"What Will You Sing Me?" (continued yet again) - Wondering About Future Stages, Beginning Of Casino Show Photos, & Wanting The Wonderful And Amazing To Be Seen By All
What better way to start off than with the sweetest face of all?
Irresistible smiles right after an enthusiastic Lukey.
Alan walks on the moon.
Alan admires a giant disco ball, which led to a funny story about children and appropriate names for body parts..."What are we supposed to call the balls now?".
Not a closeup, but too glorious to have to wait to see; from the early part of Charlie Horse.
Well, so much for getting right back to finish up the preceding entry. I had every intention of doing so, but last night was full of distractions, not the least of which was looking out the window of Leo's and watching three homes burn down while eating supper. Decidedly unsettling. Then we wandered over to O'Reilly's to see how Fergus O'Byrne is coming along with his turn at being a solo act at O'Reilly's Pub. Much better news to be found on that front. Fergus is doing very well on his own, leaps and bounds beyond where he was this past spring in his first performances after Dermot's passing. Fergus is now putting on a show that insists on being taken seriously, quite the impressive insistence in a pub that often caters to tourists' perceptions and misperceptions, an altogether admirable attempt.
And Fergus sang a song last night that I think should be done by Great Big Sea - not being the biggest trad fan, it's not often that I react that way to any traditional tune - because it's a perfect combination of the sensual and the sentimental, kind of like Yarmouth Town grown up and served minus the cheery cheese: Jolly Jack Tar. I've poked around a bit today and found numerous versions of the lyrics, but it's still Fergus's version - with the tender emphasis (underlaid by a throbbing bodhran accompaniment) on how Jack persuaded his Lovely Nancy all through the night until the break of day - that's the most compelling. Sensual and sentimental would be an excellent approach for Great Big Sea to take, and this song would sound great with Alan and Sean trading off on verses.
Thinking about Alan singing the song Fergus was singing led to wondering what it was like for Fergus decades ago, back when he was on stage with his Ryan's Fancy bandmates, and wondering if he had ever thought back then about the day coming when he would be performing upon a solo stage. That thought led, perhaps inevitably, to wondering where Alan will find himself several decades from now...what songs on what stages in front of which audiences? How bright the lights and how many pairs of hands clapping? Will he be getting all these things he wants and needs to be happy? Will he still have friends by his side to share it all with, or will he be facing into the spotlight on his own, as Fergus now finds himself doing at O'Reilly's.
Lots of distractions, so much so that I'm still thinking about what - and how much - I want to write about in regard to the upcoming GBS CD. I think I'll keep right on thinking a bit more and let this be about the Vancouver casino shows for now. One more "To be continued" can't do any harm.
*****************************************************************************************************************************
Photos from the first part of the show at the Red Robinson Theatre, Coquitlam (Vancouver area), up through Charlie Horse.
There are times, such as during this well-pounded intro to When I'm Up, when Alan looks as if he is playing guitar with his entire body, including his hair. Really gorgeous lights here, which I am intentionally noting because I am going to point out the other side of that coin at the end of this entry.
When I'm Up again, and this time he is singing the song with both of his hands almost as much as with his voice. 
These from Lukey, starting off with Bob playing his accordion part.
Muray does the Lukey "Maximum Bass On All Frequencies" as Alan gets ready to shout out to Sean for some bodhran action next.
Looking up into the crowd (this venue had stadium-style seating) as they respond to his call to sing along.
Post-Lukey charm and delight, and a discussion about how the set list would take a dive from here on out.
This might not have been among their best-ever, most-asskickingest shows, but it was a show that featured a completely endearing, absolutely beautiful, Walk On The Moon.
Not at all a good photo, but it does show Bob playing the low whistle instead of the fiddle on the song.
As I said before, absolutely beautiful.
I had a lot of trouble with Sean pictures at this show, a combination of how bouncy the floor was (we were standing on the temp flooring that goes over the orchestra pit) on his fast tunes (Paddy, Rover, Mari Mac) and the idiot on my left who kept slamming into me (sometimes because she was being slammed into by the even-bigger idiot on her left) whenever I lowered my self-protective left elbow and turned away from her a bit. This picture was taken right before the worst of the frenzy broke out - there's an elbow in my back as I take the shot but so far the floor is still relatively stable - as Sean is introducing Paddy Murphy.
