NICK KENT 2. FULL INTERVIEW: WHY HIS 1974 ATTACK ON PINK FLOYD & "THE CRACKED BALLAD OF SYD BARRETT"
Вставка
- Опубліковано 27 вер 2024
- #davidgilmour #sydbarrett #pinkfloyd #wishyouwerehere
**If you love this interview PLEASE CONSIDER HITTING THE "$ SUPERTHANKS $" button !
(It's under the video. ) Any small donation helps with my work - retrieving, editing & uploading my unique and original content. Thank you for your support ! John **
In 1974, the music journalist Nick Kent wrote two now famous pieces for the New Musical Express (NME). The first - "The Cracked Ballad of Syd Barrett" was a search for what had happened to the reclusive Syd Barrett.
The second piece was a scathing review after he watched Pink Floyd play live "Shine On You Crazy Diamond" and other newly written tracks from their forthcoming "Wish You were Here" album. The review resonated with the band.
The interview was for the documentary "The Story of Wish You Were Here"
#davidgilmour #sydbarrett #pinkfloyd #wishyouwerehere
#richardwright #nickmason #rogerwaters
FOR PLAYLIST OF ALL MY ORIGINAL INTERVIEWS ON SYD BARRETT
• SYD BARRETT UP CLOSE
FOR PLAYLIST OF ALL MY PINK FLOYD
INTERVIEWS @ • PINK FLOYD UNFILTERED
Please subscribe for more of my Pink Floyd and other rock musician interviews / @johnedgintondocumenta... .
**If this content is appealing to you , do support me with a subscription (free).
**PLEASE ALSO CONSIDER hitting the SUPERTHANKS $ button under the video to send me a small donation!
Every $/£ donated will be invested in my work - retrieving, editing & uploading unique and original content. **
Enjoyable interview!
I don't think Roger could ever build a wall as big as English Rock critics build between what they consider to be Punk, versus everything else that came before it.
Even now, nearly 50 years later, Johnny Rotten ranting about the shitty state of the world in 1976 is seen as something totally legit, but Roger doing it in 1975 is just some boring old fart from the Pre-Punk era who we have to write off because they actually took some time and effort to make their records sound good.
mmm interesting, and those first three singles to me were 3 minute works of art (like the first two of Floyd's); but the real mystery was how John Lydon morphed into a butter selling tweed wearing national treasure, in a world that's just as, if not more so.
But, I suspect, nobody listens to Johnny anymore, doesn't endure because it really is a hard listen. Like Kent, he ranted artlessly. Yes, Roger also became and endless stream of predictable rant and The Wall confirmed it despite a few decent tracks.
@@visionproductionsnz7828 The Wall? Only a few decent tracks? What is your problem?
Very helpful. Kent has insight.
“One man’s melancholy is another man’s abject depression”
Thank you very much.
@JOHNEDINGTONDOCUMENTARIES i've watched all your Syd Barrett videos and I just have to say WOW! you are BY FAR one of the best documentary makers EVER! I thank you for for taking the time to make this collection and recollection for all of us to see! KEEP ON KEEPING ON! subscribed!
Wow, thank you!
I laughed when I read that whilst Syd was still in PF his suggestion that the band needed female backing singers and a saxophonist was scoffed at. Five years later on DSOTM that's exactly what they had! 😂
well it’s not what they needed in 1967. which song on Piper would you add saxaphone and gospel backup vocals? the Scarecrow? 🤣
Nick Kent answered his own question on why they were/are popular. Not only were they "deep", but sonically it was wonderful, certainly to a teenager in the 70's, as I was. Their music continues to resonate still, and probably will always.
I was ready to slate this guy, ( I've previously read stuff about him), but at least he admits his bias in the article he wrote in 1974.
He's accurate on his assessment of Gilmour and Wright's contributions to Waters' songs.
Very informative interview. Thanks!!
My pleasure
He gets a little confused I think when he talks about the mystery of why Floyd is successful. I don't think it's that confusing. They have unique and beautiful singing voices, good players/musicians who play their instruments beautifully, and they write good music and lyrics. Not all their songs are great, but they have strong numbers on every album to carry the not so strong songs. They have a unique, beautiful sound, like Echoes, A Pillow of Winds, Atom Heart Mother, Shine On. In a way, they kept some of the dreaminess that Syd brought with his songs and music. They just make good and high quality music, so it's not such a mystery to me that they made it big and became so successful.
