I Just Read About That…

SOUNDTRACK: WICKED LESTER-The Original Wicked Lester Sessions (1972).

 Wicked Lester was the band that Gene Simmons and Paul Stanley started before they created Kiss. They recorded, but never released, an album (given Gene’s money grubbing needs, I can’t believe he hasn’t released this yet).  This demo version which floats around the internet may or may not be the album.  I’d be surprised if it were because there are four cover songs.  But whatever.

It’s a fun archive.  It has a very 70s vibe (including flutes and keyboards) and is much less heavy than what they would be releasing in just a year’s time.  Two of the songs from the demo made it onto Kiss records (strangely, one not until their third release).

“Love Her All I Can” sounds not too different from the Kiss version.  Paul’s voice is much deeper. The solo is lame and it’s funny to hear “do dooo” backing vocals (and a keyboard section).  “Sweet Ophelia” has a groovy 70s vibe and a feeling that is not too dissimilar to the sound of The Elder.  I love “Keep Me Waiting” has a what, tuba sound? for the riff.  The song also has an entirely new middle section, which is very early Kiss–they liked showing off creative chops back then.  I love this song.   “Simple Type” (the version I heard is lousy qality) is a rock and roll number with (I think) Gene on vocals.  It’s got a lot less of the psychedelic elements that the other songs have.  “She” (one of my favorite Kiss songs) has a wonderfully weird vibe here, (not to mention a flue solo which is very Jethro Tull).

“Too Many Mondays” has Gene on vocals and it is a very delicate song with gentle backing oohs.  It is probably the least Kiss sounding song of the bunch because they didn’t write it.  This is the first of several covers.   “What Happens in the Darkness” has a kind of disco sound (in the backing vocals) and Paul’s lead vocals have an interesting edge to them.  It’s fairly psychedelic, including the middle section sung by Gene and the slide guitar solo.  A band called Griffin has also recorded it (and their version is better).  “When the Bell Rings” is another cover.  Gene seems to be straining a lot on falsetto vocals.  “Molly” is a gentle acoustic ballad by Paul with falsetto and everything,  “Wanna Shout It Out Loud” is another Gene falsetto song.  It’s a cover of the Hollies song and not the “Shout It Out Loud” that Kiss would later record.

I can see them not wanting this released during their heyday or during their heavier moments, but it’s not an embarrassing collection by any means.  Definitely of its time, but some interesting stuff nevertheless.  Check it out:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=busyMPHjKMA&list=PL2B518729242D8887]

[READ: April 9, 2014] “The Definitive, One-Size-Fits- All, Accept-No Substitutes, Massively Comprehensive Guide to the Life and Times of Kiss”

I’ve liked most of Klosterman’s writing.  I especially like his writing about music (although I have never read any of his books–some day).  But imagine my delight when Klosterman decided to write a huge article defending Kiss for all of the right reasons while at the same time loathing them for all the right reasons, too.

Kiss are very easy to dislike if you don’t know them–they are silly, they were costumes, they sing dopey pop metal about sex, and they just keep going even though they are ancient.  Kiss are even easier to dislike if you do know them–Gene Simmons is a greedy bastard who is intent upon taking as much money from his fans as he can (and is proud of that).  They keep releasing greatest hits albums with an extra song or two, they even keep making albums that are nowhere near as good as their best stuff.  As Klosterman puts it:

They inoculate themselves from every avenue of revisionism, forever undercutting anything that could be reimagined as charming. They economically punish the people who care about them most: In the course of my lifetime, I’ve purchased commercial recordings of the song “Rock and Roll All Nite” at least 15 times.

And yet…  And yet…

The impetus for his writing this was Kiss’ induction into the Hall of Fame (I don’t care about the Hall o Fame so i have no real opinion about this).  But Klosterman does (at the end of his article)–he likes the building itself, but he acknowledges the silliness of something so utterly subjective.

As for the article, he runs through the bands’ origins in 1972.   And since Chuck Eddy was mentioned in yesterdays article, we get his take on Kiss: “a cat, a bat lizard, something with one black star on one eye and something with one silver star on each eye.”  he breezes through their heyday during the last half of the ’70s when Kiss operated as the biggest band in the world — although not because of record sales. “Kiss simply declared that their enormity was reality, and reality elected to agree.”

Then the highlights before the fall–solo albums all released on one day, their blood mixed in a Marvel comic, and a silly movie. (commercial below)

And then the plummet from the heights–the string of guitarists, the lack of makeup, the new make up, the reunions, the departures, etc etc.

