Some reasons to love Mitch Mitchell

I have been thinking about this, since yesterday's post. Invariably, he will be billed as 'Hendrix's drummer'. Many other articles that covered the story, speak about Mitch, as though he were only some kind of skilled side man. Although playing with Jimi Hendrix is an incredible accomplishment, I think it is only fair to consider Mitchell as a talent on his own terms.

Here are some reasons, to love John 'Mitch' Mitchell:

• His apparent ability to hit everything on his drum kit -- at once; whilst being soulful.
• He played Woodstock.
• His commitment to keeping Hendrix's legacy alive.
• The drum part on 'Manic Depression'.
• He played on each of Jimi's studio albums.
• For being considered as a potential member of The Who (before Moon).
• For never trying to exploit his resume.
• His drumming (in general)!
• For using my given name!

If you think of more, always comment!

Son of Dave: '03'. A review!

I just bought (from iTunes) the album 03 by Son of Dave. I'm listening to it right now, as I write this.

It's amazing -- this guy is one cool dude! As the video would suggest, he operates as a one-man band.

Although, in the coolest possible sense.

This is how it works:

• Amplified harmonica
• Rattle in the other hand
• Vocals, mixed with beat-boxing
• A machine, that can handle digital loops
  

He does it all, at once!

(I don't want to shortchange the guy, by adding the video to this post; I just wanted to show how good it really is.) His blog and MySpace are worth looking at, also.

The music on this album really has the spirit of the blues -- but with some noteworthy twists. I have never heard it done quite like this, before. There is a lot of wry humour in the lyrics and presentation, too. It won't be a kind of blues that you are used to hearing; but that's what makes it exciting. The shadow of the old blues tradition can be heard, but something truly original, too.

I suppose that's what makes an artist: to take one's influences, honour them, but take it somewhere else!

Give this album a go. There is real musicianship and originality, here. Besides, it's just so juicy!

Richard Wright: 1943 - 2008

What you read in this link, is one of the official articles about Rick's death. It's more than likely, that other Pink Floyd fans have already heard the news. However, I only found out today. Of course, it came as a shock; especially as I did not know that Rick had been suffering from a serious illness. This is very sad news for me; I have been following the band, since I was quite young.

For those who don't know, Richard was a gifted keyboardist and multi-instrumentalist -- and a founding member of the world-famous rock band, Pink Floyd. Much like many other people, I first came across the band, through the album Dark Side of the Moon. It was a part of my Dad's record collection. Little did I know that the LP would change my life.

With albums such as Dark Side of the Moon, I began to realise that music can be very deep. It did not necessarily need to be a passive experience -- something that was enjoyable, but ultimately inconsequential. This was not the case with Pink Floyd, however. Their music was always interesting, because it spoke to my mind, as well as my heart. It was a life-changing album for me.

The structure of the music, as well as the lyrics, was intellectually challenging. Rick 's musicianship and lyrical contributions were immensely important; but they were often forgotten by fans and journalists. Perhaps it's because he never sought the limelight much, I don't know. Anyhow, during his time with Pink Floyd, and when he was working on a solo career, the music was always great.

So many examples of Rick Wright's music are coming to mind. Obviously most people will think of Dark Side Of the Moon, when they hear Floyd; but there were so many other musical high points. This is taking a while to write, because I have so much I wanted to say. It may even be necessary to write another post!

From my perspective, I feel this loss deeply; even though we had never met. You will be missed, Richard.

Olympics in Beijing

I wish China, and her people, all the best of luck in the Olympic Games. While the excitement of the sports will remain the same, no matter where it is held, the location does seen to be bringing out very strong feelings with some people. In everything I read, there seems to be one controversy or another.

China seems to want to prove something to the rest of the world; and that is coming across in a rather pointed way. Everything needs to be strong, perfect, spotless and unblemished. I thought the Olympics was supposed to be about competition and acceptance, not intimidation and social unrest. Rather than saying what a good job China has done, people were talking about Tibet, Internet censorship, or the opening ceremony miming incident. It is unfortunate; because, even though I am a casual observer at best -- I find myself thinking about the political and social issues, as opposed to The Games. I cannot remember the actual Olympic Games being turned into a propaganda opportunity. I have only read about this kind of thing in history books. It's quite strange -- everywhere I turn, China wants to flex its proverbial muscle.

Aren't there sports in the picture, at some point? Sure, there are, if one wishes to focus on that, but they seemed to be running a poor second, to everything else that's going on. It's quite bizarre.

Even with everything else, I'm sure China will make a good job of this year's Olympic Games. Hopefully, everybody will remember that the sports and culture are the main reasons everybody travelled to Beijing.

What's going on with the Olympics?

 So, it seems that people are talking about the 2008 Olympics for all the wrong reasons.

It is definitely the most politicised Olympics, that I can remember.  When there is discussion about the Olympics, that is unrelated to the sports themselves; it's usually about some kind of drugs scandal, or which nations will be competing. In other words, it's pretty boring. 

 Usually, I find the games themselves boring, as well. Unless I want Australia to win really badly, of course!

But now that China is running the show this time around, it is from most politicised Olympic Games that I can remember. This seems to be a lot of talk about who is boycotting these games, and who isn't. It is possible that the lead-up to the games will be more interesting than the games, themselves.

I am thankful that these Olympic Games have brought the Chinese occupation of Tibet for a discussion, again. I would not have known about the situation in Tibet, at all; if not for the publicity surrounding the Olympic Games. It is a horrible business, I am glad that people are speaking out about it.

But it is a situation that has happened in history, on many previous occasions. Australia was thought to be unoccupied, when it was taken over by the British. Of course, it wasn't. Indigenous Australians had been occupying the land for hundreds of thousands of years. I can see some parallels.

Nobody can arbitrarily declare that they have the right to take over a particular piece of land. It happened with the pilgrims, who colonised America. It's a double standard, really. If that had not happened in Australia, I would not be here. Still, it's not right.

I don't believe it's right, or peaceful, to impose democracy on another country. I think that's what happened in the  recent conflict with Iraq. I don't know what the real reasons for the conflict in Iraq are.

I still fully support the job that the troops over there have been assigned to do. I am proud of the bravery of the armed forces.

That's all, for now.  (It took me ages to finish.)