Very interesting interview. I've always sided with John Fogerty, but I must admit this interview with drummer Doug Clifford made me think twice about John always being the victim.
Still.........you have to wonder if they would have had ANY of the success that they had if John hadn't taken over the band the way he did. Personally, I don't think they would have.
John's talent made the band and his ego ruined it.
John doesn't need Cosmo or Stuey, thats just the way it is. without John, the other 2 would not be out there earning a living playing his songs.
I'll have to second that one............
John's talent made the band and his ego ruined it.
Interesting perspective.
[Edited on 9/18/2016 by robslob]
Thanks for the heads up on the interview, it also looks like an interesting site for more good music info.
A great Fogerty interview by Alan Paul...
http://alanpaul.net/2014/08/an-interview-with-john-fogerty/
Recently watched a repeat of Dan Rather's Big Interview with John Fogerty. When asked about the breakup Fogerty says he really had no insight until his wife mentioned to him years later that the other band mermbers were jealous.
From this I get the impression that John had to be pretty distant from his bandmates during their time together. Could not have been comfortable for them. But being the band's leader and creative force may have been that all that mattered for Fogerty at the time.
While also interpreted as "John's ego" I believe his story that on the last (trio) record he refused to sing the other's songs cause he just didn't think they were as good. Yes; a team member would have given it a go. But hell; George Harrison hated Paul McCartney till the end for treating him like a kid brother and keeping his songs of the albumns. (Never had that animosity towards John who while keeping his songs of records didn't treat him like a child in the recording studio)
I like CCR to a certain extent..as For Fogerty what an ass..been reading for years how classless he is...could it be him and Trump are related??? Wouldn't surprise me at all
A band is a collaborative effort - until you treat your mates like they are disposible. Stu, Doug and Tom helped Fogerty find his sound and hone it, they helped the band find their sound and hone it. There is no doubt they were solid contributors. Only Fogerty's ego will have you believe he walked in with complete songs and the Muppets added the backing tracks.
The whole thing is one sad panache of personalities, bullshit and betrayals, all the more sad by the money they screwed themselves out of all while being one of America's favorte bands.
Trump/Hillary has not gotten more bitter than Fogerty et al. Same shit, different stage.
It's a sad web. I've interviewed John several times and read his memoir, which is very revealing in both intentional and unintentional ways. He was clearly the big talent in the band. Just as clearly to me he was grounded by them and was a difficult guy to deal with from the get-go.
As for Music Aficionado, I think everyone here would love the site. It was started by the longtime publisher of Guitar World. i was involved early as an editorial consultant, before stepping off because I was writing One Way Out. I'm doing some work for them, including the Oteil interview, and an upcoming piece with Warren. Andy Aledort is writing a lot. I invite you all to sign up and don't think you will regret it.
Lets face it if Stu, Doug and Tom had the writing talent of
George Harrison
David Crosby Byrds era
Gene CLark Byrds era
Dave Davies Kinks
John Entwistle The Who
Warren Haynes Dickey Betts Band Allman Brothers Band
Dickey had as big an ego as John Fogerty but he knew warren was on the same level
as him duane and gregg.
Stu, Doug and Tom werent on the same level as these people
John Fogerty did give them a chance on Mardi Gras there songs weren't
very good. The album did not do well.
hey when it is a partnership and partners treat partners like crap everyone ends up with crap. What was to keep Fogerty, Mr Big Shot Talent from taking off and doing his own thing? Nothing. Then he says he's the victim? I don't buy it.
Sad that it happened but John perpetuated as much ___ as he gave. Same for the other two. Well, three.
I remember watching the Storytellers and Behind the Music on Fogerty on VH1 back when he was promoting Blue Moon Swamp and starting to play CCR songs again for the first time in decades. If you read between the lines of what he said, he came off as a pretty big egomaniac and tone deaf, as if he was doing his band mates (including his brother) a favor by including them in his successful band. There are always 3 sides to every story (2 sides and the truth), but Stu and Doug came off as being relatively reasonable to me in interviews. The day Saul Zaentz died, Fogerty re-posted "Vantz Kant Dance" video which was pretty classless. Obviously it was very personal to him, especially for being sued for writing songs in your own style, but you can at least let the dead rest.
Charlie Rose narrated the doc, and had a line (I'm paraphrasing) it doesn't matter who wrote the song, or who owns, rather, the people who continue to sing and celebrate the song.
