Being 9 in 1989 and getting this album on illegal cassette in Poland back then I fell in love with this album. It is still to this day on of my favorite Paul's albums. Motor of Love...so good.
Bought Flowers on the day of release which also happened to be the last day of my junior year of high school. Released the same day as Queen's The Miracle. I remember getting out of my last class (half day) and heading to the record store to buy both on vinyl. I loved both albums and would have hyped them to no end to my friends at school but it was summer. Back to sleeping in til noon and watching soap operas until the parents came home. It was the first new album I bought from him as a new fan of about 2 years. I was at the height of my Paul obsession. Then he sold out by playing Beatles songs on the tour and it bothered me. It was all nostalgia and "wasn't I great back then?" Whole show seemed stupid and overblown. The Beatles were okay. But I didn't want to hear him play those songs. It wasn't my era. Felt out of place. Like I missed it all. I was young and my heroes were still vital. He started his first victory lap. All the ladies and couples crying over "Yesterday." As a teen, I was wanting to hear "my" memories; take it away, with a little luck, no more lonely nights, goodnight tonight, keep undercover, juniors farm, arrow through me, Morse Moose and the grey goose!!! The Beatles songs were just a bunch of old crap from before I was born. I knew the songs but they didn't have the magic by being performed by one Beatle and a bunch of ham and eggers (this is my 18 year old self talking BTW). I still think his first 20-ish years as a solo artist are superior to the Beatles. By becoming a Beatles jukebox, he effectively killed his solo career and sowed the seeds of irrelevance to any of his new songs. Flowers was the dividing line. I don't think Flowers died from a lack of promotion. It (and he) was everywhere; showtime, VH-1, record store, newsstand, commercials (I recall Figure of Eight being used for a credit card to pimp the tour. Another uncool thing at the time. In 89, it still wasn't cool to attach your music to a product.) mainstream radio ignored it but I guess that kind of music wasn't cool at the time. Didn't surprise me. If I really liked something, it wasn't considered cool by the masses. Roxette and hair metal were big. Some old hippie bafoon that your mom used to swoon over with his thumbs in the air singing, Put it There, was probably kind of cursed.
I have always considered "Flowers In The Dirt" as one of Paul's better efforts. It will be 30 years old next June, 2019; I think it deserves a relisten. As mentioned afore, the disc release was not quite synched to the "World Tour." The shows didn't arrive in Foxborough, MA til July of 1990; 13 months later. IIRC, there were also tie-ins with Elvis Costello's "Spike" album. I, for one, am still fond of FITD.
Listening to the deluxe FITD, I think if a slightly more streamlined and under-produced version had been released right at the start of a world tour, we’ll, that would’ve been something (to paraphrase the man). Is it me or does Flowers still seem like a “recent” album? It’s from the first half of his recording career!
The signing-on sound my phone makes always puts me in mind of the start of Motor Of Love, which I love. Distractions also a beauty, along with Figure Of Eight, This One, We Got Married and How Many People. Core of great album there, but let down by the Elvis Costello co-writes which mostly I don't care for, especially That Day Is Done. And huge missed opportunity in not including So Like Candy, which is to my mind the best thing they came up with and sounds great in its original demo. I play the album a lot, or my faves at least.
Similar to me except I was at the start of high school. Totally “unhip” compared to whatever was popular at the time. Good thing is anyone who could have criticized my tastes at the time are long gone. Anthology and Flaming Pie definitely benefited him commercially. I also remember a lot of promotion for Flowers as well at the time.
I've always loved that album. This Day Is Done is my favorite track. I really enjoyed the duet version with Elvis Costello on the Deluxe version. The album seemed to be well received at the time it came out. I don't know how high it went on the charts though.
Yes it was a good video with a big push behind it. Mccartney was by then pushing 50 clearly in ways that Jagger or Bowie were not. 2nd ...my brave face is a great song but McCartney's 80s records are distinguished by oddly ineffective production. 3rd ..this is the beginning of Mccartney's voice really falling off. He could push pretty hard to impress listeners before..but by the late 80s that effortless power was gone and his weak spots and poor technique showed more than before. Elvis Costello's demo was better and fit the times better. He would use a similar style with the song Veronica and scored an MTV hit video of himself and an old lady. If you can find it on YouTube there is a video of Mccartney doing the song with his band in a studio setting in black and white with a partially live vocal and different less impressionistic mix that you should hear. It's a strong album but at that time some very strong singers were throughout the charts... Macca rediscovering himself and his songwriting muse should have been the story of the year... but the sound of the album just wasn't cutting through to the mainstream..but was certainly embraced by fans as a return to form... and Macca coming above ground again.
Talk about promotion... big video... british tv appearances. He came out of hiding. Then that two page ad in the New York Times with the tour dates and AMEX sponsorship... it was surreal... THAT was a hit!!!