,
Sometimes a picture is not at all what you thought it was going to be. Alan does not usually make this spinning move at this point during Paddy Murphy, and it surprised the heck out of me when he did it this time. But I was not so surprised that I did not notice the glorious view that was occurring while he was making the move, and I was quite pleased that the camera shutter chose that very moment to click. Every now and then, shutter lag is a genuine delight.
Bouzouki moments during Paddy. 
A series of shots of Alan's between-song commentary before he goes into When I Am King, pictures taken, despite the low light, for the sole and sufficient reason that he looks gorgeous.
When I Am King, and more gorgeous Alan.
Mic stand issues, but he looks great so no reason to jettison the photo just because my location sucked.
Alan admires the giant disco ball (truly a prodigious disco ball - my bad for not getting a photo of either big ball in these casinos...pleading distraction, once again). This led to several disco-inspired music moments (see the prior entry for some video bits) and a tale told by Alan of a young lass who was trying hard to recall the proper names for no-longer-unmentionable body parts.
Ending with this one in proper sequence, with Alan striking the eye-catching pose during Charlie Horse.
Next time around, the photos start with Penelope - which was a pure and utter joy - and I think whatever it is I decide to go on about the new CD too. Right now, I'm thinking what would do great at clearing my mind and clarifying my thoughts is a late supper of moose burgers. After I wrap up with the last bit, that is.
****************************************************************************************************************************
One thought that occurred to me during the Police show at the ACC was that even though I was a very long way away from the stage (straight back, near the rear of the first off-the-floor section), there was never a moment during the show when I could not see the performers because of either a deficit or an overbundance of stage lights. That realisation led inexorably to thoughts of these two GBS casino shows, to thoughts of a pile of other recent GBS shows too.
This is a good enough place to deal with this now because it puts the bitching all the way down here at the end, thereby lessening the incurred wrath. Or so I hope, but then I always hope, even when that hope is demonstrably foolish. The first picture is how it really looked - from stage edge - as Alan played his "galloping guitar" part during Charlie Horse. And how it really looked is a mistake in stage lighting, one that occurred repeatedly during this show, as it has also occurred repeatedly in past shows.
How it looked:
Best I can do with the editing program:
In a move that would surely appeal to Goldilocks even if to nobody else, the show the next night - which took place in a venue virtually identical to this one - was blindingly bright, painfully overexposed not only to the camera but also to the retinas on multiple occasions. Lots of people were commenting about problematic lighting in both shows, and in true Faithful Fan fashion. some were making excuses along the lines of "They had to travel light for just two shows so they weren't using their own lighting equipment." No matter that this doesn't really explain bad lighting on opposite ends of the spectrum in two identical venues, and no matter that it also ignores some pretty darn familiar-looking lighting equipment that could be seen on both stages, if one actually looked for it. Then there's the matter of the same spectrum-spanning lighting issues taking place at so many other shows, especially over the past year or so.
Whatever the cause or causes (and perhaps this is unfair, but my first assumption is always that they are too tight-fisted to have the proper equipment where they need it to be), the end result is that at this first casino show there were performance moments the audience could not see because the players were hidden in obscuring darkness and at the second casino show there were performance moments the audience could not see because the players were impossible to look at directly in the glaring backlight.
There are moments when GBS's lights are truly spectacular: some of the colour blendings, especially the pinks and lavenders and blues, are gorgeous and add tremendously to the songs/performances they highlight; there are performance moments that are genuinely about the music more than the personalities, such as the instrumental swell near the end of John Barbour and the whistle/bass fiddle intro they did to start last tour's Hard & Easy shows, moments during which a darker stage does encourage that shift in focus; and I can agree with what they try to do it the attempt to create a mood with the backlighting on songs such as Turn, even if the unfortunate height of the lights they are using invariably tends to result in utterly blinding those unfortunately situated in the glare trajectory. But despite the successes and even the well-intentioned misfires, there continue to be times when the lights are an impediment to their performance, times when the lights hinder instead of enhance. There's just no reason for a dark stage during any Charlie Horse performance monent, and even the most artistically motivated bit of multicoloured backlighting is all for naught when your audience is covering their eyes to block out the glare.
The people who wind up losing the most from this aren't folks such as myself who see umpteen GBS shows, because we will be able to see whatever moment it was we missed this time around at the next show when the lights get done right. The folks who are seeing their first GBS show or the only GBS show they're going to be able to make it to this tour or this year lose more in missing out on their only chances to see such moments. But it's the performers who work so hard to create those moments who lose the most of all. I really don't give a shit about the umpteen show-goers, myself included; I see a treasure trove of the Wonderful and the Amazing and count myself fortunate regardless of any stray moments missed along the way, and the others must be getting whatever-the-hell it is they want from the shows since they keep on coming. I don't even care all that much anymore about the one-off folks since they're still seeing a better show than they'd get most anywhere else, peering eyestrain or scorched retinas notwithstanding.
