Recently a friend of mine pointed at disappointing live TV appearance of now-elderly Art Garfunkel who was supposed to be a highlight of certain UK TV show. Now 70+ music veteran was invited to come on stage and sing one of his almost half a century old pop classics. It didn't sound horrible to me but I understand people must have been shocked by the way is aged voice sounds today. We all know and cherish old records, but time mercilessly steps over everybody and sooner or later pushes us aside.
This was always very interesting subject for me and I even wrote about it long ago, when I still worked as journalist. I wrote an article about the subject of elderly performers, since its interesting (and obvious) that in other professions people can hold a little longer, but when it comes to voice, it is very unpredictable and individual, some people lose it (look at Billie Holiday) while other can go on forever (Cleo Laine, who sounded amazing when I listened her live in concert at 80+). And than there are those who simply don't give up, even when voice is basically shut down and its definitely time to retire. Most of my elderly Croatian singers perform live probably out of sheer economical necessity, but I doubt someone like Garfunkel really desperately needs financial support after lifetime of very successful career. Is it vanity? Proving to yourself that you can still do it? Is it not painful to be aware that this delicate instrument is not anymore what it used to be? Sure, some people simply exchange youthful pipes with experience and bring something else, a completely new dimension that an still sound excellent in a completely different way: Cleo Laine masterfully covered those once-chandelier hitting notes with veteran actress self-assurance. Marianne Faithfull never was good singer in the first place, so she can go croaking forever. Whatever elderly Barbra Streisand lost along the way, first class production can fix it up. Some say that Joni Mitchell lost it but I disagree, to my ears she actually sounds more interesting today. Than we have somebody like Cher who is pushing it a bit too long in my opinion and just like Madonna found herself trapped in pop market where striptease became the main weapon - I always loved Cher but cringed with embarrassment when I saw her pushing 70 and still cavorting half-naked on the Las Vega stage. What is the point?
To make sure I explain myself clearly, I perfectly understand that ageing is natural process that happens to everyone. There is no way around it. And just like every age has its own beauty, people should recognise when its time to gracefully retire and step back, to leave the unspoiled legacy behind and to give some space to new, younger generations, no matter how silly and unrefined this new kids might appear. Forget about those saying "oh, there will never be voice like that anymore, it was one in hundreds of years" - there will always be a new talent blossoming out of nowhere sooner or later, just like our favourites came out of nowhere. Every Ella and Barbra were product of their time, reflecting what was perceived as outstanding back than. I love the fact that members of "Abba" ignored all those multi-million temptations to re-unite and sing "Mamma Mia" and "Honey Honey" as grandfathers and grandmothers, they would probably just get slammed for being wrinkled and (gasp!) aged. For the end of this little tirade, here is recent Aretha Franklin live performance - mighty "Queen of Soul" got convinced that she should conquer the world all over again and unfortunately I think that at this point that legendary voice is gone. She was sensational for a long time, but no matter what enthusiastic audience over there claims, nowadays she just sounds shrill - like with so many before her, the spirit is still there and its admirable she still wants to work, but thanks no. Better to leave nice legacy behind and have wonderful, inspiring body of work before the whole world becomes tired of them.
No comments:
Post a Comment