And the Lost Story of 1970 - Simon and Garfunkel

If you remember the musical events of 1970, you'll find this book absorbing and surprisingly informative. If your record/CD collection contains the final recordings of the Beatles, Simon and Garfunkle and the first CSN and CSNY albums, the first solo recordings by former members of these bands, and the first three James Taylor records, you'll find yourself listening and reading the liner notes again with new perspective. (For instance, how interesting to notice that Joni Mitchell's appearance as back-up singer for James coincides with their love affair...) Unlike many books published by Da Capo Press, this is well-researched, well-written popular history.

Great book about a pivotal year in music history. Browne does a great job bringing to life 1970 and the various tensions and struggles of the bands in the title. I really enjoyed this piece of cultural history. I highly recommend it. Browne, a Rolling Stone writer, does a great job telling the story of the music too. Not being a musician I really liked this window into the recording sessions and the creative process.

Thank you, David Browne, for capturing the essence of this time for those who remember, and describing it beautifully for those who don't.

This book crafts a gorgeous narrative of four artists whose work dovetailed and really defined at least one generation. Browne's research is extensive and the facts uncovered are a goldmine. Definitely a compelling read for all people who listen to music, of any age.

As a former FM rock jock from the waning days of 'underground' radio I highly recommend this book to anyone who was there when it all happened (it will give you a WHOLE new perspective on the music). I also recommend it to anyone who wasn't there -- this will transport you to 1970 and help you understand. Fire and Rain captures this fleeting moment as 'the album' became an art form (as well as a unit of serious commerce); record stores dedicated to these artists popped up all over the country; radio went from TOP 40 Boss jocks yelling at you between 3 minute singles to deep-voiced FM announcers talking to you between 7 minute album cuts, or entire album sides; and concert promotion evolved from ad hoc shows in national guard armories to Bill Graham putting on events at the Fillmores. The Sixties (in this sense) wasn't really a decade; it was just a few years of radical change, politically, musically, and commercially. And then it was gone. Fire and Rain is a fine guide to the era.

One often hears of the passionate music buyer that ever since CDs came along,they miss the "experience" of the vinyl record album. Now that music is morphing into a low audio quality "accesory", it's getting even worse. There may be tons of "information" about it on the 'net, but where's the "affection", where's the "knowledge"? For talented author David Browne, I'd say 1970!!
Of course it will seem silly to some, but Mr. Browne has penned a delightful read and an ode to four albums and artists that he took to heart upon release and has carried with him since. In doing so, he's explored and demonstrated (via the printed page or screen) the "experience" that was,for many, the post Dylan charm of the record album.
This thoroughly researched work explains these musical "landmarks" ,from inspiration to marketing, within the context of the times they were created in, and while divulging a number of interesting inside stories about their making, also makes oft-told tales seem fresh.As a full life record lover,I say "BRAVO" for that-even if I personally think the melodically sweet baby James Taylor helped turn the tone of early 70s music into "mush"!!

This is an ambitious outing, one that wants to link the changes in music with the times to paint a very broad picture of social movement. It succeeds to some degree, but in a way that feels forced and coerced from the reader.
For me, the stories of creating these seminal albums from 1970 were the highlight of the book. There is such a sense of art and earnest belief in the music that springs from any of these groups, except possibly the Beatles, who by 1970 were functionally a nonentity.
The attempt to sync the social movements of the day with the music didn't work as well for me, except for the bracing story of the creation and marketing of Ohio after Kent State ( though Neil Young is perhaps the least fleshed out character in the book) and the rise of James Taylor as a musical balm after the turmoil in the country and in music.
There was a consistent and thus sort of formulaic tendency to promote one guy as the dicky one in each group (eg Stills, Simon, McCartney). Maybe that's so.
Still, I was moved afterwards to spend yet more money, and you should plan accordingly. I fleshed out my Simon and Garfunkel tracks, bought Deja Vu and Stephen Stills, and picked up a couple of James Taylor tunes. I strongly encourage you to seek out the original Apple produced "Carolina in My Mind" with George Harrison backing Taylor. Great stuff, found it on YouTube. For that, and the occasionally unique insight, Fire and Rain is worth a read for music fans.

