Wonder if a lot of today's collectors could be described as "so hip and so zonked"?

PS Nice to have you back Pete.

Edited January 30, 20178 yr by Steve S 60

Nice one Pete, I think that's a very important column that I've not seen since i bought the mag. It's describing the Old Soul scene, in the main, that then became Northern Soul. 

  On 30/01/2017 at 16:55, ady croasdell said:

Nice one Pete, I think that's a very important column that I've not seen since i bought the mag. It's describing the Old Soul scene, in the main, that then became Northern Soul. 

Yeah I read about a dozen issues on saturday and it inspired me to put a mix together of all the records that were mentioned at the time, amazing how scarce some of them were but they are actually common today!

Ah, before imports became the only game in town. Strangely enough my eldest sister had stuff like 'Mr Bang Bang Man' on London and 'What's Wrong With Me Baby' on Stateside in her record collection - along with David Bowie, T-Rex, Motown and reggae etc - and she was never part of anything resembling a rare soul scene, they were just popular at the local disco in the early 70s. I inherited them (well borrowed and never returned actually) and when I asked where she found such gems would reply 'they had a big bin of old stuff at Woolworths'!

The first two paragraphs could refer to the music business today and the current resurgence of Northern Oldies. Seems odd coming across the word 'disco' in this day and age. Dave Godin certsinky knew what he was talking about back then.

Thanks for posting that article on here Pete, I couldn't read it on fb with my dodgy eyesight.  

There's no doubt that Dave Godin was a major influential figure and prime mover in the British soul scene of the 60s in particular and also into the 70s. But I've got to admit  I find some of his writings a little strange to say the least. His writing style often seemed , stream of consciousness  type rambling with no real attempt to make his point. This is (to me at least) one such piece. What exactly is he trying to say? Also some of his well known claims are fanciful to say the least (e.g the stuff about early days with Mick Jagger). There's a major contradiction in this piece that may be explainable but he doesn't even attempt to do so.

Firstly it's obviously important to state that his "oldies" are somewhat different from today's definition. All the records he was referring to are no more that five or six years old and the specific examples: Chubby Checker and Tommy Neal, are three and two respectively. So his "oldies" are often relatively recent issues that have passed their promotion time-span.

On the one hand he makes a point that most of the "oldies" in demand are not deleted but just require searching for ("finding them and digging"). He then immediately goes on to make a very strange derogatory comment about those who wish to  hunt for original records (most less that five or six years old): "..... their searching is a pathetic attempt on their part to convince their playmates ...." . So he advises searching for records then calls you a poser if you do?  Unless he's stating that there's no need for searching for originals if a record has been reissued. If so that's a pretty  strange outlook, particularly when he's just stated much had not been deleted.

This meandering contradiction then leads straight into what is essentially an advertisement for his reissue  label and shop......  where he sometimes sells those original records (eg Chubby Checker) that just need searching out - presumably to his hip and zonked customers.  

 

 

 

 

I'm sure there are streams of consciousness and often contradictory but he would no doubt have argued his point well. I ain't got time to do it and don't feel strongly about it affecting his other great writing. He gave the scene a sense of self-worth, unity and pride in the early days. I'm not sure what you're referring to about Jagger but some of the Stones and Beatles, independently, looked up to him; which did little more than tickle him as he wasn't a fan of their music in the slightest 

  On 02/02/2017 at 12:11, maslar said:

There's no doubt that Dave Godin was a major influential figure and prime mover in the British soul scene of the 60s in particular and also into the 70s. But I've got to admit  I find some of his writings a little strange to say the least. His writing style often seemed , stream of consciousness  type rambling with no real attempt to make his point. This is (to me at least) one such piece. What exactly is he trying to say? Also some of his well known claims are fanciful to say the least (e.g the stuff about early days with Mick Jagger). There's a major contradiction in this piece that may be explainable but he doesn't even attempt to do so.

Firstly it's obviously important to state that his "oldies" are somewhat different from today's definition. All the records he was referring to are no more that five or six years old and the specific examples: Chubby Checker and Tommy Neal, are three and two respectively. So his "oldies" are often relatively recent issues that have passed their promotion time-span.

On the one hand he makes a point that most of the "oldies" in demand are not deleted but just require searching for ("finding them and digging"). He then immediately goes on to make a very strange derogatory comment about those who wish to  hunt for original records (most less that five or six years old): "..... their searching is a pathetic attempt on their part to convince their playmates ...." . So he advises searching for records then calls you a poser if you do?  Unless he's stating that there's no need for searching for originals if a record has been reissued. If so that's a pretty  strange outlook, particularly when he's just stated much had not been deleted.

This meandering contradiction then leads straight into what is essentially an advertisement for his reissue  label and shop......  where he sometimes sells those original records (eg Chubby Checker) that just need searching out - presumably to his hip and zonked customers.  

As for his style of writing , Dave Godin   -  like clothes music politics sport and life itself  -  he was of his time and times change and each generation expresses itself differently to a  degree,  so that's no crime.

Most of the points he made in this article - and indeed throughout his whole journalistic and writing career  - are in fact fairly clear and to the point .

