My most recent post garnered some attention from readers. I am glad. It was long and not the most easily digestible of topics. I love feedback from readers. A reader reached up to me with substantive criticism and it ended up turning into a very nice back and forth. I figured it would be a fantastic companion post to the prior one. I am always reachable either in the comments section or via email at Todayiheardblog@gmail.com. I was so impressed with what he had to say, that I asked him if we could post the conversation. I think he adds proper criticism and perspective to the conversation. Without further ado, here is Letters to the Editor Vol. 1.
Letters have been lightly edited for easier reading and to preserve privacy.
Hello Joe. My name is A.P.
I first want to say bravo on incorporating Russell Kirk's work into your piece. It fits very well with the ideas of the piece and he is not brought up enough when discussing conservatism. Now, for a slight nitpick about steel guitar. Unlike what was said, the Steel guitar had been present in Country since the 20s and perhaps even earlier - Jimmie Rodgers played with Hawaiian steel guitarists and the explosion of Hawaiian music's popularity in the early 20th century undoubtedly influenced the development of country. I think in the context of your larger argument, the 1940’s date given works as steel guitar did not become widespread until the 40s; just thought I should mention it.
Moving on to your main argument of reactionary vs conservative, I think I straddle the two categories. On the one hand, I acknowledge and accept that the modern or future Country scene will never be the same as it was in the 50s or 60s - nor should it be. I want innovation and modern artists to feel able to express themselves. On the other hand, modern interpretations of the genre generally don't resonate with me, and therefore I seek a reactionary style of representation in modern Country. I also am in favor of stricter definitions as to what is Country and what isn't (at least, in comparison to most), so that probably saddles me a little closer to reactionary in attitude. In short, I seek a revival of older styles in Country because they are what speak to me, not because I want the genre to revert back to its previous iterations.
If Jake Penrod or the Malpass Brothers were hoisted up by the CMAs or the Opry alongside mainstream artists and not relegated to the proverbial dustbin, I would have a lot less complaints. I just think there's a certain irony. When I watch Country music's biggest stages, I, a classic Country fan, feel the most alienated. Diversity of sound is constantly preached about in modern Country, but it seems they forgot about classic sounds.
I hope that little rant made sense. Anyway, there's a key piece of your argument that I perhaps see a bit differently. I like your comparisons of artists like Joshua Hedley with those like Jon Pardi, but I can't help but feel you could be misdiagnosing some of their root motivations. Take Aaron Watson, for instance. When I hear him, I don't hear a modern blending of old and new, but an imitation of older 80s-90s neotraditional, à la George Strait. Could he and others, like Randall King, be similar to the neovintage artists in their pursuit of an idealized 'yore' in Country? Just their 'Eden' happens to be a more modern version than that of Crockett or Hedley?
Furthermore, artists like Crockett don't seem to be so much striving for historical recreations of classic Country sounds, but blending a variety of vintage influences to create a new, but traditionally-sounding product. To my ears, there is a big difference between a group like The Country Side of Harmonica Sam and Charley Crockett. Going down this train of thought, the artists who truly seem to embrace that reactionary, neovintage style that you describe often have catalogs full of covers. What better way to return to tradition than to sing from the traditional canon? That could be an easy way to help separate neovintage from neotraditional artists, especially as it emphasizes neovintage artists' orientation towards the past. I could be dead wrong though, as I have not listened to a lot of neotraditional. It's at least food for thought. I just want to reiterate that you did a good job and I have to say that your genre-wide analyses are a breath of fresh air in a commentary scene which primarily focuses on new releases (though understandably so). I'm glad to have discovered your blog.
A.P.
Dear A.P.
Thanks for reaching out! You raise a bunch of good points so I'll try to go through them one by one.
I feel like Kirk doesn't get enough respect. In regards to why I chose him specifically, to my eyes he elevates the mentality of the conservative as the definitive characteristic rather than any specific policy or philosophical ideal. Choosing any other thinker, from Locke or Burke, to Hayek or Buckley wouldn't be as effective because they tend to be focused on specific ideals (relationship of government, common good, nature of rights etc) as the identifying characteristic, rather than broad mentalities. Perhaps in politics focusing on one of those writers would be a better formula. Not really the scope of what i \was aiming to achieve here. When it comes to art, the specifics really go out the window and mentality is all you are left with. I think it would be cool to now try and trace the threads of progressivism and revolution in country history. It is certainly a big part of the story. In a way it's the other half to the story that I didn’t touch on here. I feel the progressive angle probably has been discussed in an academic sense more than the angle I chose, so perhaps there’s less of a need. Still something I want to unpack at a later opportunity.