I loved reading this book and found it hard to put down. It gives a lot of background info on some of my favorite musicians as well as the current events at the time. I was too young in 1970 to be aware of much of what was going on so this was very interesting. I learned a lot!

Being in New Zealand through the 60s and 70s meant ( at least) a delay of three months for records and magazines to reach us. Live acts from the UK or the US were few and far between so there was no chance to follow an artists developement. Brownes "Fire and Rain" put me back in that pivital year playing it out in real time. With a backdrop of social and political change 1970 traces the dying of 60s icons and the rise of a new breed that would too change the face of popular culture. A great read that drove me back to my old vinyl for a soundtrack. And that can only be a good thing.

This is a fantastic book. The inside stories are all there, whether you have heard them or not. But it seemed sporadic and jumped from band to band. Then, in the last chapter, there's four pages where he ties it all together, the shifting music and changing attitudes as the 60's came to a close and solo artists rose from the ashes of great bands, but it would have been much better woven in all along rather than an 'ah-ha' surprise at the end.

I purchased this book as a souvenir of my recent visit to the Rock Hall in Cleveland.

I was fifteen-sixteen years old in 1970, playing this music in a small town in Upstate New York, and completely into the cultural scene and events covered.

I really was pleased by the choices and the writing. Even if you lived thorough the era and have read copious pages on the proceedings, you will find some new details. Some examples: the significance of Rita Coolidge, the economic impact on the venerable Fillmore East, what the Roches were doing, James Taylor's slow rise to stardom, the inception of Devo, and The Beatles waiting for their royalties were covered in a fine fashion.

Well-worth reading!

Fire and Rain is a superb reconstruction of the year 1970, and that year's major events in pop music history. Well-written, personal, factual, and often quite funny. Amazing to see the rebellious 60s morph into the calmer 70s. David Browne knows his subject, not just names and dates, but emotions and ideas.

FIRE AND RAIN: THE BEATLES, SIMON & GARFUNKLE, JAMES TAYLOR, CSNY AND THE LOST STORY OF 1970 - it's quite a mouthful as a book title, but what it's really about is that last bit, 1970 as the end of something and the beginning of something, using that small sampling of the popular music of the day as a lens for looking at history. It's a pretty ambitious undertaking, and I'm not sure it's entirely successful. But it sure as hell did bring back a lot of memories for this old grey-haired geezer.

In 1970 I was finishing up grad school on the GI Bill, married and a new father, so I wasn't the typical college student of the 60s. I was intensely focused on getting through college and finding my first 'real' job, feeling the heavy responsibility of providing for my brand-new family. I was aware of the anti-war protests, the marches, the sit-ins and general unrest that went with the late 60s. But I was too busy to be part of them, working part-time at various minimum wage jobs and then as a teaching assistant. But I tried to be 'hip.' We went to the Shakespeare Fest in Stratford, Ontario, that spring. I bought my first bell-bottoms and sandals there. I let my hair grow. And I always - ALways - made time for music. Because music had always been important to me, from the time I was old enough to sit and rock to my mother's old 78rpm records of Bing Crosby, Guy Mitchell, and Gene Autry. My first 45rpm purchase was Johnny Ray's "Just Walking in the Rain," followed by Marty Robbins' "A White Sport Coat (and a Pink Carnation)." The first LP I bought was Elvis's Christmas Album when I was twelve. And I kept on buying records from then on.

