The artist Paul Simon said was never “interesting” enough
The songwriters that Paul Simon looked up to didn’t always need to have the most complex chord changes of all time.
The singer-songwriter scene was always populated with bands that didn’t need to have 19 different strange chords popping throughout the mix, but as long as they had something to say, it was worth it to listen to one of their records. But when looking at his heroes, Simon could tell when artists started to take a severe dip in terms of artistic quality now and again.
Then again, Simon wasn’t looking to simply wag fingers whenever he was disappointed. Anyone’s heroes are bound to have a few clunkers in their catalogue, and even looking at the greatest songwriters of Simon’s generation, it’s not like all of them were looking to go down in history in the same way that Woody Guthrie wanted to when he was first strumming protest tunes.
For God’s sake, look at what Bob Dylan was doing at the turn of the century. Dylan easily could claim to be one of the most important artists of his generation and miles ahead of what Simon was doing in most regards, but looking at the kind of music that turned up on Self Portrait, most would have sworn it was made by someone who was a few notches below Simon, trying their best to create a coherent record.
Even if Simon does have a few records that don’t hit as well with the public, none of them are what I’d call bad by any means. They might not have been the kind of record he wanted or the kind of record that fans were expecting out of him, but one thing everyone could count on was the music being great when the needle came off the groove. But the songwriter did see some cracks in the foundation when looking at John Lennon.
Granted, Simon was bound to hold Lennon to a higher standard than most. He was in one of the greatest bands of all time and had written fantastic tunes that the world fully embraced, but critiquing Lennon’s more political tunes like ‘Power to the People’, Simon would have just as easily washed his hands of any of the former Beatles’ solo catalogue if he could.
Despite loving what he did with the group, Simon felt that Lennon was having trouble finding his footing back in the day, saying, “I am a potential audience for him, but I find that he seldom says anything that’s interesting or innovative to me, and yet, I listen, based on a long-standing respect. Based on his musicianship, based on the fact that he was involved in some great music over the years, and so I keep listening to stuff that’s no longer great.”
It’s not like Lennon has a spotless catalogue, either. Some Time in New York City was bound to be divisive from the minute it began, but even when he was going through the strange periods of his life, he always kept people engaged, whether that was because they couldn’t believe what they were listening to or they were shocked that he had made a pop masterpiece without his old mates.
Simon’s protests were legitimate concerns for any listener to have, but they also came from two different definitions of what “bad” music could be like. Lennon’s political tunes and avant-garde experiments may have been strange at times, but it’s always more interesting to have a record that’s bad in a dramatic way than something that’s merely boring to listen to.
