tom traubert

The barrett you're talking about is the one after Piper, out, flipped, melted, it's up to you... it hasn't always been like this.

For the interviews, you handle it; there are all five Floyds and from all historical periods, so you have plenty of choices. But well, it's all the same.

The EMI basically didn't understand a damn thing about the music those four guys were playing. They insisted on having a producer of their choice and trust (Norman Smith) and that the format be radio-friendly. Other than that, they trusted them; they knew the singles had sold, that they had been on Top of the Pops, and they wanted it to continue that way, along that line. The Floyd, rightly so, were ambitious; they wanted to make it big, and they went along with it. In style, of course, and with astonishing results.

It's a definition that I didn't say couldn't apply to Dark Side, on the contrary. But we will never truly agree on the commerciality of Piper... that's just how it is. However, you don't have to believe me; go reread some interviews.

But please, you... the Floyd of 1967 were constantly under pressure to churn out chart-topping songs (see Candy and a Currant Bun, Apples and Oranges, Paint Box). It's no coincidence that they stopped making singles until The Wall. Denying that Piper was an artistic compromise is really tough, believe me.

What do the tastes or knowledge of today's kids have to do with it? One must judge within the context of the era, not 40 years later.

I'm glad that at least we are back to arguing; the discussion is interesting this way and not just a backyard fight. I believe that one must judge with the eyes of the era and also through the eyes of the Floyd. They were much more interested in spacious, lysergic compositions in the style of "Interstellar Overdrive" than in the pop format, which they began to adopt upon request. Of course, Barrett had his unique and crazed way of writing a pop song, but the fact remains that he adapted to the format demanded by radio. Don't come and tell me that "See Emily Play" is a difficult song now... yes, they were riding the hip wave, interested in a certain type of audience and not another, we know that, but the fact is that "Piper" does not represent the Pink Floyd who played at the UFO Club. There, they did what they enjoyed, the long improvisations, the delirious jams, not on "Piper"... that would have been a truly anti-commercial album. And of that hypothetical album, only "IO" and "Pow R Toc H" remain... the rest is pop, beautiful, original, new (even if it was already trendy in London) but pop. "Piper," for its time, considering how the Floyd were, and how EMI was, was already a compromise. That's all. I'm not saying they were unoriginal pieces or of little artistic value; on the contrary. In fact, they managed to combine commercial needs with compositional depth, and there should be no misunderstandings about that.

By the way, in my opinion, the only Pink Floyd albums that could (perhaps) be defined as "the antithesis" of commercialism are Ummagumma studio (which was accompanied by a live album) and Animals (there wasn't a single song that could become a hit, a unique case in the band's discography), but even here we're not exactly talking about Stockhausen, after all. But this is where the difference between sellable and commercial comes into play. It's like the difference between De André and Masini…

Laugh, laugh. The fact is that EMI requested and obtained a three-minute pop song album that could match the success of the first two singles. Barrett did exactly that, producing catchy tunes (of great class, I might add) that were meant to push the Floyd up the charts - end of story. So, Piper was extremely commercial both in intent (and openly so!) and in results. I want to clarify that with this, the album does not lose an ounce of its value, and I did not bring up the commercial/non-commercial issue; someone else did by defining Piper even as the "antithesis" of commercial, when in fact this is not true. And when it's pointed out, instead of arguing (which they can't), they just chuckle. They are free to do so, but talk means very little.

Piper the antithesis of commerciality? Another proof of your poor knowledge of Pink Floyd. Piper is an album of pop songs, made by a band that almost never played pop songs live. Piper is a record designed to sell, where their space for freedom was represented by a condensed version of Interstellar Overdrive. Not "just" to sell, but undeniably it was its primary objective. They say it themselves, and everyone knows it. And this has nothing to do with the quality of the product, mind you. But if there's a "commercial" record by the Floyd, well, it's definitely Piper.