So when David Browne focused in on 1970, I could immediately picture those album covers in my mind's eye. The Beatles' LET IT BE album was to my mind a damn good record, with tunes like "Across the Universe," "Two of Us," "The Long and Winding Road," and of course the title track. Because I came from an earlier time when there was rarely more than one hit per album. The Beatles changed all that when they became so popular on both sides of the Atlantic that whole albums were played on the radio and every single released from their LPs charted in the top ten. I was sad, of course, that the Beatles were finished as a group, but I was also excited that they'd keep making records, albeit individually. MCCARTNEY, Paul's debut solo album, was something of a disappointment. As big a fan as I was, I thought the track, "Junk" kinda summed up the effort. I wasn't real pleased with Lennon's initial efforts either - that 'primal scream' LP with the Plastic Ono Band was pretty raw. I didn't expect much from Ringo, but his albums of standards and C&W were, I thought, at least more honest efforts. George's triple album, ALL THINGS MUST PASS was the biggest surprise, and the best of all. Because I bought all those albums. I didn't stop being a Beatle fan just because the Beatles stopped liking each other. Because no matter how they all tried to forge their own identities as artists, they would always be Beatles to their fans. That's how big they were in the cultural lexicon of the 20th century. And I was saddened when we lost two of them. John and Yoko's Double Fantasy was a fantastic album and I felt Lennon was on the verge of a whole new career when he was killed. And George kept putting out great music too.

Simon & Garfunkle, well they were always simply superb in everything they did, even after they split up - even more beautiful and thought-provoking music. BRIDGE OVER TROUBLED WATER was indeed a gorgeous achievement, filled with wonderful inspiring, rollicking and joyous music - not a clinker on the whole album. I can still remember the day I bought it, in a store called Log Cabin Records on Mission Avenue in Mt Pleasant. Took it home and played it over and over; probably damn near drove my wife nuts. But my one year-old son was clapping his hands to "Cecelia" right along with me after a few times through. To me S&G were always - and still are - musicians for thinking folks.

CSNY? Yeah, I bought both of those early albums. I was cool; I knew what was in. Truth is I never really liked either one of them that much though. The only songs that have stayed with me are "Teach Your Children," which I loved for its nod to Kahlil Gibran's then enormously popular THE PROPHET and its sweet, sad vibe; and "Our House," because, well because I couldn't wait for my family to have its own house, with dogs in the yard and so on. And as I read Browne's book, I kept finding myself humming that song. After all that Browne had to say about CSNY, I found I didn't much like any of them, except maybe Graham Nash, who incidentally wrote both of those songs. Those other three - egotistical druggies not worth my time. In the CSNY sections I was also a bit surprised to find out the incestuous nature of the music biz too, how the women (and talented ones, like Joni Mitchell and Rita Coolidge) were passed so casually around among the men like a fat joint. I remember Stills' first solo album (not favorably), but nothing after. Crosby I think of now mainly as the sperm donor for Melissa Etheridge and her partner. Browne's description of him and Stills make me think of them as a couple of undisciplined - if mildly talented - jerks. This may not have been Browne's intention, but, well, there it is.

But enough of CSNY - never favorites of mine, and after reading all about their gravy days, even less so now. As far as them being the "American Beatles," huh-uh - no way. If there ever was such a thing, it had to be the Monkees. I know they were 'manufactured,' a product of Madison avenue, but their sound was indeed very close to that of the early Fab Four. So okay, maybe they couldn't even play their own instruments to start with, but the music was very 'up,' happy stuff, and I liked it.

James Taylor I've always enjoyed. I know he's had his problems with drugs and mental problemes, but he seems to be straight now and still making beautiful music. Reading about his matinee-idol good looks in 1970 kinda made me chuckle, because these days I usually think of him with his bald head and kindly-grandpa look. The voice is still as good as ever though. Browne suggests that the rise of James Taylor in late 1970 was a turning point from the harsher rebellious 60s to a quieter, perhaps better time. I tend to agree. Because he opened the door to a lot of very listenable stuff. Carole King's TAPESTRY album, for example. Or Michael Martin Murphy's music. Or, my favorite, the brief resurgence of Rick Nelson in the form of his last top 40 hit, "Garden Party." Ironically, at a time when most of the group acts had split off into solos, Nelson, perhaps one of the most successful solo artists of the late 50s and early 60s, was trying to come back as a group - The Stone Canyon Band.

