Otis Redding
This article originally appeared in Issue 12/13 of Crawdaddy in November, 1967
It is over a year now that I’ve been writing about rock ‘n’ roll, and certain things about my own attitudes are beginning to crystallize. In my writing thus far I have talked about the blues, English rock, and Motown: three distinct aspects of what’s happening in pop music at the moment. The reason that I’ve written about these things and not others is that this is what I dig, what moves me. In the course of my articles l have tried to show what characteristics of a piece account for my digging it, or what failing on the part of the musicians accounts for my not digging it. I haven’t spent a lot of time talking about West Coast rock, because I don’t dig the idiom as a whole. I don’t believe the Doors or the Airplane make good rock, or, for that matter, even good music.
It is not an accident that a person likes one type of music and not another. I think there are certain characteristics common to all the types of music I like that are lacking in music I don’t like. For example, I like formal music, structured music if you will. Perhaps that’s the reason that one of the West Coast groups I really dig is the Byrds. I also like music which is unpretentious. I would rather hear someone do something simple perfectly than hear someone do something extremely complex terribly. For example, I would rather hear B. B. King sing “Sweet Sixteen” than listen to the Doors do “The End.” This doesn’t mean that I believe art can only advance by stages. Nobody is going to go out tomorrow and start a whole new music devoid of the characteristics of all older forms of music. Whatever comes tomorrow will necessarily be a dialectical outgrowth of contradictions that exist within the art of today.
What I dig is people capturing totally what happened yesterday, and then going on to explode the past. In other words, I would probably like the Doors better if they had learned how to play hard rock or the blues before trying to do what they’re doing now. They didn’t, and as a result their music sounds to me like it exists in a void—fundamentally unrelated to the exciting musical developments going on everywhere. And maybe this accounts for why I enjoy the Stones, the Beatles, and the Who so much. It is obvious that these groups mastered some of the older styles before moving on. The fact that they learned straight rock and r&b first gives their music a certain perspective, a certain relatedness, a certain wholeness, which I find lacking in groups that never served such musical apprenticeships. I love the Who’s “l Can See for Miles” because it is rock ‘n’ roll, catches the spirit of rock ‘n’ roll, has the perspective of rock ‘n’ roll, and therefore can become more than rock ‘n’ roll: it has the potentiality to transcend rock ‘n’ roll. And the same is true of the Beatles, who began at the beginning, the very beginning, and worked themselves one record at a time to where they are now. Anyone who thinks that he can start at the Sgt. Pepper level is out of his head. The Beatles couldn’t be doing what they are doing now without having lived with the experience of what they did before.
This doesn’t mean that everyone should start out in a hard rock or blues band and then work his way into the current scene. It does mean that every artist must confront the experience of the past in whatever way he chooses or finds most efficient, in order to advance beyond the contradictions of the past.
All of which brings me to Otis Redding. Otis Redding is past, present, and future, which makes him an extraordinary artist. His music contains both the contradictions of the older musical forms of which his style is an outgrowth, and the resolution, or potential for resolution, that these contradictions cry out for. His music is at the same time innovation, tradition, and immediacy, which gives it an overall sense of completeness and unity not often encountered in pop music—or anywhere else, for that matter. In terms of rock ‘n’ roll, his music is timeless in the way that Chuck Berry has proven to be timeless, the way the Stones are timeless, the way that James Brown is timeless. All of these people’s music expresses microcosmically the entire continuum of rock ‘n’ roll’s development. What that continuum is can only be felt subjectively, but it is, nonetheless, reality. It is the ethos of rock ‘n’ roll that ties together all that is rock and separates it from music that is not rock. I can only define the ethos in terms of the specific, such as the guitar introduction to “Johnny B. Goode,” or Bob Dylan’s “aah” before the fourth verse of “Like a Rolling Stone,” or the Beatles screaming “Help!” or the Four Tops saying “Just look over your shoulder” or Steve Cropper playing his solo on Booker T.’s “Groovin’“ or Otis Redding ordering us to “Shake.” These instances and a thousand others are noteworthy for the fact that they are so much more than mere fragments of excellent recordings. They are united by a quality of transcendence that takes one beyond the immediate listening experience. They are expressions of the totality of rock ‘n’ roll, not just that which their authors intended them to be, or the casual listener may take them to be.
I don’t consider all this to be very mystical, either. I’m talking totally about a reality situation, a nonmystical reality, and I am simply saying that particular works of art go far beyond others in their capacity to express the unity of all art of a certain type. In fact, ultimately it is just such works of art that define the idiom as a whole, because it is just such works that express and communicate most precisely and with the greatest clarity what that idiom is all about.
For the last six months I have been convinced that Otis Redding’s performances constitute, as a whole, the highest level of expression rock ‘n’ roll has yet attained, a level I think he shares with several other rock artists. In his own totally individual and distinctive way, he says it all. It took him a while to get there; some of his older records are a drag, but by the time you get down to the Dictionary of Soul there is absolutely no doubt about it.
Otis himself, of course, is part of a very specific development in contemporary music: the Stax-Volt scene. His sidemen are usually Booker T. and the MGs and the horns of the Mar-Keys, two fabulous Memphis groups. The man Otis works with most closely is his guitarist Steve Cropper, who has written some of Otis’s material, as well as writing such stuff as “Hold On, I’m Coming” and “Midnight Hour,” which he co-authored with W. Pickett. Cropper is a great rhythm guitarist and has an amazingly subtle chord style, as the aforementioned solo on Booker T’s “Groovin’” demonstrates. Like Otis, he prefers to keep it simple. No fuzz tones, no reverb, or, as Steve himself puts it, no gimmicks. Booker, the piano-organ man, obviously feels the same way about it. He is very influenced by country and western, Floyd Cramer type stuff, as his background doodling on the live version of “Fa-Fa-Fa-Fa-Fa” illustrates. But the main man that Otis relies on to give him the right sound is obviously drummer Al Jackson. The man is indisputably in charge of soul drumming. It is hard to pinpoint what makes his soul so distinctive; perhaps it’s the tom-tom-like sound he gets out of his snare by tuning the heads so loose, or maybe it’s the way they record him, or something like that. In any event, his drumming is kinetic. It makes you feel that more is going on than really is. lt’s understated: Jackson waits until you have taken all you can before he socks it to you. For example, on “Try a Little Tenderness,” notice that he waits until the absolute last moment before he actually plays a roll and moves into the Motown beat he uses to finish out the tune. Also, his bass drum work is amazing.
Ultimately it is Otis who runs his own show, is responsible for his own sessions, and deserves the credit. He has a highly developed state of consciousness of his own art. For example, in the September 18th issue of Soul magazine he is quoted in an interview:
Basically I like any music that remains simple, and I feel this is the formula that has made soul music successful. When any music form becomes cluttered and/or complicated you lose the average listener’s ear. There is nothing more beautiful than a simple blues tune. There is beauty in simplicity, whether you are talking about architecture, art or music.