Oldies But Goodies became a well known phrase - and an industry - in the US in the late 60s when the first wave of Rock N Roll nostalgia began (for rock, doo wop and rnb music of the 50s and early 60s ) . There was much money being made from re-issuing classic hits. This is what he is going on about in this article although he puts it in the British context and specifically the "Up North Soul Scene" as he referred to the scene at the time.

The  comments he makes on those who are "finding  and digging"  "oldies records" are actually directed at elitist DJs  & collectors. If Dave had been active on  the soul scene of the last 15-20 years , he would almost certainly have  mercilessly hammered today's OVO brigade ;    and  if a record had been legally re-issued at a  cheap price Dave would have insisted you should be able to play it anywhere , any time. 

Ironically though , in his early columns of the late 60s / early 70s , he used to say it was OK and understandable for a  DJ to have a few "exclusives" or "secret sounds"  (ie a  cover up) ... 

As for plugging his own product , well why not, it was his column and he was a  businessman too ( had his own record shop Soul City).

 

Edited February 3, 20178 yr by sunnysoul

  On 02/02/2017 at 23:04, ady croasdell said:

I'm sure there are streams of consciousness and often contradictory but he would no doubt have argued his point well. I ain't got time to do it and don't feel strongly about it affecting his other great writing. He gave the scene a sense of self-worth, unity and pride in the early days. I'm not sure what you're referring to about Jagger but some of the Stones and Beatles, independently, looked up to him; which did little more than tickle him as he wasn't a fan of their music in the slightest 

I enjoy reading his articles and reviews. Some give a great insight into what was going on at that particular time and place in a field where there really wasn't that much written information.  E.g. his enthusiasm for Band Of Gold and its signalling  the beginning a new era for soul music. However, some of the things he wrote were obviously his opinion and some were fanciful to say the least. I'm not getting into the Jagger stuff because there's a tendency  to look too negative.  Anyone is free to do their own research and reach their own concussions if it interests them.

Edited February 3, 20178 yr by maslar
typo

  On 03/02/2017 at 03:29, sunnysoul said:

As for his style of writing , Dave Godin   -  like clothes music politics sport and life itself  -  he was of his time and times change and each generation expresses itself differently to a  degree,  so that's no crime.

Most of the points he made in this article - and indeed throughout his whole journalistic and writing career  - are in fact fairly clear and to the point .

Oldies But Goodies became a well known phrase - and an industry - in the US in the late 60s when the first wave of Rock N Roll nostalgia began (for rock, doo wop and rnb music of the 50s and early 60s ) . There was much money being made from re-issuing classic hits. This is what he is going on about in this article although he puts it in the British context and specifically the "Up North Soul Scene" as he referred to the scene at the time.

The  comments he makes on those who are "finding  and digging"  "oldies records" are actually directed at elitist DJs  & collectors. If Dave had been active on  the soul scene of the last 15-20 years , he would almost certainly have  mercilessly hammered today's OVO brigade ;    and  if a record had been legally re-issued at a  cheap price Dave would have insisted you should be able to play it anywhere , any time. 

Ironically though , in his early columns of the late 60s / early 70s , he used to say it was OK and understandable for a  DJ to have a few "exclusives" or "secret sounds"  (ie a  cover up) ... 

As for plugging his own product , well why not, it was his column and he was a  businessman too ( had his own record shop Soul City).

 

Well no, his comments about "digging" weren't aimed at "elitists" but the ones about buying originals probably were to some degree. Or maybe certain individuals he knew.   It's hard to  say because he really isn't specific.

I agree with a lot of what you say about OVO but I don't get the "permission to own half a dozen exclusives please sir" bit (my words). Why only a few? Why is this criteria so important?  And I would have thought "cover-ups" would have gone against his ethos?

 

Edited February 3, 20178 yr by maslar
typo

I have a lot of respect for Godin but I do agree about his writing style. All those long, tortuous sentences and I think he does fail to make a coherent argument in the piece above. Also comes across a bit 'hipper than thou'...

I am too young to have bought B&S when he was writing it originally but remember buying a load of back issues in the 80s and thought the same thing then. Always assumed he was on the diet pills or summat when he knocked out these columns...

One more thing, can anyone explain the point he is trying to make about 'Mr Bang Bang Man' in the final paragraph? It just reads like deliberately cryptic gibberish.

Edited February 5, 20178 yr by son of stan

  On 05/02/2017 at 17:22, son of stan said:

I have a lot of respect for Godin but I do agree about his writing style. All those long, tortuous sentences and I think he does fail to make a coherent argument in the piece above. Also comes across a bit 'hipper than thou'...

I am too young to have bought B&S when he was writing it originally but remember buying a load of back issues in the 80s and thought the same thing then. Always assumed he was on the diet pills or summat when he knocked out these columns...

One more thing, can anyone explain the point he is trying to make about 'Mr Bang Bang Man' in the final paragraph? It just reads like deliberately cryptic gibberish.

I know what he was trying to say, it should have said someone asked him for Mister GANG Bang Man but it's a typo which makes it sound like nonsense - he explained it in the following issue.

Ah ok. Thanks Pete. That's pretty funny. Most probs the editors thought he had made a typo in his manuscript and changed it to the correct title of the record.  Must be every writers' nightmare to have their punchline ruined that way! 

Does sort of suggest that the editors of B&S didn't have a clue what he was going on about either...!