Well put. I’d go a step further, perhaps a large step, and say this guy is so COMPLETELY out of touch with the world that, using his own words, I find it “Jaw-Dropping.” Was he alive in the early 1970’s? (I know he was) but did he ever open a newspaper or turn on the news, either by way of television or radio!? Has he done that in the last 20 years!? From Vietnam to Grenada to Panama, to Afghanistan and Iran, Israel and Palestine-there’s a LOT going on to be “gloomy” about for crying out loud! This guy obviously lives in his own bubble where platters of fish and chips and sniffing his own gases are his main concerns! What a maroon! (As Bugs Bunny says) 🤔😐🥴🤷🏻
What are you two Bobo's saying ? Nick Kent was a pioneer in British music journalism when music was actually played and sung by the band's in question . To not recognise Kent's contribution to British music journalism is to recognise that you actually don't know dick about the time's and music of which Kent had a front row seat for . The only people " confused" here is you
Such an interesting article (NME April 13th 1974), I kept it. It's now stored with Nick's other article (NME May 18th 1974), "The Band Who Ate Asteroids For Breakfast" presented with Dr Carr; a review of all the singles and albums up to and including "Dark Side" and the compilations and bootlegs up to that date. Unfortunately I didn't see the second article.
I disagree with Nick Kent. I think most people would say that Roger Water's lyrics, and that period of Pink Floyd have held up for generations is because the lyrics and the music are timeless. It seems that every generation can relate to Pink Floyd with Roger Waters in a visceral and intellectual way. There is no mystery in that.
Yes, I'm not a fan of Waters' public persona and think Gilmour comes across as "a better human being", but the band really lost its sharp-and-sweet quality after The Big Falling Out. As for the Barrett stuff, the instrumentals and his songs on Saucerful are great, but the faux nursey rhymes on Piper are utterly cringeworthy.
@@pch2230 While I don't entirely agree with your last point as I do really like Piper, some of it is definitely silly and childish. Syd's story is heartbreaking, but I do find him and his contributions to Floyd massively overstated by many.
I respect Nick. Like his work or not, he had it right about Syd and the Floyd. He knew each generation would discover Syd, which is correct. Madcap never went out of pressing. It still sells. I have an alternative way of looking at Syd’s Floyd work from mid-67 to 68, but ultimately, Syd managed two amazing and rare things post Floyd. 1. He never embarrassed himself. 2. He became a myth.
Yes. My original pressings of Madcap and Barrett are prized. I really like your idea about Syd... never embarrassed himself and became a myth. So true.
Each new generation discovers post Dark Side Floyd as well. He was wrong on that one.
1. He never Embarrassed himself ❤❤ 😊
2. He became a Myth ❤❤😊
Nick had what right?…exactly? The Floyd(Waters, Gilmore Mason & Wright, & Storm) had everything to gain by exploiting the ‘Myth’ of Syd,…which in my estimation is an ugly & potentially very untrue created dogma around what actually happened…jugband blues has him VERY cogent! very AWARE of whats going down..
I never met Syd so Ive little reference piint outside whats in print & in music..I believe the music-Syds Music-Piper•Saucerful•Madcap•Opal
"Syd Barrett had left the building; he wasn't gonna come back and 'shine'."
Lol he came back into the "building" multiple times while they were recording the album and literally shined with his bald head and a rumored offer to lay down some guitar tracks, which was supposedly denied him.
Balding fat guys weren't allowed in Pink Floyd until the 80s, so again, Syd was ahead of his time.
You can say what you like about N.K. 'overblown , pretentious too serious etc'....but for my money he was always a bloody good read from a time when,unlike the sixties,rock journalism was,if anything,ahead of the music.You gotta remember in late '74 we didnt know punk was around the corner.We just knew something had been lost and Kent and co were an eloquent exploration of the ongoing musical malaise of that time.✌️
Thank you again John for posting these interviews. Very much appreciate how you give your subject the time and space to formulate his thoughts and ideas.
Thanks again Neal
Keep uploading these. Keep em comin.
Fantastic and important interview. Thank you, John
Cheers!
Been a Floyd fan since 1971..but Nick Kent is spot on.
Funny as well!
His (Nick’s) autobiography is superb.
Did he mention anybody else who wasn’t Roger Walters? The worst Music journalist, period!
Wonderful interview. :)
This gent sounds about 1000% more self-important and self-indulgent than WYYH ever did
D Skinner - *WYWH.....
@@warmswarm yes, sorry. Thanks!
19:10 - 🤷♂️I still consider ANIMALS to be a Pink Floyd album 🐖
Thanks for posting this interview. Always loved Nick Kent in the NME.
Me too!