Anyway, chances are most of the first-timers and the repeat offenders alike are just going to think It Was All Great no matter what took place during any given show; the only argument I can offer up for doing more than is expected of you by others is the argument of rising to your own standards - allowing your grasp to equal your reach - and I can see how that argument could get pretty damn stale over the course of 15 or so years of less-than-challenging expectations. Which would all by itself suffice to explain why it is I am so impressed by how Alan performs, even if all the other reasons for feeling that way weren't even being taken into account.
What this particular matter comes down to for me is an objection to excellence, even unexpected and unlooked-for excellence, going unnoted and unappreciated. It's bad enough to contend with the tangled dilemma of those who routinely expect you to be less than you are as an artist, but for a great performer to work hard at creating that Wonderful and Amazing performance moment only to have his efforts go unseen because of something as easily correctable as inadequate lighting...that does bother me a great deal, enough so to make me willing to stray from the PositiveSpeak GBS Party (Band) Line and say that it's high time for the lights to live up to that performance.
In the back-assward World Of GBS, I know that all I'm supposed to care about is what I get to see, not what anyone else gets to see, and least of all what anyone on stage might want seen. I've been told in no uncertain terms that it is a bad thing - bad because it might increase the "competition" for access and attention - to want as many people as possible to see what a wonderful performer Alan Doyle is, as well as what a grand show GBS is capable of puttimg on. If that's how things really are, then I'm guilty as charged and totally unrepentant,
Might as well just send me Straight To Hell. With a smile across my face.
Heh, Alan looks good when he spins around unexpectedly. That's a cool shirt but WTF does it say on the front?
Are you totally off posting comments again? Did I piss you off about the Grey Cup show?
L.
Posted by: Laura | 15 November 2007 at 01:12 PM
Hey, Laura. Alan was looking very good to me from every angle at these shows, though I'll agree his sudden-spin angle is very lovely too, even if I am still most partial of all to the no-guitar, a cappella AlanView. The shirt he's wearing is a Rivaldi design, with the logo "The first, the last, the everything" emblazoned across his chest. Fitting. I'm guessing someone who knows him well saw that shirt somewhere and knew immediately that it would make a perfect gift for Alan Doyle.
No, you didn't piss me off with what you said about the Grey Cup show. You worry too much about that - it really does take a lot to piss me off, way more than just opinions. You made a perfectly good point about the upcoming Grey Cup show; I just wasn't ready to answer your perfectly good point yet, though I'm getting close to it. When I do, I think I'll just put your comment in the body of the entry, if that's OK with you. I should have mentioned that plan sooner, though, and not left you wondering. I'm really sorry about that.
No, I haven't stopped putting up comments altogether, but lately it's been a combination of some folks not taking me seriously when I say I'm done with the conversation here being centered on GBS fans so they send the kind of snarky personal comments that I'm not putting up here anymore, and then there are others who really don't want what they say put up at all and who'd rather communicate privately. No way I'm putting something up here if a person asks me not to - even if their real reason for asking is they don't want to be "caught" communicating with the likes of me - so I let those comments be. I try to keep up with the ones who want an answer but sometimes I don't do so great at that either. Apologies again.
Actually, it seems to me as if more and more people in the "GBS world" are growing increasingly wary of saying much at all publicly, and not just here. Some of the same people who don't seem to be making comments on the GBS sites anymore are also the ones who comment here but ask me to keep the conversation between me and them. I checked the GBS site the other day, and while it looks pretty dead on their board, I wonder if that quietness might be somewhat deceiving. I know my blog traffic is way up, even while people prefer to keep flying below the radar in terms of making public comments, and it seems likely the same could be true for the GBS message boards too.
It's an interesting time in GBSLand. Perhaps I should follow the cautious lead of so many others and shut my mouth publicly too. But that might be a bit like shutting the barn door after the horse has gotten out. I do feel the same pressure, though, more for me from not wanting to cause more trouble for anyone I care about rather than being afraid of getting myself into trouble...that latter horse ran out of the barn ages ago.
