righteous Brothers. It's got that lush sweep that I can see both of those artists eating up, actually - maybe I should give that a listen next?
It starts with something that's surprisingly modern, actually, which is a sample of some wave and seagull sounds. It's only after that fades gradually in that the tune comes in, with thick, layered strings, some delicate harp, trilling flutes and the main tune on what could be either a bassoon or a cor anglais. It's a slow, Romantic, wistful kind of sound, and very lush.
The chords, especially when the brass come in, are powerful and have a sense of longing to them. A more skilled music theorist than me could tell you why, and what chord progressions we are seeing. The whole orchestra moves at once, which I think helps, either way, creating this big, epic sweep.
And then it cuts away, and we're back to the more delicate strings and harp, with a (admittedly slightly cheesy) harp glissando into the final note, which fades back into the ocean sounds and the seagulls and then we're done.
It's a lovely, pretty thing, but I'm not quite sure why people were so into it. It's slow and atmospheric, more than particularly catchy - several listens in, I still couldn't have hummed you the tune. It would make a nice film soundtrack, and I'd get its popularity if it was used as part of a film, but I can't find anything that says it was? It's just providing a nice, dramatic background, I guess.
The one thing that is interesting is the sea souds, which - and this might be a reach, but bear with me - have something a little bit new-agey and ambient about them. Like, even if it's not a direct ancestor of new-age or chillout music, it's got definite links to the sort of exotica / lounge music vibes that will create tracks like Fleetwood Mac's Albatross, which just feels like the most natural comparison here. Interesting.
I wouldn't put this on frequently, but it is very effective at creating a specific chilled-out, floaty, not entirely blissful but definitely serene mood. Intersting.
Man (Uh-huh)/Woman (Uh-huh) - Rosemary Clooney & José Ferrer (7)
I'm confused by these songs, and more particularly, I'm confused by what, exactly, they're meant to be. Spotify doesn't seem to be helping me, as it turns up exactly one version of them, and it's a combined version with Rosemary Clooney and Bing Crosby. So not the version that charted, I don't think?
As far as I can tell, these were two songs by different artists, that were sort of cross referenced? Man (Uh-huh) seems to be by Rosemary Clooney, with José Ferrer providing backing vocals, while Woman (Uh-huh) works the other way round. It's a clever concept, and I'd like to see more songs doing this! Mostly charting tracks with two parts are just an A-side and a B-side that are unrelated. Having both parts being answers, or giving both sides of a conversation is clever.
Even more clever, we get little references to the medium itself. The end of each track, for example, has the other artist exhorting the listener to turn the disc over and listen to the literal other side, for the more metaphorical other side of the story. In particular, Rosemary's arch "Girls, turn this record over and listen to the wife's side" is deliciously knowing! I love it!
Unfortunately, it's the only thing I like about either track, as they're otherwise just really gross and stereotypical, a viscerally-upsetting, concentrated, time capsule of the worst period attitudes about women and men, and their relationships, wrapped up in a ploddy tune and some very dopey performances from both singers.
I listened to Man (Uh-Huh) first, and it starts fine. Man's a mystery, but "Whatever he is, we like him that way". Ooh, Rosemary, so flirty! So coy!
Sadly, this doesn't last, giving way to a sort of comedy misandry? It's the sort of thing that you sadly do still see nowadays, as a particular strand of "haha, aren't men the worst" feminism, and I just don't like it. It's kind of feminist, on the surface, but its generalisations are more about taking men down a peg than building women up, or actually addressing anything with any nuance, and so it lets all sorts of ugly ideas persist below the surface.
One strand here is about how man, in general, is "As easy to read as a page in a book", "He'll boast and he'll brag of the women he's spurned / But just like a doorknob his head can be turned". He makes his business work, but he'll "wind up at night under some woman's thumb". So we've got men as predictable, and easily manipulable - and women, implicitly, as wily, controlling seductresses. Lovely.
We also get the lines about how inept men are: "As strong as an ox or as meek as a pup, he's just a small boy who will never grow up". He certainly can't be expected to do anything round the house: "He knows all the methods of landing a fish / But still can't be trusted at drying a dish". I know men who are like that, and true, it got a laugh out of me the first time. But expanding this out to all men, and stating it like it's an unchangeable fact doesn't really help things. It just tells women to expect their man to be some sort of helpless man-child. He can't help it, he's a man!
Finally, we also see that things are apparently not happy at home - perhaps unsurprising, all things considered. Our man here "Complains that he's henpecked and treated so bad / But if he's ignored then he'll holler like mad". So we've got the sort of classic sit-com "I hate my spouse" joke set up. Again, gross.
These sings are compounded with a really dopey refrain of "Uh-huh (Uh-huh), Ooh-hoo (Ooh-hoo)". José in particular sounds as dim as he's being made out to be, so points for good character work. Unfortunately, it doesn't make for particularly fun listening.