Why are people here saying he can't make better music than the Floyd? He is a writer, not a musician. He seems very reasonable to me.
I’ve never been more endeared to an artist like Syd, his writing takes me back to the innocence and wonder of childhood, before I knew the world was a fucked up place. Rogers writing reinforces my adult view, that the world is a fucked up place
This guy gets it
Maybe he did more mandrax than Barrett, that is how great he is.
Wish you were here is my favourite pink floyd album. I grew up listening to it in my dads car. I never knew it was about syd barrett until i was an adult. Its a moving piece of music to me
Stunningly poignant and deep
As a Barrett lover, this is very telling n revealing to me
So thank you so much for uploading,
Just grateful you value it
Man, so well understood, he's has a really good insight and it's how I've experienced the pink Floyd
Absolutely brilliant, I think it's an important point of view to muse upon. He is a music writer and critic after all. He's honest and open. Glad of this John. Hope there's more to come. I've been going back through the interviews, especially Pete Jenner and Joe Boyd and they certainly seem to tell it like it was, for them.
Thanks. So good to know you’re diving deep !
Nick Kent is a throwback, in the sense that he belongs to an era when the appraisal of popular music was held to be important. I recall a friend telling me how brilliant Dark Side of the Moon was, but I didn't get it and still don't. We went to a lot of prog gigs, and I formed the opinion it mainly consisted of ex-public school boys trying to bring a modern jazz sensibility to pop. It felt like a lecture by the toffs to aspiring toffs, and in that sense foreshadowed the contemporary political mindset. Kent's Jeremiad on the Floyd was at least permitted in the 1970s, today it probably wouldn't see print.
@maxinemckenzie2354 Kent rightly sees DSOTM as a soundscape with elegant production but empty of any of the positivity of early Floyd. He correctly portrays the pretension of its fans, and their tech, and understands that popularity has nothing to do with discernment. I'm also working class, but prog was an aspirational movement and most of its protagonists were firmly middle class. Times have changed and commercial forces would ensure a voice like Kent's would never be permitted open season on an industry cash cow like Pink Floyd in 2023.
If you want to lose your girlfriend, just sit her down with a copy of "Tales Of Topographic Oceans". As for DSOTM. it is hardly "Bitches Brew" by Miles.
@@robjones2408 but that’s just personal opinion. I know people with broad enough musical appreciation who have Miles Davies and Pink Floyd in their record collections
@@mckeich Here, here!
My collection includes Miles Davis, The Floyd, George Straight, and Bone Thugs!
I think that is a failing of your own mentality in regard to music. Notice that a lot of replies like a big repertoire of music, so it is not just one thing.
Thanks for uploading, John. Kent hits on some interesting points, particular the latter Floyd's appeal, despite its dark outlook and why the Floyd decided to write about Syd after years of avoiding the topic.
He makes good points.
Thanks for posting John. I read nick in the NME for many years when I was a kid, and agree or not, he always made you think, I can still remember his review for the smiths’ Queen is dead album wetting my appetite for hearing it, the golden era of rock journalism. I love PF’s 70’s work but the points he makes in this interview are sound, and he’s charismatic and always worth listening to. Did you interview storm for your Barrett documentary?
Yes! I read every word that Nick wrote in NME in the 1970s and took his opinion very seriously. He influenced me to listen to a lot of good music!
Ditto. Nick was/is a class act.
Thanks for all these interviews I have to say that I'm slowly succeeding in wtching them all. Syd Barrett is such as captivating person and there's a reason behind the genuine interest of a lot of people for him, me included. I also think, although I may be wrong, that his lyrical output needs to be studied more in-depth. There are after all a few solo albums and a lot of poems, and when you're listening with a right kind of ears you hear more than someone who "completely lost it"
he was a schizophrenic
@@papalaz4444244 I also had eggs and bacon for breakfast.
Pink Floyd is such an interesting story. Not untypical to find human drama in successful bands but everything about pink floyd has this odd atmosphere. I dont mean that pejoratively. I love them
Nick kent gets it
My all time favourite band
Very insightful interview on the whole Syd story, I’m not sure Roger Waters would agree with all his points of view, but very insightful nonetheless.
This is great, thanks.
Oh wow. Looks like Waitrose will have to wait for another hour then.
😊👏
Looks like a Rembrandt self portrait
of his ball bag
Superb again, many thanks John. Nick is extraordinarily perceptive and insightful. I feel similarly - for me, Pink Floyd's music after about 1970 feels irredeemably turgid!
The wall changed the world..