I appreciate the point about the steel guitar. I was not fully aware of the history. To my knowledge, returning GI's from the Pacific arena who had been stationed in Hawaii really brought that sound with them. Perhaps popularized is a better word. I stand corrected.
Re your introspection about why you feel like you belong in the reactionary camp. I don’t think the specific rationale (reassembling eden, an appreciation of the more simplistic take, the trad or modernist approaches in early country vs the postmodernism of most modern art, heck even just loving piano), all these can contribute to why one falls in love with a time period. So long as the desired result is recreation, it falls into this category. It’s probably no quite that binary, but that is how I lean these days.
I see you are open to pluralism. I.e. you are fine with modern iterations of country, but you want representation for your favorite styles. That doesn't mean that you aren't aligned with this "reactionary" viewpoint. Although sthe messaging is often “country is dead and my style is the only….” I’d say you are a nice guy and open to different people having different wants and desires. Tbh country is in an odd spot right now. I could see the future you want eventually coming to be. The Grand Ol Opry is expanding these days. Hopefully it will open up further.
On to the real meat and potatoes. I think you are correct in your estimation about certain artists hearkening back to 1996 instead of 1966. Their sound will necessarily be more modern, but isn't fundamentally non-reactionary. To be honest, Randall King does falls into that area. Like, conceptually there isn’t much difference between a late 90s or early 00s Strait album and a Randall king album. This is in large part why I didn't choose to spotlight King. also i jut wrote a glowing review of his most recent album, so he’s gotten enough press from me lol
I strongly disagree about Aaron Watson. Watson released his first albums around the turn of the millenium. That means he started cutting his teeth in the late 90s. The first half of his career was very much in the late 90’s/ early 00’s lane. However, that wasn’t because he was hearkening back to something, that’s because he was simply growing and evolving his sound out of the time and template he was from! I’ll grant you that by 2010 he was beginning to sound anachronistic, but that is right about when he started to change up his sound and gain commercial appeal! The story of Aaron Watson with his blend of reactionary neovintage rhetoric (I cut out a whole paragraph about the irony) and forward looking yet neotraditional music begins in the 2010s to my ears.
TLDR: agree in concept but not in specific example
I do think that maybe I picked the wrong song to demonstrate this idea within Aaron Watson's music. July in Cheyenne is a gorgeous song, but the modern production attributes it showcases are very slight. I thought that if I could do a sufficient job showing the subtle nuances in contrast, that would clarify the murky line in between the two artistic methodologies in a way that using a more overt example wouldn't be able to do. Additionally I specifically wished to use a song that had a music video so I could further show how the visual art follows along in the same vein. I see that was a risky choice that may not have worked.
Lastly, your point about covers is a good one. Cover projects are tricky. Sometimes it is meant to elevate the name and songs of the artist to try and make them relevant to a new generation. This could sometimes fall into an reactionary “Eden recreation” paradigm. Other times it is meant as a more conservative device of connecting with the chain, showing tribute, and updating the songs sonically for the new gen. Josh Turner and Jon Pardi both released cover projects in 2020 that fall into this latter category. Crockett’s cover projects seem to me to be more in line with the former. TBH that, along with his wardrobe and cinematic throwback vibe, is a big part of why I consider him a neovintage artist and not a neotrad artist. Even though, like you said, he does more genre blending then was common in those days, the total package of not blending modern genres, the vintage production techniques, the cover projects, and the persona, I think he fits into neovintage. Also, he still has plenty of material that would fit into the more rigid 1960s genre lines. I’ve written a bit about him.
Thanks for reaching out, its really fun to get deep into the weeds with anther person who thinks deeply about these topics.
Joe
Dear Joe,
Yeah, your mix-up with the steel guitar is understandable - most historical overviews of the genre that include steel focus on the Post-War boom that Hawaiian sounds had. Marty Robbins is a perfect example of such historical influence (fell in love with Hawaiian music while in the Navy during WWII, and incorporated its sounds and styles into his music upon returning). But as you eluded to, it was more of a revival or resurgence than a new trend.
