I’m always looking for insights coming out and I got them from Bruce and the interviewer. I don’t need fly on the wall access and might be disappointed if I somehow had it. His work is ... his work. Looking forward to Letter to You ...
What I found encouraging what this part though: Despite a release close to Election Day, Letter to You is decidedly not an album of fiery anti-Trump anthems. “That would be the most boring album in the world,” Springsteen says
Well it’s a cliche already isn’t it? I’m not into albums/themes that are retreads of known facts. I like insight from an artist.
That was the best interview I've seen with Springsteen (the '95 interview when Springsteen was promoting Greatest Hits).
To me it just sounds like a Western Stars song arranged for and played with The E Street Band. Put some strings and horns on it instead and it wouldn't feel out of place on Western Stars. To be clear, I don't think that's a bad thing at all.
It's just a win-win for Bruce and RS. RS puts Bruce on the cover and sells more copies (I would guess) of that issue and Bruce gets a good article to promote his new album. If RS would be critical of Bruce, they wouldn't get the interview. It's easy as that. Also, RS will give the new album 4 1/2 or even 5 stars. We know that, right? Since they gave Jagger's Goddess in the Doorway a 5 star review it doesn't matter anyway.
Who cares how many stars it gets in Rolling Stone? What was the last Rolling Stone review that made any difference to anything? It's like saying VH1 is going to be all over it.
Rolling Stone has been irrelevant for a long time, but Springsteen Inc. still likes to play the game of old, and Rolling Stone still provides it with that vehicle. Springsteen and his representatives will feel good when they see their next 4-5 star review.
Ghosts comes out tomorrow.. as mentioned earlier. This is how it was described in that Rolling Stone cover story/interview: "He was also writing about being haunted, not unpleasantly, by the dead, most directly on the rousing “Ghosts” (“I turn up the volume and let the spirits be my guide/Meet you, brother and sister, on the other side,” he howls)".
I would say, the point is, Rolling Stone is still relevant to many people who are still Bruce fans. As you have many times pointed out, Bruce is not widening his market much or at all these days. He's certainly not attracting loads of new young fans (maybe a few via generational osmosis). So it does the job, I would have thought.
I don't know if that is true or not. Rolling Stone may have mattered to Springsteen fans back in 1980, but it isn't the same publication it once was. Factions of the deep fan base might seek out the article/review of the new album because they love Bruce, but I am not convinced the magazine is viewed as being relevant. I suspect a lot of people, including Springsteen fans, recognize it no longer is.
Bless, I dont think Molly is capable of it. He is a wonder to watch, because he is very knowledgeable and is a big fan of most of the people he talks to, but man, can he murder the language!! I mean, even if Molly did pre-think an entire interview and pre-submit it, you could guarantee by the time he got to the end of the first question it would be history. I remember him asking a question of someone famous, and at the end of the question the artist had no idea what the hell the question was because Molly had got so lost in what he was saying hehe Still, life wouldnt have been quite the same without him and Countdown. Glad I got to tell him so and buy him a drink
Whether we are allowed to discuss it here - or not, Bruce is more than allowed to discuss his political views in an interview. If he did an album called "Don't Vote For THAT Guy" then I'd agree, but he doesn't. His politics can only come as a surprise to people who aren't paying attention.
I’m close friends with several former RS writers (including an editor whose name you would probably recognize). They don’t even read the magazine out of habit anymore. Gave up some years ago.
It's obvious that Bruce didn't want to go too deep into politics in the RS interview, because if he wanted to, RS would have gladly provided the forum. And I would wager that the vast majority of serious Bruce fans know exactly where he stands, so he'd either be preaching to the choir--or alienating a big chunk of the potential buyers of Letter to You. He actually did get a few digs in, but he mostly played it smart.
To be fair , I think it's not just Rolling Stone. As a confessed former magazine-junkie, I've given up dead tree magazines completely. Most of the content is --or will eventually be--online in one form or another. But in the case of RS, it's website is atrocious anyway.
I thought that's what Facebook was for (e.g., "digs")! I think I let my last RS subscription lapse in the mid-90s... I'd visit their website still to read the occasional article if it wasn't so annoying.
I don't even go there for album reviews--and that's what I used to get it for back in the '70's and '80's. I occasionally read Taibbi because he's interesting, but other than that , there's nothing to reccomend it.
To me it was a by-the-numbers Rolling Stone interview. Mostly promotional, sometimes fawning, Bruce his usual eloquent but guarded self. Interesting read but nothing all that noteworthy. As far as the other stuff goes, Bruce is a charter member of the R&R HOF clique, along with Wenner, Landau etc. Along with that comes many platforms and opportunities not available to others. I would say he’s earned it.
If you mean he's 'earned" the R&R HOF, I agree with you. But the lofty perch he inhabits now is based on who he associates with. He's in "The Club."