Even if Nick didn't rate Roger Water's doomy worldview and political leanings - combined with David Gilmour and Richard Wright's detail and colour - it gave 70s Floyd the edge that made them special. Pink Floyd post Roger were pretty in parts but mostly tepid.
I NEVER had any knowledge of these articles. When it comes to the paying tribute to Syd Barret it's both deserved and ironic. Syd deserves to be remembered, but the irony is, the 'fallen genius' image made Syd into the ulitmate of what, I suspect, was one of the main reasons Syd retreated mentally and emotionally: being turned into a brand that glorifies his personal downfall in a way which makes it APPEALING?
He may have hated how he was having his creative freedom controlled and being packaged? Yet, look at how he and so many other icons of music who either died young or were troubled so they died INSIDE?
But, I have to say, I never knew or considered, the possibility Gilmour and co may have felt Syd's (another irony) own life both made him the thing he hated AND basically, was working against his recovery? Because he could've been gripped by it like all fans of his have been.
Both Brian Wilson (one of my heroes).and Peter Green (I know of him but not well) managed to get better, and by varying degrees, performed and wrote again. So, supporting him, money or legend wise, was the very thing he may have not benefited from.
The only problem with this is that Syd had every right to royalties from music he wrote and helped create.
And finally, you could argue Syd not only helped creatd Pink Floyd but, he was in part, responsible for their later super stardom. Because, him as a person, and his music, must've impacted them. "Darkside of the moon", "Wish you were here" and "The Wall" all exist because of Syd. Even, his feelings towards the music industry were feeling their later experienced. Brothers of the steel rail.
So, finally, he never truly left them. But, their worries of supporting him, is curious, considering all the wealth and success they had which CAME FROM his downfall being part of the aforementioned albums?
Yes, they were also responsible and were INCREDIBLE as artists. However, everything they did was the reflection of light coming from the crazy diamond called Syd Barret.
Fascinating.
David
😮
Who was this young man with this tshirt?
John Lydon
It’s good they they asked Pete Docherty’s dad, his thoughts on Syd.
This is a great interview, Waters down to a tee haha.
Great interview John.Really enjoyed it and Iiked N.K. a little bit by the end. He vwasnt just someone who wished he was in the Stones but didn't have the talent to pull it off. He understood what he was talking about, which was a departure from previous "Rock journalists" like Penny Valentine et al.
At the 30 mins point Roy Harper is mentioned. There is a more prosaic, accidental, truth about why Harper is vocalist on 'Welcome to The Machine'. The complicated backing track was completed first. By the time they finished the backing track Pink Floyd realised that none of them could sing the song at the pitch of the backing track and it could not be altered. Harper was in the recording studio when they were talking about how none of them could sing at that pitch. Harper said he could sing it, and proceeded to prove he could do so on the spot. As for Harper hoping for mainstream acceptance? Forget that....
you watched my Roy Harper interview about this ?
"Welcome to the machine" --> "Have a cigar"
@@JOHNEDGINTONDOCUMENTARIES Great interview!
@@jdmresearch thanks!
Amazing interviews John.
It's great how you managed to extract so much valuable information out of all of the key players and more in the Syd story.
I could watch your interviews all day (sometimes I do!!).
A couple of questions for you:
1) Did you have to get clearance from everyone to air the lengthy unedited interviews, or were you free to do so as I assume you own the footage?
2) Has there been any pushback from any of the interviewees about the unedited footage being made available.
3) Have you considered making a "Director's Cut" of your original film?
4) Have you seen "Have you got it yet?" and, if so, how do you think it compares to your own definitive documentary?
Keep up the good work ✌️
Hi Georgie. I'm very flattered by your compliments ! Wonderful to know you do actually watch the interviews all day ! To answer your questions 1. No clearances were requested by me..I just crossed fingers and took the plunge ! 2. No pushback so far (: 3. I'd love to but the problem would be the cost of music rights clearances. 4. I haven't seen it yet. I've heard a lot about it from Jenny Spires who assisted Storm and Roddy. Looking forward to catching it soon.
See Emily play remember it well lovely times sing it going to work in 1967 of to the cotton miil in Nelson lancs pendle Tony's hicks home town. Of the hollies group. Just love that song thanks. Sid. ❤️💯🇬🇧👌👍
If Pink Floyd weren’t flawed then their achievements would be less meaningful to me.
Flawed human beings and flawed steps on one’s artistic path are a great reason why their achievements were so heroic.
Roger Waters basically had a gun to his head as Syd began his struggles.
Write and write well or you’re all done in the music world.