I also would agree that though I am more generous than your typical 'traditionalist', I still fit within your definition of reactionary since I desire the maintenance of traditional styles of Country in the modern era, rather than accepting a slow evolution. Upon reflection, I think my argument here was less about debunking your framework and more about highlighting: A) The complex nature of individuals' interaction with the framework & B) That reactionaries aren't always 'old man yells at cloud' types, but perhaps legitimate fans of older musical styles who feel ostracized by the modern Country scene. The street of acceptance needs to go both ways. But as you noted, Country really is in a weird spot right now. I can't help but attach a certain significance to the moment considering we are about 100 years from the genre's commercial debut (in any real sense), so hopefully 'we' can lay the foundation for another incredible century of Country music.
Glad we agree on Randall King, and I would like to suggest the same applies to many of his Texan brethren, but that's neither here nor there. What is perhaps more salient is the question of how regional identity plays into the neovintage vs neotraditional divide. Now, it goes without saying that unique artists can emerge from anywhere; don't misjudge the cowboy in the continental suit. But I think it's an easy conceptual leap to assert that people like Randall King in the modern Texas scene are more likely to idolize Strait and the 90s neotraditional scene than most.
Either that or Honky-Tonk and Western Swing, but the influence the 90s has on the 18-35 Texas crowd is undeniably a lot broader and stronger than that of Bob Wills or Hank Thompson. The same goes for Bluegrass in Appalachia (i.e., Cole Chaney) or Western in the West/Southwest (i.e., The Sons of the San Joaquin). Could places outside of large Country music centers, like Texas or Tennessee, feel more shunned by modern country (even neotraditional), and adopt older styles, especially if the past included prominent artists from their area? I'm just spitballing here, but there's another factor, along with age, for your equation.
Regarding Aaron Watson, I apologize if I did misrepresent his career and sound. I am not familiar with his work and only used him as an example because you did. Plus, as you admit, the song you selected was perhaps a bit misleading for those unfamiliar with his catalogue. So, no need to provide a lengthy defense - my mistake. But you seem to have grasped my larger point.
It seems we also agree on covers, including that they can be made for several reasons. As you mentioned, sometimes an artist wants to prove their 'Country cred', if you will, or update a classic song for a new generation (Bailey Zimmerman's cover of God's Gonna Cut You Down I think could be classed as both). Sometimes it's about paying tribute, like Merle's ‘Tribute to the Best Damn Fiddle Player’ In the World album. Other times, it is to maintain tradition and bring classic songs to a new audience in their original style, such as the Malpass Brothers performing Louvin Brothers songs. In regards to Crockett, I see your point. He really is one of those artists which is difficult to categorize, but whatever can be said about him, I agree that he seems to respect and idolize 50s-60s Country far more than your average neotraditionalist.
A.P.
Dear A.P.,
Thanks for the further responses. Keep ‘em coming!
I love the historical information about Hawaii. I guess I’m an idiot because I never put it together that Marty got his love of Hawaiian music from when he was in the army. In today's world we have access to so many subcultures that it's quite easy to be a fan of some niche regional sound without much in the way of actual physical access to the area. Obviously in the 40’ and 50’s things were different.
It’s a very interesting point you make about the identity aspect of regional sounds. It does seem that generally Texas is similar enough to Nashville that it isn’t as unique as it likes to pretend it was. Many crossover acts, Jones, Strait, etc. all abound in the middle road between Nashville and Texas. What is true is that there are periods of divergence. Western swing in the 40’s was a different scene then the nascent Nashville scene at the time. The gritty Texan singer songwriters in the 70’s (Clark, Van Zandt etc.) cut from a more folksy Neil Young-esque cloth then the smooth luscious sounds of 1970’s Nashville. However, throughout the 1990’s things seemed pretty similar. A divergence hit again when Shania hit the scene in a big way and moved Nashville toward poppier sound. Garth did the same around the same time and the rest is history. Texas didn’t move in that lane and has been traveling a parallel path with its own twists and turns independent from Nashville ever since. Things are starting to merge yet again now. Still, there are some fascinating things to be said for where the differences rear their head and where they share commonalities. The Texas spirit lives large in country. There’s a lot to unpack there.
I am a big fan of Aaron Watson and have written about him a few times on the blog.
He isn’t as popular now as he was a few years ago, so if you’ve been delving mostly into older stuff until recently, it doesn't surprise me that he hasn’t come across your radar. I highly recommend his work. Especially the three album stretch from 2015-2019.
Cover albums really are tricky to quantify. Especially these days. Covers used to be far more common and nowadays they aren’t really. I imagine songwriting credits play a large role in that. Glad we see things similarly.
Love the chatting,
Joe