In August of 2006, Uncut magazine counted down their take on ‘The 100 Greatest Debuts’ in rock. Perched atop their list was The Velvet Underground & Nico. The article claimed that “…its No 171 placing on the Billboard chart belied its subsequent influence” and went on to mention Brian Eno’s oft-cited quote that “Only five thousand people ever bought a Velvet Underground album, but every single one of them started a band.”
Today I wonder: were VU really as influential as Eno would have us believe? And if so, does this album’s subsequent influence make it any more enjoyable? As always, because I’m a tone-deaf imbecile, I’m hoping that you, the enlightened reader, will help me solve this puzzle with your insightful and humorous comments…
THUMBS UP: Velvet Underground is like foreign cinema – if you enjoy it, bonus, but its main purpose is to expand the scope of your experience. Indeed, much of VU’s music seems like it is intended NOT to be enjoyed, but to be passively observed, like art. Lou Reed was a brilliant noir songwriter, and his character sketches of transvestites, junkies, and losers are every bit as brilliant as the beat writings of the 50’s. ‘Heroin’ was a bold and alarming take on drug abuse, and the group makes every moment of the song’s 7-minute, 9-second running time count. ‘I’m Waiting For The Man’ sees Reed in Harlem chasing down drugs and fielding suspicious questions from the locals. VU’s 1967 debut shined a light on the down-and-out, and opened the field of rock music to more interesting topics than sun and surf and boys and girls.
THUMBS DOWN: Nico’s addition to the group was one of Andy Warhol’s conditions for managing them, and it’s easy to see why Lou Reed and John Cale were less than thrilled about the proposition. Her icy demeanor and Cale’s shredding viola are enough to drive an even-tempered person mad. Velvet Underground & Nico has some undeniable moments of brilliance, but much of it is unfit for regular listening. ‘Femme Fatale’ sounds vapid – as does everything else Nico croons on – and she ruins a perfectly great tune in ‘All Tomorrow’s Parties’. Meanwhile, ‘Black Angel’s Death Song’ pretty much sounds like the title – an alley full of feral cats is more tuneful than this. A lot of people mention VU&N as a great album, but I’m guessing that only a fraction of them regularly drop it on the turntable and suffer the consequences.
[What do you think? Is Velvet Underground & Nico the greatest debut album of all-time, or an artsy-fartsy mess that punishes the ears? As always, your opinion is kindly appreciated...]
Tags: Andy Warhol, debut album, John Cale, Lou Reed, Nico, Velvet Underground, Velvet Underground & Nico
20 August 2008 at 7:36 am |
I disagree – I think this gets the balance of sedate melodies and visceral noise nicely right. I love the laconic Sunday Morning as much as the feeling on the back of my neck when the glass smashes on ‘European Son’ and the guitar breaks loose of its moorings. It regularly gets played start to finish in my flat, which is not something I can say of the other Velvets albums or even ‘Transformer’ or ‘Berlin.’
Nico’s contributions are admittedly odd, but I think they have their own charm and there’s something about her other-worldy vocie that makes them more than just ‘vapid.’ She’s a casualty of that Factory scenester world and it’s emptiness, and i think you can hear that in her songs. Maybe I should separate circumstances and art more, but for me that makes them more poignant.
Can’t believe you’re even contending this one’s status as a stone-cold classic. White Light, White Heat on the other hand…
20 August 2008 at 7:38 am |
P.S. Name a better debut album cover…
20 August 2008 at 7:50 am |
Thanks for the excellent defense. I know there are many people who hold this album dear to their heart, so I had to think twice before putting this one on the fence. But it’s an album that baffles me, and I can honestly say that 50% of the time I’m ‘thumbs up’ and 50% of the time I’m ‘thumbs down’ on it.
When I posted the ‘20 Greatest Debut Albums’ the other day, not a single reader mentioned this in the comments as an oversight (yourself included). I thought that was both interesting and telling…
I really appreciate the thoughtful comment – it’s the kind of measured reasoning that I’ll take with me to the turntable the next time I put this one on.
20 August 2008 at 7:56 am |
I think the album should be saluted for the sheer accomplishment of creating a ’sound,’ which ain’t easy. Especially one that ends up influencing so many people, not necessarily just other musicians.
On the other hand, some of this album I’d be happy never to listen to ever again.
So maybe it’s a mess of a masterpiece, more beautiful for its imperfections. Like a lot of arty movies, you may not want to watch it again but you’re better off for having the experience.
Plus, I agree that the album cover alone kicks ass.
20 August 2008 at 8:19 am |
Shit floats.
20 August 2008 at 9:19 am |
I didn’t “discover” this album until about 10 years ago (While I like Warhol’s art, wasn’t sure I’d be interested what I thought was his music project). At first, I didn’t think much of it…more style that substance. But I’ve really grown to love the entire album, even Nico’s odd, haunting vocals. It puts you into a certain mood…
It’s hard to judge now how different it was from anything else that was coming out at the time. Masterpiece? Probably not. But a definite thumbs up.
21 August 2008 at 10:33 am |
Gotta agree with mr. nick up north: I can’t believe we’re even discussing this album’s worth. And picking apart the album song by song or because of Nico, or Cale’s viola, or whatever, is irrelevant.
The fact is VU’s first is one of the few pivotal moments in rock. We can hear its influence in probably thousands of bands today.
Which is more than we can say for the Beatles’ debut album.
Just kidding!
Or am I?
21 August 2008 at 1:13 pm |
put this on a list of the most influential LPs of all time. keep it off all others, with the possible exception of the 500 greatest album covers.
brian eno is right.