He turned that terrifying challenge into some of the greatest songs we’ve ever heard.
A little credit wouldn’t hurt.
"It takes you down: hanging on in quiet desperation music"
well it is the english way. Wonder if it has something to do with no longer being the worlds dominant empire.
@@mikearchibald-u6gno
Completely agree with what he says about Gilmour and Wright. Their musical sensibilities are what make Pink Floyd special. Roger's lyrics I can take or leave, but the music is it.
There are lots of musicians that play good music. There are VERY few lyricists of that level of Roger Waters. Now of course we figure "well you only need one", but you look at the social criticism of Amused to Death and you can MAYBE count on two hands the number of people who put out albums like that, and thats regardless of the music. But I've said before, Amused to Death is SO raw that I really can't listen to it 'for pleasure' and maybe Wright and Gilmour could have chnaged that, but I doubt it.
Roger is not only lirics!!!...see the albuns...he made 90% foi lirics and 70% music...or participate, pos Syd
It’s present on animals and even aspects of the wall. Roger was really important too
Great interview 👍
Cheers!
My wife and I went to see Pink Floyd on the same tour. Nick Kent's comments of "shambolic and turgid" completely echo what we saw all those years ago.
We came away from the gig (Trentham Gardens, S-O-T) thinking were we the only ones there that thought that. It was considered "uncool" to criticize The Floyd back then.
Still my favorite band of all time though, and I saw so many great ones way back when.
THanks for that, its good to know it wasnt just 'personal' on his part. The part where he says Rick Wright came up to him at a party and said they took it to heart really goes to what we NOW hear about Floyd concerts. You can go "best concert ever' and see the Ivor Wynne concert where they blew out the windows of nearby stores at the end to see just how much they'd switched.
They LOST money on the The Wall tour, nowadays the idea of LOSING money on a tour just seems insane for a group the size of Pink Floyd. But yet they went out and lost money just to put on a 'show'.
I was at that concert and Nick is correct. It was very poor. Roger Walters stood with his back to the audience he whole gig. Not their best moment. Gotta Be Crazy (Dogs) and Raving and Drooling (Sheep) were as ineffective as Shine On You Crazy Diamond on the night. Something was wrong with the band that night. They’d figured it out by the time they recorded them though.
Nick...you were spot on thank you
I've read that review and it was so mean and spiteful, I don't know how the group could ever look at him again after he did it.
Were you at the concert? Maybe their performance was deserving of a bad review. That people paid good money to see one of the top bands in the country and they trudge onto the stage looking like they just got out of bed and proceed to spend the first five minutes tuning up is unprofessional to say the least.
Sometimes people need a good kick up the backside when complacency sets in.
@@robwilde6857 That was probably them trying to be anti-showbiz I guess but it backfired on them with this review.
@@robwilde6857 Were you?
About time doom monger Roger Waters was brought down a peg or two, this's pretty funny and Kent is sharp as ever.
John Edginton is still putting out amazingly good documentaries. Well done!!!
Thanks so much!
Taking you down is what so many people relate to, because, let's face it, life can be a real bitch in its slavery for the almighty dollar & having to contend with so many negative views & emotions of the human condition. Its very relatable.
He makes some very good points. To me, though, "Shine on" is a high water mark of the Floyd oeuvre whereas "Wish You Were Here" is merely a great song. I agree that the rest of the album is somewhat underwhelming. But "Shine on", wow! I find it interesting that Kent considers the concepts and lyrics to be the "deep side" of Pink Floyd as if the music doesn't have depth. Many music critics, including Robert Christgau, seem more interested in the words than the music, which I suppose makes sense in market terms as they are writing for mostly a musically illiterate readership. Christgau tends to be indifferent to the type of music that highly skilled musicians tend to like. That said, the lyrics and concepts are a very important part of the full Floyd experience.
Well spoken
Its stoners music, travelling music that takes you to another planet. It makes you feel stoned without smoking weed! Thats what floyds music is!
@joannebaker7875 yeah! and rap music is for gang bangers, country music is for hillbillies, classical music is for stuck up pompous people.
Pink Floyd is NOT a drug orientated band...
Maybe... MAYBE when Syd was in charge.
MAYBE.
@@thisisnotachannel I never said they were! The band! Wake up!
Not sure why he doesn't get the why now in 74 sing about Syd. It was obvious to me that they finally make it big internationally and maybe it didn't quite feel right without Syd or maybe it did because of him and his creativity. Anyway, they probably felt it was time to pay homage to that "ghost" from their past they had to leave behind, but now probably understand Syd better for it. Plus, Syd provided a lot of material for Roger to work with, hence The Wall.
