I don't mean to diminish it, though. While it's not the most sophisticated song the Beatles ever wrote, it's still got some killer playing-- I've actually come to appreciate this one more over the years. On a seemingly simple frame, the Beatles hung a lot of cool stuff, is what I'm saying. For one thing, it's a really excellent bass part for Paul, isn't it? That bass rocks, and it's backed up with some excellent harmonium playing courtesy of George Martin. To my ear, the drums actually sound de-emphasized in the production, which makes the bass that much more critical to the texture. Then the guitars work that really simple two-note motif with just the right syncopated edge. In the verses, the guitar gets this really full, Rubber Soulish sort of ring to it as it works another totally simple four-note figure, which totally works, driving up some good tension before falling back into the relaxed groove of the chorus. I don't know-- the whole thing somehow equals more than the sum of its parts for me. Like a lot of songs from this period, it sounds like musical sunshine to me.
And it works as a happy "yay for love!" kind of song for me today. I am still on vacay and super-excited to watch my friend from back in college skate for the Cherry Blossom Bombshells in the DC Rollergirls Championship bout today HELL YEAH. Which I guess is not a very lovey-dovey sport, as they go, but what the hell. The sun is out, and the word is love, and this day is going to rock. Hope your Saturday does too!
"The Word," released in the U.K. side A track 6 of Rubber Soul, December 3, 1965; in the U.S. side A track 5 of Capitol's sucky Rubber Soul, December 6, 1965.
Fo' sho' on the bass on this. I think the guitar in the chorus (or refrain or whatever) is a little too reverb-y. The Beatles loved them some 12-bar blues, no?
ReplyDeleteNice blog, just discovered it. What version(s) of the albums do you listen to? Eg. official CD's, vinyl, or Purple Chick? Stereo or mono?
ReplyDeleteI'm listening to official CDs, jcarvill, purposefully-- under the assumption that that's what most people have. Most are stereo, but sometimes the videos I post use mono instead. (I have a lot of vinyl, but none of it particularly special, all picked up in yard sales and thrift shops in my broke-ass youth, with only a few notable exceptions. As for Purple Chick, I discovered it pretty recently myself, in the grand history of my Beatles fandom. So don't feel qualified to write about it. All my entries deal with official canon.)
ReplyDeleteThe descending guitar riff on this one is great. What's interesting to me about the discussion on mixes is that the original mixes (mono, stereo) of Rubber Soul have never been officially released (the 1987 CD was a new remix) and likely never will be (I'm guessing the September reissues will be brand new mixes?).
ReplyDeleteI didn't know that about the 1987 disc remasters; I would have thought those were the album versions. I assume Purple Chick 'released' the original mixes. I agree that the September remasters will be new mixes, but that doesn't bother me. Then again, I have high expectations of them.
ReplyDeleteTHanks for the reply. Totally understand your wanting to stick to the most available versions, but it would be very interesting to hear your thoughts on how a given track compares across various versions - 1987 CD/Anthology/Dr Ebbert/Stereo/Mono etc. I've just started getting into the Purple CHick stuff and some tracks - eg. 'Taxman' - seem to my ear to be very much more immediate and enjoyable in mono. Then of course there's the entire Sgt. Pepper and White Album mono verions...
ReplyDeleteThis is a fair point, Jcarvill. I'll try to do it in future posts... especially in cases where it seems most interesting to do so. No promises, but I'll be as on it as I can be. :)
ReplyDelete