Klosterman says that a critical analysis of Kiss’ output has never been fully contemplated (surprising least not for a band about to be inducted into the HoF).  So he sets out to do just that (he clearly overlooked my own critical analysis on these pages, but he is more comprehensive).  For the most part I agree with his assessments, which I’ll list with some of my own comnets in grade format here:

A: Kiss
A-: Hotter Than Hell
B+ Dressed to Kill (I’d put it at an A-)
A+: Alive!
B: Destroyer (I’m inclined to go higher).
A-: Rock and Roll Over
A: Love Gun
A-: Alive II
C-: Double Platinum (I agree that it’s weird they truncates and changed songs, but the platinum cover was always boss)
A: Ace
B: Gene
B+: Paul
D: Peter (I like Paul’s best, but yes, Peter’s is awful).
D+: Dynasty (I rank this higher because it was the first Kiss album I bought, but his arguments are strong)
B+ Unmasked (I was surprised this reeived such a high grade as I’ve always thought I was th eonly one who liked it…It’s better than people thing/remember).
A-: The Elder (THRILLED that this got such a high grade.  The album is weird and wodnerful).
B+ Creatures of the Night
B+ Lick It Up
B: Animalize (I am more critical of this one)
C: Asylum (I actually liked this one more than I thouht I would).
C-: Crazy Nights (I think this deserves less).
B: Smashes, Thrashes and Hits (shoul dbe ranked lower just because they made Eric sing “Beth.”
D-: Hot in the Shade (This grade is a bit too low, there’s a good song or two on here but the album is waaay too long).
B-: Revenge
D: Alive III (A little low)
B+ Unplugged
In my reviews of the abums, I hadn’t gotten to these yet so I can’t really comment.
C: Carnival of Souls (This is rated a little tool low but it’s not reallya  properly completed album so it is hard to be fair about it).
F: Psycho Circus (It can’t possibly deserve that, can it?  I’ll have to relisten to find out )
D: Alive IV (I go a step up because of the weird set list)
C-: Sonic Boom
F: Monster

He then reviews all of their solo albums (including Vinnie Vincent Invasion–which gets higher marks than I would have thought) and Frehley’s Comet (lower than I would have thought) all of Peter Criss’ albums (that’s some stamina to listen to all that) and Gene & Paul’s solo albums (which I have, but which I bought used–i can only give so much to the Kiss Koffers).

So given the increasingly poor grades, why do we still like Kiss, and why am I going to see them this summer?

Klosterman sums it up in a few points which I think are on the nose:

1. I know Kiss are fucking me over, and I don’t remember a time when I didn’t know this. I know they view me as a robot. As far as they are concerned, I exist only to buy the same old material they keep repurposing while unconditionally investing my thoughts into the same self-mythologizing anecdotes¹¹ they keep telling, over and over again. But here’s the thing: I like it. It seems insane, but I know it’s true. I enjoy giving Kiss my money; it’s one of the few extensions of consumerism that provides me with genuine gratification. At this point, the process of acquiring Kiss minutiae is not that different from actually experiencing it….  By interweaving capitalism so intimately with the very idea behind why they exist, wasting money on Kiss is actually pleasurable. I like being a prisoner. I wouldn’t if the stakes were higher, or if it weren’t my choice. But the stakes are low and the choice is my own.

2. Because Kiss do not pretend that what they do is motivated by some romantic, idealistic truth, you are able to eliminate the blind hero worship that so often comes with pop idolatry. Kiss are adored by their base, but only when they’re literally onstage, exercising the overt signifiers of arena rock; the moment they exit the arena, that same fan base views them skeptically and objectively. Ask a crazed Kiss fan if he or she thinks Gene Simmons and Paul Stanley are “good people” — you may be surprised by the response. Kiss fans tend to be unusually obsessed with the band’s greatest missteps (Kiss Meets the Phantom, the failure of The Elder, the exact year Gene and Paul started wearing wigs, etc.)….  It’s just totally accepted that Kiss fans can love Kiss and still think they’re jerks; as such, it’s a balanced relationship. It’s a real relationship.

3. When the critical world looks at Kiss, they see adults pretending to be characters they are not, projecting unsophisticated music about fantasy emotions, presented as a means of earning revenue. What they do not see is that this is how almost all rock music would appear to an alien. It is inside the genre’s very DNA, all the way back to Elvis. So Kiss are not a cheaper, exploitive translation of rock; Kiss are the living definition of rock’s electrifying unreality, presented with absolute transparency.

So, yes, that’s it.  I’m ceding the last words to Chuck: “There is just no group that’s more fun to think about. There are some that are more fun to listen to, but that’s a different question.”

You can read the whole thing here.