Finally, I should probably fess up that I did just a teeny bit of skimming in the political, non-musical bits, and here and there in the BEATLE segements too, because, let's face it, their story has been done to death (Bob Spitz's biography is the best), but generally speaking, this is a terrific book, meticulously researched, thoughtful and well-written and also chock full of great musical connections and trivia. Thank you, David Browne, for bringing it all back for this old guy. - Tim Bazzett, author of the memoir BOOKLOVER

I was utterly immersed in David Browne's Fire and Rain... It was a revelation to read the complex interweaving between Apple Records and James Taylor; Ringo and Stephen Stills! Incredible and fascinating. But what I loved most
in this gem of a book was Mr. Browne's delicate yet truthful handling of these fragile musicians - so respectful of their artistry!

Marc DuQuette

Should I continue reading this book? I'm a quarter of the way through and, as a Beatles guy, I keep coming across sloppy, incorrect info (Taylor's "Something in the Way She Moves" was not inspired by a George Harrison lyric. It was the other way around; Brian Esptein was not alive when Apple was in operation; Linda McCartney's daughter was 7 YEARS, not MONTHS, old when Paul went on his "Paul is Dead" retreat.) Why didn't a copy editor catch these basic, distracting errors?

Not being much familiar with the history of CSNY, Simon & Garfunkel and James Taylor, I can only wonder if their stories are similarly affected with this kind of sloppiness? Maybe someone can clue me in. Otherwise, it is a fun narrative of a year in pop music and culture....just disappointing to realize I may be absorbing a lot of mistakes as facts.

A lot of information on performers about whom not much is written. That said, the Beatles get short shrift in this book. Also, the author's liberal politics shows through in several places (the North Vietnamese were seeking refuge in Cambodia? the 2003 invasion of Iraq was unprovoked? read a book sometime, David).
..

Warning: Very jaundiced and incomplete, as one would expect from anyone who'd been a Rolling Stone writer. This is a VERY hippie/counterculture perspective here. Not everyone in 1970 was marching in lockstep with the ideals of the counterculture or 'the Movement' as the author would have us think. Moreover, things weren't as somnolent and boring, musically, as this book makes out. 1970 was also the year of Black Sabbath's debut album, Deep Purple's 'In Rock' and Led Zeppelin III, to name just three. Much GREATER music than that dealt with in this particular book, and, moreover, music with a FUTURE, not just a past. That said, it is an interesting enough snap-shot of an age through its music, that delicate fulcrum in time when the full impetus of the counterculture was rapidly waning and the more hedonistic sensibilities of the 70s had barely begun. If you take into account this book's massive shortcomings, it can still be a useful one for students of this period.

It's about the Beatles, Simon & Garfunkel, Crosby Stills Nash and Young (CSN) and James Taylor.

Less interested in their contributions; this book is more interested in their fracturings.

The Rotten Apple Beatles breakup has been done enough times--the worst part of the book.

Most annoying is the calling of CSN the American Beatles. What is the similarity?

Too depressing and not that interesting overall.

I know that is a harsh standard to hold it too, but honestly, if you're writing about the Beatles, CSNY and Simon & Garfunkel you have to know that expectations are going to be HIGH. That being said, it was a decent book. Very well researched, and a good idea to tie all the bands together by linking them by a single year. It was pretty slow moving and dry for a book about the glory days of rock and roll, but that's my only complaint.

In many reviews of this book, the respective writer agrees with this book's author assertion that 'Let It Be' was and is an iconic Beatles album.
Now really, I will bet anyone any amount of money that when your average Joe or Jane Schmoe reflects back on The Beatles' music, the last record that will come to mind is 'Let It Be'. The record stands as one of their most cynical as well as one of their most weakest album. The only 'good' thing that one could say about it is that it reflected the frustration and feelings of futility that were in the heads of the members of the group at the time.
The book itself isn't too bad when compared to others of the same ilk but Browne definitely tries far too many attempts to be 'profound':
For example: "In many ways, Crosby, Stills and Nash was a corporate merger, a business deal."
Huh? In what 'many ways' are we talking about here? Browne doesn't even try to back up this ludicrous statement. He also tends to describe the behavior of his subjects with words and tone that are far more subjectively judgmental than he admits.

I can't say I remember 1970 like it was yesterday. I have trouble remembering yesterday, or even what I had for breakfast today. The year 1970, though, was a watershed year for me personally, as well as for the world.

