One of my wife's closest friends had never heard heard of Sparks before she streamed the movie earlier this year because she likes Edgar Wright films. She saw them three times on the spring tour and basically has listened to nothing else since she watched the film. She says she hasn't been his obsessed with a band since junior high.
The stretch from 2001's Lil Beethoven to 2020's A Steady Drip Drip Drip is easily the most consistently great work of their entire career so far. Try 2016's FFS, a collaboration with Scottish indie stars Franz Ferdinand, for an easy way to see how they've influenced other bands and vice versa.
It’s funny you say that. My latest blog post is about some big meta ideas on Gratuitous Sax and National Crime Awareness Week that tie the songs to their own journey from irrelevant and unpopular to forging new horizons: https://www.sparks-onefortheages.co...guide-to-gratuitous-sax-and-senseless-violins. Sorry for the shameless self-promotion but I think I’m onto something here.
I second that - wonderful album that I listened to more than any other the year it was released - so many great tunes that stick in your head, and just an overall super positive vibe about the whole album.
I third that! It’s a nice and accessible starting point for anybody wanting to hear what modern Sparks sounds like, and I love trying to figure out what is FF and what is S. Great band name too!
Sparks’ career can be neatly split into two halves. In the first half they’d switch genre, hop labels and seek out new audiences in far off places. Then with their neo-classical reinvention on 2002’s ‘Lil Beethoven’ they set a ground zero for a sound and attitude that defined the next two decades of creative flourishing. When asked how they conceived the idea, the brothers claimed to have abandoned a whole record’s worth of material in the style of its predecessor, making this a sudden change of direction as it came just two years after ‘Balls’. But this doesn’t seem to be the whole truth - the lyrics from this era tell a far more interesting story than anything that the Maels have shared in interviews. If you think of ‘Balls’ as their music industry break-up record then it reveals a shared concept that runs through every song. Here’s a different perspective on the history of Sparks. Ron and Russell had the idea for ‘Lil Beethoven’ as early as 1994, but after years out of the spotlight, and broke from the failed ‘Mai the psychic girl’ movie project, they needed pop hits to resurrect their career. They mount a successful comeback with GSASV, an album that ends “instead of the usual drums and bass he heard senseless violins”, the perfect segue into ‘The Rhythm Thief’. This is what they plan to do next. There’s a power struggle with the record label, so instead of furthering their work they’re co-opted into re-recording the hits for ‘Plagarism’. The only positive from this is they get to experiment with orchestral arrangements. For the next album the label demands pop hits. Unwilling to wait for permission to realise their vision, they set about making two records at once. The record label pays for ‘Lil Beethoven’ but gets ‘Balls’, both developed in parallel. What they deliver in 2000 is an album designed to end their record deal - a side project. It follows the label remit, filled with catchy songs that never deviate from the 4-minute pop format, yet somehow it’s as deep and impressive as anything else they’ve created. Every song on the album can be interpreted to support this view. Coming soon is my ‘Meta guide to Balls’ post. Here’s a preview of how the opening track ‘Balls’ fits. This is a statement of intent. Sparks are showing balls of steel in wrestling back control of their career, and the opening lines work as a definition for what they must create for the label. “Nothing too prosaic Nothing too archaic Here's your wakeup call” Next they state that they’re making a change, taking inspiration from The Prodigy’s “punkin’ instigator” in the lyrics as well as musically. “We are pro vocation We are instigation Here's your wakeup call, your second call” Being turned into a legacy act with ‘Plagarism’ was their first wake-up call, and now being asked to make pop hits is their second. “You can sting or be stung You can fling or be flung It's all up to you” Next they show that they’re manipulating the label: “When they're being with you They're agreeing with you What you say is true, it comes from… Balls” The label are “agreeing” with Sparks, so Sparks are telling them what they want to hear. Then they tell us why that they’re not going to wait, as if they’ve been promised creative freedom after one more pop record. “You can wait for saviors Meting out their favors You can wait and wait Hope may spring eternal Sounds a bit maternal Do you want to wait, or crash the gate?” It’s “maternal” in they’ve had enough of being dependant on the parental figure of the label. They have the confidence to know that this won’t mark the end of their career: “Others will respect you Others will elect you They'll accept your calls” On ‘(When do I get to sing) my way’ they saw no point in wasting a dime on “ a call to god knows who”. Later we see the call is accepted, but they’re placed in a queue - “Please hold, please hold”. “Others will desire you They may not admire you But they will admit You do transmit Balls” Agreed. For more of this, see my blog at https://www.sparks-onefortheages.com.
