CAT STEVENS: NUMBERS (1975)
1) Whistlestar; 2) Novim's
Nightmare; 3) Majik Of Majiks; 4) Drywood; 5) Banapple Gas; 6) Land O' Free
Love & Goodbye; 7) Jzero; 8) Home; 9) Monad's Anthem.
Around this time, Stevens got particularly
fascinated with numerology — just another one of his turns — and decided to try
his hand at conceptuality once again, writing a mini-rock opera that would
somehow revolve around numbers. The story that he invented was never fully
explicated, but partially made it to the album's liner notes and partially to
the lyrics. You can read about it in more details in a variety of sources,
starting with Wikipedia, but honestly, I wouldn't pay it too much attention,
unless you have pledged to accept Cat Stevens as an intellectual beacon rather
than a musician. In fact, this was probably how it went in 1975: Numbers was routinely ridiculed as an
embarrassingly pretentious conceptual disaster — the critics hated it because
it once again made a strange jerk in the direction of prog-rock, and the fans
were left befuddled because it offered neither pop hooks nor easily accessible
spiritual enlightenment.
Once again, though, I have to play a
controversial role here: throwing overboard all the sci-fi fluff about planets
populated by Pythagorean concepts, I see a record that returns Cat Stevens to
the world of music-making, easily his most focused effort since Tea For The Tillerman, well worth
revisiting by those who expected another set of soulful folk ditties, but got
something far more experimental instead. True, the jazzy and funky elements
that are all over the record remain a bit alien to Stevens' nature, but, as he
did on Foreigner, he is capable of
enhancing the melodic aspect of groove-based music to compensate for the lack
of energy. And he is really all over the place, trying to find a different face
for each of the nine tracks — sometimes successfully, sometimes
controversially, but who cares? After the preachy disaster of Buddha, the man suddenly remembered
that he used to be a composer, and that's enough for me.
Now, meet the harbinger of disaster: ʽBanapple
Gasʼ, the only single from the album and one of the most commonly hated Stevens
songs, according to my observations. Putting it out as a single was probably a
mistake — it is intentionally slight, yet fully adequate to its sarcastic
purpose, mocking the self-delusional state of society with a happy
country-meets-Caribbean pop song that would not have sounded out of place on an
Osmonds record, or in a soda commercial. In the overall context of the album,
it is clearly parodic, though it also fulfills the important function of
offering a light breather in between the heavier stuff. Funny, catchy, but
obviously fluffy and about as suitable for the role of a lead single as, say,
ʽHoney Pieʼ would be for The Beatles.
On the other hand, it is one of the few tracks whose lyrics are more or less
autonomous and allow it to be sampled outside of the concept, so perhaps that
was the driving motivation. Or maybe, in the era of Main Course and KC & The
Sunshine Band, Stevens — or his record company — thought it was dance time,
even for spiritual singer-songwriters. Who knows?
In a perfect universe, the lead single should
have been ʽMajik Of Majiksʼ, one of the man's most complex and interesting
musical creations since the ʽForeigner Suiteʼ. The composition effortlessly
flows from slow piano ballad to a proto-disco dance groove, sharp strings and
all, and is also embellished by David Sanborn's sax parts (apparently, Stevens
did not turn a deaf ear to Bowie's Young
Americans, either). Unlike ʽBanapple Gasʼ, this one has no vocal hooks, but
it's not as if Stevens had never released a hookless single before — and it
does know how to build up and release tension, with lead and background vocals
and strings and saxes working as a perfect team. Besides, it can also be viewed outside of context:
essentially, the lyrics are talking about a meeting with a supernatural being
that leads the singer to an epiphany — hopefully, Cat was really stoned when he
wrote that. Not all that convoluted.
Elsewhere, the record fluctuates between soft
jazz (the opening instrumental ʽWhistlestarʼ, a very nice theme with real
whistling and somewhat soundtrackish, but memorable piano phrases from Jean
Roussel, Cat's trusty sidekick); orchestrated medieval dark folk (ʽNovim's
Nightmareʼ); and the usual folk-pop formula (ʽHomeʼ). It is not a tremendous
amount of variety, but then the album, like all Cat Stevens albums, is also
quite short — although still not free of some tedious filler tracks (ʽDrywoodʼ
tries too hard and too long to put out a harsh blues-rock vibe, but lacks that
special something — like a Sanborn sax solo — to properly ignite); and the
pompous choral conclusion, ʽMonad's Anthemʼ, where, I assume, it is explained
that all the naughty numbers are really one, lays on the chorus effects too
thickly, abusing the talents of the «Magic Children Of Ottawa» (whoever they
are) without getting anywhere. At least the Stones knew that a full-scale
symphonic choir on one of their songs (ʽYou Can't Always Get What You Wantʼ)
could only work as an introduction; Stevens decided that it would make a fine
two-minute conclusion to the album, and in the process, turned it into some
young adult vaudeville show.
Still, the best thing about Numbers is that the conceptuality of
the project, instead of harming the music, seems to have positively influenced
it — you can toss the concept for all you want, the best songs on this album
work perfectly fine without it, and the worst ones would never have worked with it anyway. I will not go as far in
my controversy as to openly recommend it, what with all its flaws and
inconsistencies, but it was a major step in the right direction, and who knows?
had the public and the critics truly embraced it, maybe today's Yusuf Islam
could have ended up being Pythagorid McBoole instead, and spent the rest of his
days collaborating with Count Von Count on educational activities for children.
Then again, it is unlikely that Stevens' spiritual path could ever depend that
much on mass opinion.
Time to give this a listen maybe. I'd given up on him following its appalling prececessor
ReplyDelete