Too old. Not heavy enough. Young people unimpressed with desperate Beatle nostalgia music video. Neil Young and David Bowie were old people doing cooler things that rocked harder. I was 13 at the time. I was there. I remember. Personally, I think the record is better than the stuff that proceeded it but still just 'good' not 'great'. Hardcore fans will disagree, but they are only a percentage of the record buying public, and didn't have the muscle to lift Dirt higher up the charts. Now that there is no record buying public left Sir Paul can cruise to #1 with ease thanks to his acolytes.
I saw it plenty on MTV and VH1. Plenty. I remember seeing a video for "This One" and "Put It There" too, though the rotation wasn't quite as heavy as for the lead single.
Great song. The local classic rock station play it a lot. It had some beef to it, that's what people want these days. Not much beef on "Flowers". Where's the beef? I heard "Young Boy" on a local station maybe twice, that was it. I love that guitar break in the middle. There was a "Beautiful Night" video, and it got press for having boobies in it or something. And Ringo. Flaming Pie, aside from two worthless jam songs that should have been dropped, is a damn good record. I played it last week. I even made a mixed disc of assorted McCartney songs from the past 20 years and the Flaming Pie stuff shined the brightest.
Yes! "Motor of Love" gets a bit of criticism from certain fans here, but I think it is one of the great grand PM ballads/album closers (also see "Through Our Love").
Actually, the Stones have done consistently well unlike every other classic rock act. Steel Wheels was released at the same time as Flowers in the Dirt, as both Paul and the Stones returned to the road. Both tours were very successful, selling out multiple dates at stadiums across the world. But Steel Wheels sold very well while Flowers in the Dirt died. McCartney had lost credibility with his core fanbase, largely because they so disliked his popular early 80's work - "Ebony & Ivory", Pipes of Peace, Broad Street, cartoon songs and MJ duets. Most first generation fans stopped buying new McCartney music, and he never really recovered. On the other hand, Stones fans still wanted to buy their new music. That continues to this day - with the exception of their debut album, every Stones album in the last 50+ years has peaked in the Top 5 on the Billboard charts. I think it's unfair in a sense, as Undercover and Dirty Work are just as bad in their own way as Pipes of Peace and Broad Street. But, unlike McCartney, the Stones stayed true to their "blueprint" of blues-based guitar rock. I think that was the difference.
For me, guilty as charged. But I did buy FITD and went to see him live. But after that the anticipation of a new McCartney album was gone.
Picked the cassette up in 89, gifted it away a short time later. My time with Paul was over. To this day I still can't stomach My Brave Face. Weird as I really enjoyed Press To Play, but by 89 my tastes in music were rapidly changing. I bought this around the same time and preferred it
Phil Collins was huge in 1989-1990. But Seriously was a hit album and you couldn't get away from "Another Day in Paradise" and "I Wish it Would Rain Down."
Okay, I don't know about Morse Moose, but thinking about how neat it would've been to hear his excellent 1989-90 band tackle some of his 80's singles, aside from "Ebony And Ivory," the absolute lamest song he could've picked.
All good points but not really fair to compare a solo Beatles to the Stones, in terms of prestige value. It’s amazing that he could compete with them on some level at all.
After the Beatles broke up, Paul was able to find a new generation for his music - A lot of teenagers in the 1970s were fans of Wings and bought their records because they liked stuff like “Jet” or “Live and Let Die” - people like me. That’s why he remained popular through the early 1980s. Unfortunately, by 1989, guys like me were no longer teenagers. We were in our 30s, were married with kids, and no longer in the large record buying demographic. They don’t buy new music - if they buy CDs, they buy reissues or “best of collections.” It’s no accident that Paul’s biggest seller during that time was “Wingspan.”
I don't really have too much new or different to add. As far as the album: The music had no edge to it. Even if by a few years, he just seemed older and "safer" than many other '60s/70s stalwarts who picked '89 as their comeback years. He was always a goody-goody. John Lennon was the "edgy" one but he was dead. Ringo was the "funny" one and George the "mystical" one, but Paul was just that lightweight who let his wife join the band. A year earlier, the Wilburys were successful--but that was five big-name guys as opposed to one. Heck, even Billy Joel's "We Didn't Start The Fire" seemed hard and edgy compared to McCartney. As far as the tour: I was 17 at the time and while the Who's (and a lesser extent, the Stones') "stadium comebacks" were getting attention from my age group, Paul's just wasn't. I remember my mom being like, "Oh my god, I would love to see Paul McCartney in concert," which of course to a teen means, "thanks, I'll pass." Plus 20/20 or some show had this really dorky segment about some soccer mom who was traveling all over the country trying to get tickets. It was kinda pathetic.
By 1989, I was too old for MTV. That was for high schoolers and such, so I guess I missed much of the promotional stuff. College was over, I had a real job, and bills alike. Started getting picky about disposable income, I must have been 30. (yikes). FITD, Stevie Nicks "Rooms on Fire" and The Waterboys' "Fisherman's Blues" were my primary 'go-to' albums that summer. I was lucky enough to snag 2 tix ((face value)) for the World Tour; just not lucky enough to make it to the venue, 7/24/90. See my stunning best-seller "How to Turn Your Misfortune Into a Nifty Cash Windfall." (yeah, the title was too long.)