He asks one of the dumbest questions I’ve ever heard: “Why write about Syd seven years later?” Roger Waters needed those years to (a) learn to be a good songwriter, and (b) come to terms with his own feelings about the loss of Syd as a best friend & musical colleague. “Wish You Were Here,” considering it was the follow up to Dark Side, is one of the best examples of Pink Floyd’s catalog. This guy can throw all the stones he wants, but history speaks for itself: Pink Floyd are to the 70’s what The Beatles are to the 60’s… perhaps even more so than Zeppelin. Sadly they found it impossible to work together, but their legacy is untarnished.
Way more so in my opinion than zeppelin. Floyd was the 70s to an extent
Thanks for this fascinating upload with an NME writer I always enjoyed reading. I have a correction to make. At 10.34 you state PF played "Shine On You Crazy Diamond" for the first time when Nick Kent saw them play 14 Nov 1974. PF opened their DSOTM UK tour with two nights at Usher Hall, Edinburgh on 04 & 05 Nov 1974. They opened with three new songs before playing DSOTM in it's entirety, then encored with "Echoes". The first song played was Shine On - I was there 05 Nov - £4.00 ticket for Front Central Stall directly behind their massive sound & visual desk. So Shine On was first played in UK in Edinburgh. Cheers!
Thanks for the correction!!
Thank you Nick Kent. Your insights are as keen as they ever were.
Hey Nick, 250 million sales can't be wrong.
Dave Gilmour agreed with Nick Kent
The one thought I had about the 'shine on' aspect was that, to be fair, the 'shine on' and concern about carrying Syd happened BEFORE they saw him. So prior to that both Gilmour and Waters had worked with him. As Nick admits, Peter Green came back. That other guy he mentioned came back. So why COULDN"T Syd have come back? The story from one of the floyds was that Syd at some point said "when should I put the guitar on". What if they had handed him a guitar and a mic? In any case, if Peter Green could come back after threatening to kill his accountant, why couldn't Syd come back after jumping up and down brushing his teeth. NONE of these guys are token examples of healthy mentality, how many rockers are straight up off their rockers.
So I don't think that verse is quite as barbaric as the story he sets up. But when you are just riffing in a conversation, not everything will be gospel.
I honestly feel that this song was incredibly hurtful and exploitive and who knows, maybe ironically Kent's own article about Syd made them realize how much attention they could garner by using him, after the fact, in this way - as a myth rather than just a person. The song should have been "We're sorry, we are just pricks", IMHO
Post Syd Mega-Star Floyd seemed to have a weird tinge of despair, like they were living out a Faustian bargain. Dave seems nice if genuinely overwhelmed, like a child of a single parent taking on too much responsibility, or perhaps someone stuck in a toxic relationship.
I.e. Kent seems right on the money re Waters.
Floyd, the pop psych music fan's favourite canvas....
So them play in 19 69.down.the imp in Nelson lancs car Rd. They had. Fireworks.on the. Sage. Flaching literally all over the place. Great stuff 👍🇬🇧🙏
Everyone is prone to criticism. You either take it in good sport and think what it really means and if it has any effect on your way to be or in your work or you just cry like a little b**ch. Another awesome inteview. Thanks for posting.
Cheers!
I might be wrong, but this reminds me of Henry Padovani talking about The Police, somehow... How they agreed to dye their hair so they could be blonde, all three of them, things like that. Kinda "who cares" shit, you know?
Great interview.Kent hits the nails on the head right throughout the interview. The autumn/winter reflection of what the Waters lyrics leave you feeling like was great,along with the whole take on the division of creative input by Gilmour & Wright and how without their contributions the Pink Floyd that conquered the music world would have been a collection of forgettable Waters solo albums (much like his albums after Floyd) was another bullseye,although there are still glimpses on The Wall.
This is an old interview but the recent twittering from Polly Samson about the character of Waters was clearly known by Kent all those years ago as he became the dictator and ultimate destroyer of the Pink Floyd of Atom Heart Mother/Meddle/Dark Side & Wish You Were Here with his self pitying "I lost my dad in the war" inner torment and his,quite often,weird political stances which, these days, amount to supporting the new Hitler,Putin, in his invasion of Ukraine.
Hey Atheist get back to me in 12 months your " new Hitler" comment. so dumb. West good ,Putin bad ? Thats what you've been told eh?
@@eilidh771 Polly Samson's always a Roger Waters Hater!