Then we get the first hint at the horrors the other side has for us as José cuts in: "Say fellas, push her outta the way and listen the husband's version". Yikes. This sets up the kind of comedy abusive tone of Woman (Uh-Huh).
We get off to a flying start with the refrain of "Whatever she is, she's necessary". Which... oof. Okay.
Then we get a parade of clichés about how "A woman is something both evil and god / But too complicated to be understood". In fact, while Rosemary's side had a lot of different stereotypes, this is the main one here. Women, for José are contrary and changeable. We learn, for example, how " In the morning she does, in the evenin' she don't, / You're always a-thinkin' she will, but she won't". That's it, that's José's side of things
Actually, no, there's also a spot of abuse, from the nonsensical line about how woman's "Afraid of a cricket / She'll scream at a mouse / But tackle her husband as big as a house", and how "She'll bust his head open, but then be his nurse". This is just straight up abuse. Not funny abuse. Just regular abuse, played for laughs because it's a woman doing it. Again, gross.
I hate this so much. Hate, hate, hate it. You could maybe use it for a black comedy 1950s sitcome parody, if you were making a point about how messed up the relationships there were - like WandaVision on some very jaded crack? Other than that I have no conceivable use for these tracks.
My favourite here should be clear. No need for further comment.
Hooray! We're back to the realm of multiple songs - and it's two songs I didn't know, by two artists I also did not know. How exciting! Let's get into it!
Oh Happy Day - The Johnston Brothers (peaked at No. 4)
This is not the song I thought it was when I saw the title. I was imagining the gospel number - but no, this is a completely different song.
As seems to be the case with many songs in this era, the version that becomes a hit in the UK isn't actually the original. That honour goes to a version by Don Howard, a high school student who initially stole the song off a classmate, and made it a surprise hit. Lots of people seem to have then covered it - and the group whose version took off in the UK was apparently the Johnston Brothers, a trio of British singers who weren't actually brothers.
It's got a very repetitive bassline, played on the lower register of a piano, but that just helps the song worm itself into your brain - I think I could sing this one in my sleep, after a few listens, the chord structure is so repetitive.
I can't quite tell if there's something a bit rock and roll/doo-wop about it, or if that's just my imagination (and/or wishful thinking). Leaning towards the latter, but I know rock and roll will see a lot of these repetitive chord structures, so it's nice to see the foundations laid for that.
It's overall quite slow and low-pitched, and the singers just seem to be singing along in unison, as a female set of backing singers chip in with breathy "love you, love you, love you, I love you, I do" bits. It's simple, but it does the job.
Lyrically, it's also very simple. The singer feels lucky and happy because his girl has told him that she loves him - and now it's blue skies and contentment all round. Exactly the sort of thing you'd maybe expect a high-schooler to write, nothing groundbreaking, but it's nice.
Little Red Monkey - Frank Chacksfield (10)
Well, this was an unexpected turnup for the books. What a weird, tricksy piece of music! It sounds like music from the haunted house level of a Mario game.
It's an instrumental piece, and I guess falls into the "easy listening" category, except I don't know how easily people would have listened to this, as it's just... weird?
We begin with a scream. It's not a person, though, it's an instrument. This is our introduction to the clavioline, which is our first properly electronic instrument to feature. It was an early synthesiser, with a keyboard and various effects buttons, including some to add vibrato, and the sound that comes out is quite similar to the square waves that you hear in 90s video game music. Deliciously weird.
And then, underneath the clavioline, what sounds like a janky, vaguely out-of-tune piano, and occasionally an electric guitar, for good measure. It's nice, in a slinky, devious way.
The clavioline mostly plays the tune in a higher register, but occasionally the instruments take over, at which point the clavioline comes in at a lower pitch, playing some chromatic chords that sound for all the world like the James Bond chord progression.
The rhythm of the tune also spells out "Little red monkey". I can only assume that's deliberate, otherwise I can't see any other reason for the title. There's nothing inherently very red or monkey-like about the song, otherwise.
The whole thing also gives me the same vibe as Pink Elephants on Parade from Dumbo, musically. Not sure if that's deliberate, just interesting to hear the similarities and see how both songs conjure up a similarly trippy atmosphere.
And then the clavioline screams again at the end, just to bookend the thing. Weird, in a good way. I'm listening to this very near to Halloween, and it just feels right at this time of year - very spooky!
It's really nice to be back to having multiple songs to pick from, but my favourite here is clear. It's just too weird and spooky and odd not to pick, deliciously experimental and strange. What were the record-buying public thinking?
FRANK CHACKSFIELD - LOVELY LADY - FULL ALBUM - ORCHESTRA - I bought this Lp on my honeymoon days on Jersey Islands in a small shop years ago - I still love my wife)