And given all the wonderful reviews, I was prepared to step back into that world. I never got there. Do you suppose all these wonderful reviews are from people who were born in the Kennedy administration or later, and to them, 1970 is history, rather than current events?

I didn't notice any egregious errors in the narrative, nor did I notice any errors at all. What I noticed was a sense of tedium. Mr. Browne doesn't get across a sense of excitement. Maybe he's told these stories too many times. I get the feeling that he's bored with the story.

And there's no excuse for that. I learned that Paul McCartney sang on Fire and Rain. I learned that Eric Clapton played for John Lennon. I learned all kinds of things about performers that were important in my life, and yet... I was bored. Mr. Browne buries us with all kinds of details, my eyes glaze over, and I have a hard time noticing when a gem floats by.

Good writing needs to be invisible. If you notice that you're reading something, instead of the words just flowing over you, the writer has failed, and when you are annoyed that the media isn't invisible, the writer has failed miserably. Mr. Browne makes reference to lyric fragments, and to song titles in passing, giving the reader a fraction of a second with the song. That's not nearly enough time to remember the song and "play" a recognizable clip in your mind so that you know what he's talking about. What's more, he will mention several songs in a row, within a single sentence, and put multiple sentences like that back to back, so the reader is presented with the choice of ceasing reading for ten minutes, or else passing over the paragraph without really comprehending what Mr. Browne is talking about.

It would probably make a wonderful documentary if Mr. Browne's words were read aloud while we were fed film clips, still pictures, and background music to illustrate what he's saying, but that's not the case. As a Kindle, this book is horrible. The wonderful details that Mr. Browne knows are buried by the bad writing.

If I hadn't had my hopes raised so high, perhaps I wouldn't be so disparaging in my review of the book. There IS value here, but readers really have to dig for it. You know, I thought I hated history until I got out of high school, and started reading some good biographies and discovered that historical events could be interesting if viewed through the eyes of people who actually had to experience them. Mr. Browne's book is a history tome of the type inflicted on me in school.

And as I collected my thoughts preparatory to writing this review, a phrase kept popping into my mind that I first encountered in H. Allen Smith's 1970 (what a coincidence!) book, Rude Jokes - I'd rather be nibbled to death by Muscovy ducks. At the time, I had never encountered a Muscovy duck, but I can now tell you, that the males are very territorial and aggressive. You don't want that to happen to you. And I wouldn't wish my high school history textbooks on anyone, either.

This book could have, should have, been really great. If you love the music of 1970, do yourself a favor and download Sweet Baby James or Bridge Over Troubled Water or 4 Way Street instead, and play the music on your Kindle while you read something else.

I couldn't get more than half way through this book. I just didn't feel like the book was going anywhere and I felt like I was trying to get to the end out of obligation than out of genuine interest in the topic. This book could have been fantastic, but it was dense and dry.

Why anyone would bother reading a book written by a person who has spent most of his life disparaging music is beyond me. His time would be better spent writing about himself which of course would never work because no one would care to hear it. I wonder if he looks back on all the negativity he has spread and wonders on some level what he accomplished. For example here is his take on Blind Melon's Shannon Hoon, "Then there's Shannon Hoon, easily rock's most annoying singer. Harsh and nasal, his voice dares you to listen to it for more than a song. Hoon's self-conscious lyrics (''Time has passed for Mrs. Onassis, decay on display'') don't help. Attempts at warm and fuzzy fall flat too, as he serenades his pregnant girlfriend in ''New Life'': '''Cause now she's telling me she'll have my baby.'' Just what alterna-rock needs — its own Paul Anka. While you may not like Blind Melon and Art Garfunkel may be more your cup of tea what purpose does this rubbish serve? Why should it be a negative experience? Was Blind Melon created to satisfy the whim of a wanna be or is it just what it is? Do we really need some angry spirited nerd to tell us what to like and what not to like or can we make our own decisions and perhaps enjoy the fleeting moment we have on this earth by filling it positively. Matisse was called gaudy in his color but now people flock to museums to see his shows...Who will ever flock to any of the negativity David Browne has put forth into the world??