You would not understand, this is not how I am. I have become Comfortably Numb.
great interview- i would like to know, if the summer the piper came out was a good summer for Nick and the summers after that perhaps wherent?
Those that can, produce timeless albums; those who can't, produce baseless music journalism.
Well said. Pretentious dude, eh.
Apparently both Rick Wright and Nick Mason felt that Kent's gig review had some good points and it forced them to rethink some stuff. So by that measure it was not baseless, even if you don't agree with it. And honestly the old trope about 'how many albums have you done" aimed at reviewers is meaningless. it's not even an argument.
Thank you 🙏
@@astrogarage Fair enough on your first point, albeit I think you may have missed the tongue in cheek nature of my comment. On your second, I'd contend that the massive success of DSOM is rather at odds with his subjective opinions on their work, though of course their may be some who rely upon the likes of Kent to be guided or to validate their musical tastes.
@@rorymcknight6071 Tongue in cheek is kinda hard to detect sometimes, particularly as some comments on here are making the same point entirely seriously. I think Kent makes some interesting points about post Syd Floyd that are kind of objective - he's not really shitting on it so much. I mean, it doesn't really matter what any critic thinks of DSOM, does it? :)
👍
..."over-long and unimpressive"... Nick Kent made a perfect description of himself😂
"I was ahead of my time". 🤣
KKKK
This stuff is great
Nick Kent.the man who dismissed Queen as the "fag end of glam rock",and their debut album as a "bucket of urine".Also said that Television and Richard Verlaine would be the "biggest thing ever". Not great on predictions Nick,eh?
um, I think you mean Tom Verlaine. or maybe Richard Hell. or maybe Richard Lloyd.
Robert Christgau's review history is always good for a laugh too. Presumably some people take professional critics seriously, but it's very hard to see why.
Television were a fantastic band, as was Queen. And based on their first album, few people at the time would have predicted the future commercial and artistic success of Queen.
Totally right about Queen. Dreadful band with a guitar tone of a wasp in a jar. Television were 100 times better so he was right about them too.
Mr. Kent is 100% correct in his assertion that Dave, Rick, and Nick were absolutely NEEDED to make The Pink Floyd what they were... that's why "A Momentary Lapse of Reason", and especially "The Division Bell" both sound more like Pink Floyd records than anything Roger has ever done solo.
Roger's writing WAS important.
Dave, Rick, and Nick's contributions were of EQUAL importance. Without combining those two aspects, The Pink Floyd would never have been able to continue after Syd.
It's as simple as that.
Both albums you mentioned are poor offering to the PF name. AMLOR used numerous songwriters and TDB lyrics were mainly written by Gilmours wife Polly. Waters was more than a lyricist, he was the driving force, brains, composer behind the Floyd sound. Amused to death is as closer to classic Floyd more so than the albums you mentioned.
@@samuelalexander558 You really only mentioned the lyrics, though. So your bias is showing. I'm a fan of Waters too... a big fan. Yet my point stands... they all (especially "The Endless River") still sound more like PF than Amused to Death, Radio K.A.O.S, Pros and Cons, and even Roger's new one "Is this the Life We Really Want?" could ever dream of sounding. He tried really hard with "ATD"... but without his former bands sonic grace, he simply couldn't recreate The Floyd. No matter how many different musicians/song rearrangements he tried... Not even Clapton could get him there.
I do agree however, that when held in contrast to their previous work, "MLOR", "DB", and even "The Endless River" are sub-par Pink Floyd albums.
MLOR isn't even really a PF album, when we get right down to it.
@@thisisnotachannelYes Floyds music is sublime, thoughtful and captivating but so are the lyrics from Waters and I'm not diminishing that Waters contributed a lot to the music as well. TDB lyrics in my opinion are a consistent dig at Waters by Polly, she writes with such bitterness. Strangely I think AMLOR sounds more like Floyd than TDB but it's all about opinions.
This guy uses so many words to say absolutely nothing. its impressive. bet he writes articles about the greatness of his own farts nowadays. sheesh.
so true!
For me, Park misses a key effect of the angry gloom of much Roger Waters stuff. You need the negative tensions building up with "we don't need no education" for example, to get the feeling of release and liberation in Dave Gilmour's bluesy solos without lyrics. So much more effective after getting through the relentless Orwellian stuff.
This is what we used to call intellectuals, today it's the kind that doesn't exist...
who gives a tinkers damn wether or not you like their songs? and id say they did just fine after roger left thank you very much
Absolutely so. Roger sure made a fine fist of it after he assumed control of the band ... the wonderful socialist that he is
Syd , spring reverbs, not syd, no spring reverbs
The Floyd had a bad gig. Nick Kent wrote a bad article about it. So, we'll call it a draw, shall we ?