All you have to do is look at that video and see what a sham Creedence Clearwater
Revisited is.
Hey, that dude does a pretty damn good job of trying to sound like John Fogerty!!
All kidding aside............I'd never pay to hear "Creedence" without John. I'd never pay to see Grand Funk without Mark Farner. I could go on and on and on. Zep reunited for one show in 2007. But if they did a full-fledged tour, would you go if either Plant or Page were dead? The Who carries on..........but if Daltrey or Townsend died, would it be The Who?
No, no, no. And IMO it just ain't Creedence without John.
I know, I know..........someone's going to chime in, "Duane died, but the Brothers carried on." Yeah, well, but they still had their singer and main writer, and another great guitarist. Then they got lucky and found a great pianist.
[Edited on 9/21/2016 by robslob]
Not being there, we can only speculate how the different personalities caused the demise of CCR, and to what extent each member contributed. But, I will say, no matter what John Fogerty's part is in all of this, it is nothing short of criminal that he does not own his songs and that he was sued for sounding too much like himself. It may be legal, but it is ridiculous and there should be laws in place that do a better job of protecting the rights of visual and performing artists. That includes all former members of CCR.
Not being there, we can only speculate how the different personalities caused the demise of CCR, and to what extent each member contributed. But, I will say, no matter what John Fogerty's part is in all of this, it is nothing short of criminal that he does not own his songs and that he was sued for sounding too much like himself. It may be legal, but it is ridiculous and there should be laws in place that do a better job of protecting the rights of visual and performing artists. That includes all former members of CCR.
He signed his publishing rights away in the beginning because he didn't know any better, and saul zaentz took advantage of that.
Yes. I understood that. Just a personal opinion, but I don't feel an artist's naivete should be an excuse (albeit legal) for a person who is knowledgeable, such as Saul Zaentz, to exploit the artist. This is not an uncommon practice in the world of visual and performing arts. I would like to think there would be more outrage, or at least concern, if the general public was more aware of the situation. A lot of people most likely assume a well-known musician is wealthy, or maybe there is a degree of apathy on the part of society. There should be some basic legal guidelines in place that protect both the artist and the investor. Whether it's John Fogerty or Chuck Berry; even though it doesn't impact me personally, I can't help but feel empathy.
I thinks pops42, from your responses, that you feel particularly partial to John Fogerty. John might be a wonderful human being, or an absolute jerk. I have no idea. It doesn't really matter in my assessment of the situation. Either way, he got screwed. I think he's an immensely talented individual who wrote great songs, came up with the perfect hooks and guitar parts, and performed them in a timeless manner. I would love to meet him and thank him for the wonderful music.
Not being there, we can only speculate how the different personalities caused the demise of CCR, and to what extent each member contributed. But, I will say, no matter what John Fogerty's part is in all of this, it is nothing short of criminal that he does not own his songs and that he was sued for sounding too much like himself. It may be legal, but it is ridiculous and there should be laws in place that do a better job of protecting the rights of visual and performing artists. That includes all former members of CCR.
He signed his publishing rights away in the beginning because he didn't know any better, and saul zaentz took advantage of that.
Yes. I understood that. Just a personal opinion, but I don't feel an artist's naivete should be an excuse (albeit legal) for a person who is knowledgeable, such as Saul Zaentz, to exploit the artist. This is not an uncommon practice in the world of visual and performing arts. I would like to think there would be more outrage, or at least concern, if the general public was more aware of the situation. A lot of people most likely assume a well-known musician is wealthy, or maybe there is a degree of apathy on the part of society. There should be some basic legal guidelines in place that protect both the artist and the investor. Whether it's John Fogerty or Chuck Berry; even though it doesn't impact me personally, I can't help but feel empathy.
I thinks pops42, from your responses, that you feel particularly partial to John Fogerty. John might be a wonderful human being, or an absolute jerk. I have no idea. It doesn't really matter in my assessment of the situation. Either way, he got screwed. I think he's an immensely talented individual who wrote great songs, came up with the perfect hooks and guitar parts, and performed them in a timeless manner. I would love to meet him and thank him for the wonderful music.
Well said. I guess the next issue becomes whether John "screwed his bandmates out of writing credits because of their contributions." Similar to "The Band" and the issue the other members had with JRR. My take is if someone writes the song and the Band members help refine it the writer gets credit. Perhaps the way the DOORS did it (every song was credited to the band collectivel) is more egalitarian.