Here’s my theory about GSASV being a secret concept album, where each song works as a clever metaphor for Sparks’ place in the music world of the early 90s - as unfashionable outsiders embarking on an ambitious comeback. This is a repost ahead of ‘A meta guide to Balls’, which will be ready to share this week, and builds on these same ideas. https://www.sparks-onefortheages.co...guide-to-gratuitous-sax-and-senseless-violins
Here’s a simple theory: ‘Balls’ was a rush-job, recorded during the ‘Lil Beethoven’ sessions as a way to end their contract. It was a side-project to their “career-defining opus”, both funded by the record label, but with Balls “Designed to fail” commercially. It’s their break-up record to the music industry, and they got to keep the child - ‘Lil Beethoven’. Many will be quick to correct me because it doesn’t fit the brothers’ claims from this period, but every song on ‘Balls’ perfectly fits this narrative. https://www.sparks-onefortheages.com/post/sparks-a-meta-guide-to-balls
Seeing Sparks get the respect that they’ve long been due is one of the most satisfying things I’ve experienced, in my 50 years as a human being and a music fan. Watching them grow and blossom, while the world around them has struggled to keep up with them, has been an intensely joyful experience. Their records have soundtracked the most important days of my life. As a live act, they’re almost untouchable. They, more than any other act on Earth, deserve their moment in the sun right now.
The thing is: a. Sparks "break up record to the music industry" must have been "Music That You Can Dance To", released in 1986 on MCA. After that? Fine Art, Logic, Oglio or Recognition. Enormous labels, eh? b. you may want to get those timelines right. "Balls" was recorded 1998/99, "Lil' Beethoven" in 2001/2. So how exactly could the former be "a side-project" of the latter? Sorry but I'll take the Maels words over some imagined "narrative" on an album - made up by a clearly obsessed fan - any time.
I dunno about any BIG secrets but it's cool to see the younger Maels in the video dressed as the Mael brothers on the cover of their debut LP... 2:48-3:09
OK, no need to be rude. a. The Sparks Brothers doc makes it clear that LB was the first time they weren't answerable to a label, major or not. b. I explain the timeline in the post. What I'm saying is that every verse, chorus and bridge on the album can be interpreted to support that theory, and it's a direct continuation of GSASV, which also calls forward to LB (in 1994, eight years before it came out). I've laid out a lot of evidence for this, so please don't react badly to the headline without reading the full justification.
Here's what makes it plausible. There's a strong argument that Gratuitous Sax (the song) is referencing Charlie Parker (a saxophonist with severe depression who "blew till he was blue"). He aimed to invent a new genre fused with classical, just as Sparks did. The album ends with "instead of the usual drums and bass he heard...". It's more than plausible that this spells out their intention to make LB in 1994. When I kiss you (I hear Charlie Parker playing) spells out a game they're playing with the record label to achieve this - line by line. I'd welcome any other explanation for what those words could mean.
When do I get to sing My Way is also amazing, of course. Last night, my girlfriend and I were having a glass of wine outside, and I was playing DJ. The set started off with a bunch of 50s stuff from Frankie Lymon, Dion, Carl Perkins, Buddy Holly, Eddie Cochran, then shifted gears to Cheap Trick live at the Whiskey '77, then some classic west coast punk (Adolescents, Agent Orange etc)...but then it was Sparks and Roxy Music the rest of the way. Mostly Sparks, but I had to end with 'More than this' and 'Dance Away' from RM. Ok, it was more than 1 glass apiece.