It was long ago and nobody died because of that. Nevermind.
Not everything he says is wrong, by the way. What I find surprising, though, is that a professional rock critic doesn't get why the group he has written so-so, overlong, articles has been successful. No matter what his personal opinions on the music and/or the group are.
NOBODY 'gets' why the Floyd were successful. If they did, it would have been repeated a thousand times. As he said why YOU like the Floyd is going to be different than why I do. Dark Side is quite literally the ONLY album to remain so high on the album charts for so long. I dont' even like it that much, but nobody can actually explain 'why'. Its good music but there is shitloads of good music out there.
@@mikearchibald744😅
He looks like Andy Serkis
Well. for what its worth, i am in total agreement with NIck. I am a huge Barrett fan, huge. The post Barrett PF doesnt interest me one bit and i honestly dont see the appeal, like Nick its a total mystery to me how they became so popular. In the Rick Wright interview he says Roger basically writes about school, th earmy, and madness, none of which are particularly uplifting so HE agrees to a certain extent with what NIck is saying here about RW and his miserable music. As for Mr. Kent i find his insights always spot on AND he has the humility and self awareness to look back at the review and say he went too far. And he seems to be the only person like me who HATES fucking Bohemian Rhapsody with a passion.
If you don't see any post Barrett Floyd as great music then your musical taste is shit
@@charlesclark2963 He didn't say it wasn't great, he said he doesn't like it. I like some of it, dislike others. But I found this guy interesting, its nice to have somebody outside floyd talking about them critically, and not just fan worshipping.
His insights are accurate, he DOESN"T say its not great music, only that its not uplifting. I'm not sure why music all has to be uplifting. I like the Strawbs even more than FLoyd, but tons of their stuff isn't uplifting.
I remember the article well, when it was reprinted in Guitar Player magazine in the early 90s. The article really gave you insight into who this guy really was but dwelled on his bad side and drug abuse , maybe rightfully so. Kent asked was Barrett's decline due to Mental illness or being a drug casualty?? No one will ever know.....
Faking not understanding, or just being in denial, of the success of Pink Floyd and why Syd disappeared is obviously Kent's problem. Somewhere in a parallel universe retrospective stuff here.
Easy to see why this opinionated load of waffle never made the final cut. Trying to understand the metaphysical and not liking it stuff.
Of course all of this was never going to make the final cut. Kent is just being left to ramble for the best part of an hour.. He's obviously not in denial of Floyd's success or the reason for Syd's 'disappearance' and is quite measured about what he wrote back in 1974. And he's even handed when it comes to analysing Floyd's appeal. Talking of Final Cuts, it's a shame that Waters made his. That's some opinionated waffle right there.
A nice corrective comment. Thank you.
@@astrogarage Yes as I say it is easy to see why most of it never got included. A preference for Pink Floyd without Syd isn't compulsory either and here a cathartic Kent is ironically going through his own primal scream type therapy to exercise his own post Syd's Pink Floyd hangups. A screwed up critic who can't handle that the Floyd did more than ok without their mentor Syd. Personally I'm glad I appreciate most Floyd 1965 - 1983 and the sentiment behind the WYWH album is sincere and acknowledges the debt to their former bandmate Syd. However, Syd was restless and innovative wanting to try different musical directions. As soon as something he did got popular he was moving on from it. To the point he eventually stopped doing music all together. A bit of a prankster who liked to keep his audience guessing. Unreliable in career terms. A genius yes but also a maverick. One who decided it was no longer fun and not for him and dropped out. You can speculate on his mental state forever but sadly with Syd it is what it is. Supernova then burn out.
@@200405InVision Thanks for the response - I think comparing this interview to primal scream therapy is a bit much, but certainly Kent is reviewing his opinion somewhat and I think he can definitely 'handle' Floyd's post Barrett success. He's pretty objective about that while obviously personally not liking it that much. Obviously people do speculate on Syd's mental state and I think that's understandable. You can't really ignore it, unfortunately. Something changed for him - his unreliabilty seems tied in with that rather than being a bit of a prankster or a restless musical innovator etc...
@@astrogarage ironic isn't it that Kent makes out Waters is unoriginal and channeling Lennon & Ono with primal scream therapy techniques in his art? Cathartic stuff all round here. Kent included. He obviously has a problem with Waters.
It's the music...Pink Floyd produced very interesting music. It rarely was the lyrics honestly.
Christ.
Disagree