On the one hand, it's kind of a shitty environment within which to write (a troubling thought, given that the men at the centre of this "speak no evil" world are themselves writers). On the other hand, it does create an incentive to find different ways - potentially even better ways - to express things. Lately, what I've been working on - and maybe this same approach would work for some others who feel a bit constrained about saying things publicly, as well as those who are saying things in ways that make it difficult to keep a public conversation on the go - is trying to find the least negative way to say something without diminishing (what I believe to be) the truth of that thing.
Example: The other day, what I was thinking was "The best thing for GBS would be if they could get rid of all these people who feel so frigging miserable about their own lives." That's the thought in its most negative form, so negative that it's both unfair and unpragmatic. The most miserable person with the most ingrained expectations of being given an escape from that misery is still a paying customer. You don't do business - at least not smart business - by getting rid of paying customers. And it's not at all a bad thing when someone who felt miserable gets a bit of happiness from a song.
So the next thought is "Things would be better for them if they didn't attract so many people who feel miserable about their own lives." Better, and closer to what I personally believe is true, since I see it as more a matter of how a preponderance of one type of person winds up creating an atmosphere that discourages a different kind of person from sticking around. Because of those who insist on everything GBS being Happy! Happy! Happy! 24/7, the other folks who might prefer a bit more balance in both the discourse and the music - the ones who don't need for GBSLand to be The Happiest Place On Earth because they aren't coming there to escape from some really shitty place elsewhere - sometimes wind up going some place else where things are more real, because "real" is alright with them. even preferable to them. And when they leave, that skews the GBSLand balance even more toward Sunshineland
But it's not still phrasing the thought in the least-negative way. I kept thinking that there has to be some way to say the same thing without it being a dismissal or rejection of anyone else - some way to tell the truth (what I at least believe to be the truth) within the strictures of PositiveSpeak.
What I finally worked toward in this instance was this: "It would be good for GBS to attract people who are reasonably happy and content with all the realities, the good and the bad, of their own lives." If you had a choice of going to the party where the people there were ready and willing to share celebrating all the good things each of them had going on in their lives, or going to the party where the people there were desperately looking for the few hours of fun they needed to keep them able to deal with all the bad shit going on the rest of the time...which party would you choose? If you were a band, which party would you rather play? And if you were trying to write about that difference without pissing people off or getting anyone in hot water, what would be the best way to go about saying it?
At the end of the day, the idea is that the truth can be told in a way that is positive and maybe even constructive. It's for sure more work to do it that way - it is always so much easier to simply say flatly "Such-and-such sucks" than it is to say "Such-and-such could be really good if ____" - but the end result of that work could be better ideas expressed more effectively and persuasively. And it makes way more sense on a pragmatic level to think in terms of how to attract more positive people than to simply bitch about the negative ones. I just don't believe public silence is the only possible answer, not any more than I believe wallowing in "This sucks" is the only possible answer either.
It's funny how the notion of Middle Ground has come to play such a dominant role in how I think these days, but it really does apply here too. Truth - call it opinion, if you prefer - can walk on that same ground too, and so can good writing. It's hard to do well, but when it is done well, it can be something very special. It's a great deal of what drew me to Alan's songwriting in the first place.
All of which is a long, wordy way of saying I think it would be a good thing if people found a bit less harsh, perhaps more constructive, way to talk publicly about GBS - somewhere, anywhere, though I agree it's not wanted at all on their official site - about some of the kinds of things that have wound up being said privately for various reasons. It really does seem a shame that there is so iittle intelligent public conversation in regard to GBS; all that absence accomplishes is the perpetuation of a lot of unfortunate stereotypes about what kind of people have any interest in GBS or Newfoundland, and that does even more of a disservice to them than it does to quite a few others.
I am thoroughly sick and tired of the "You like GBS? I thought you were smart" response - though nowhere nearly as sick as I am of the assumptions of idiocy routinely attributed to them - but it's dishonest to blame all of those stupid responses solely on bigotry. Those responses do get some encouragement from within the so-called World Of GBS, and chief among those encouragements is this feeling of intelligent discussion and thoughtful opinion not being at all wanted within that world.
This also sends the "Your Type Isn't Wanted Here" message to those whose interests and inclinations might tend toward such conversations and opinions. Again, discouraging any group of paying customers isn't exactly the most effective way to be doing business. I know I tend at times toward stubborn and sometimes foolish hope, but I just can't believe that an Intelligent Peace that leaves room for each person who wants to be at the table - or the party - is totally impossible to achieve.
Posted by: Lynda | 16 November 2007 at 12:13 AM