FFS is a completely wonderful record, but it's really something of a throwback for Sparks, being more "rocky" than anything they've done since the Atlantic era.
I’d love to discuss this with a Mael brother! What I’m writing does sound far fetched, but I’ve put in the work to justify it across several long posts. I’ve found is that if you consider every song as meta (about Sparks as a concept, not autobiographical), then it paints a completely different picture of these albums - one in which themes overlap and not a single word is wasted. Consider that Beethoven and Stravinsky have featured large in their work, well I think Sparks consider them peers - they’re equal to them. They all pushed music theory, particularly “meaning” in music, beyond what people thought possible. Sparks have done the same, but haven’t told anybody yet.
What do Beethoven, Coltrane and Lady Day have in common with Wagner, Tatum and Howlin’ Wolf, except (of course), for appearing on ‘Lil Beethoven’? How about this? Creative longevity - their late periods all have work that's counted amongst the true greats. 'Lady sings the blues' came when Billie Holiday was in her 40s, as did 'The genius of Art Tatum'. John Coltrane was releasing innovative work right up until his untimely death at 41. Howlin' Wolf recorded many of his best-known songs in his 50s. Wagner's later work, considered to be masterpieces, introduced new ideas in harmony, melodic process and operatic structure. And finally, Beethoven's 9th, his final and most famous symphony, came at 54 years old. So what’s this got to do with Bands being angry? Consider it the tongue-in-cheek viewpoint of Sparks themselves. They mockingly bemoan the angry hitmakers of the day, like The Prodigy or Korn, who had “stolen our spotlight, Ray” and “bounced us from centre stage”. They acknowledge the futility of competing on these band’s terms: “Hey everybody, what can we do? Crank it up just a notch or two?”. That’s exactly what they’d just done with ‘Balls’, cranking up to a more aggressive sound better suited to bands 25 years younger. It didn’t get them any closer to the top because “our profane ain’t profane enough” - it’s not the right style for softly spoken men in their 50s. It can easily read as Sparks commenting on their own mis-fire, but I don’t see it that way, after all, ‘Balls’ was a great album. It too had a song about an ageing “performer”, so maybe it wasn’t as much of a blind-spot as it appears: “I made my reputation, then, when it was expected. Now, there’s a new equation, who wouldn’t feel dejected?” The big question is what Sparks mean when they say “some might have done it… broken on through”. To have topped the charts? Be recognised as legends? Whatever it is, “some might have done it.. but not today” - they’re saying that even Beethoven at 50 would have struggled against Limp Bizkit in the early 2000s! Whether tongue-in-cheek or with utter conviction, Sparks are placing themselves right beside these musical greats (after all they do admit to being “a little vain” in ‘Annette’). But if age is a factor in all this, then consider the album title: LITTLE Beethoven, as in the child genius who published his first work at 12. Despite its classical leanings, this album isn’t their 9th Symphony, it’s Beethoven at the start. Think of it like this: 19 albums in, at the same age as these other artists, they’re telling us that this IS NOT late-period Sparks. The next 20 years of output proved that correct. The titular character is described on ‘The Legend of Lil Beethoven’ to have the perfect genetic mix of musical genius and street credibility. This is comparable to ’Suburban Homeboy’ thematically, and that mix of characteristics sounds a lot like Sparks themselves. The whole album is made up of related ideas, with all songs commenting on their own creativity and aspirations. I have lots more to say on Lil Beethoven, and that’s coming soon. In the meantime, I’ve shared many long posts with big theories about Sparks operating differently. If you look at the band and consider everything to be meta, being about Sparks as a concept more than Ron and Russel as people, then a completely different picture of these albums appear. Thanks for reading, and here are some other posts of mine. https://www.sparks-onefortheages.com No. 1 in Heaven Gratuitous Sax and Senseless Violins Balls Annette
