Nice interview with ALO ahead of his upcoming Rock Hall induction.

Andrew Loog Oldham was the push the Rolling Stones needed: Rock Hall inductee profile

By Chuck Yarborough, The Plain Dealer
April 03, 2014


Betina la Plante

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- Give the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame credit for a sense of history. The managers of the two most influential bands in the British Invasion – the late Brian Epstein, who charted the Beatles’ success, and a very much alive and kicking Andrew Loog Oldham, who maneuvered the Rolling Stones into prominence – are being inducted in the same class.

Epstein was 32 when died in 1967 as a result of an accidental lethal combination of alcohol and sleeping pills. Oldham – who now lives in Bogota, Colombia – and the Stones also parted company that year, reportedly because of his own wild ways and drug use.

Both are being inducted into the Rock Hall’s Class of 2014 in ceremonies in Brooklyn, N.Y., on April 10 as Ahmet Ertegun nonperformers.

Oldham is credited – or blamed, depending on whom you ask – for several things that in retrospect seem crucial to the initial building of a Rolling Stones “brand.” He dumped keyboard player Ian Stewart from the stage band, and he reportedly cultivated the Stones’ “anti-Beatles” reputation as bad boys.

What he did for sure that certainly had a direct impact on the band’s longevity – and wealth – was encourage Mick Jagger and Keith Richards to write their own songs and to acquire ownership of the master tapes from the record label.

We caught up with Oldham, who broke into the business as a publicist for such artists as Bob Dylan on his first visit to the United Kingdom, at his remote ranch outside Bogota. The interview was via email because of a lack of cellphone or landline service.

Where are you now?

I’m at home in Bogota, Colombia. It has been my home the past 35 years. That’s half of my life so far.

What was your initial reaction when informed that you’d been named a member of the Rock Hall’s Class of 2014?

It was surreal. I’m sure it is for most of us who receive this kind of news. It’s heady stuff, almost a day of reckoning. I was with my wife in Colorado, in Boulder, to be exact, when we got the news. We had just left a retreat out in Twin Feather Lakes, a “Joy of Recovery, Buddhism, Chi-Kung & 12 Step” at the Shambhala Mountain Center, given by Kevin Griffin and Greg Pegament. . . . So as you can imagine, fresh off the mountain, it was heady news!

You were just a kid yourself when you took over management of the Rolling Stones in 1963. How did you convince them that you were “the guy”?

We were all kids and blessed that we did not have to hang around in this business motor called education that just adds debt to youngsters and families, prevents them from getting on with their lives and has them beholden even more than reasonably could be expected to corporations who thrive on underemployment equally with unemployment. Internship is the new workplace abuse.

We were lucky – we had this passion that just could not be avoided. Most of us had been asked to leave school early, though Mick Jagger was one of the exceptions, and music and fashion gave us a road out of the hell our elders had bequeathed us as punishment for their having won the Second World War.

So we were all innocents with this music from abroad. This consolation prize that seeped through the British ports whilst the American money rebuilt Germany. But at least we were on the streets at 16, we were not made to wait like the kids of today. I’m talking mainly white kids here, obviously.

You also pushed some actions on them – bumping Ian Stewart, cultivating that “bad boy’’ anti-Beatles image, etc. Why did they listen to you?

Because they agreed with me? I think it is as simple as that. We were all equally unqualified and we all trusted each other’s instincts. I bumped Ian Stewart because I thought a band with six members was one or two too many, and there was a question of whether his looks fitted these street-fighting boys. The Stones agreed.

Do you remember the names of the Manfred Mann group? I doubt it. Funny thing is, as time passes the idea of acceptable looks changes, and dear Ian does not look unlike Morrissey, or a member of any number of groups who have made it.

As for the anti-Beatles thing, that’s not really true. It may have been the result, but it was not the intention. It belittles the Stones if your main card is comparison to another band. I dealt with what I had, what the Stones had.

I know that these days Mick and Keith in interviews say, “Yes, Andrew cultivated the anti-Beatles thing.” But it’s just not true and a bit belittling of the strength that pulled them through. However, if I had to do as many interviews as they do I am sure I would too settle for some acceptable sound bite.

We certainly did not sit around and plan what we were doing based on the Beatles’ agenda. That would have been silly. To start with, the Beatles were already almost over creatively as a live band. Most of us never had the opportunity to see the Beatles as a live, vital band – we were not in Hamburg or Liverpool in ’61 and ’62.

No, the Rolling Stones knew where their future lay – on the road. They became kings of the road in very short order. Even success in the recording studio had to take second place and bow to the all-importance of the road. And just look at the result. What are the Stones doing now? They are on the road and it is theirs!

What was the toughest part of being the Stones’ manager and producer?

It was never tough until I could not keep a handle on myself. Then I had to leave. The game changed once America entered the equation. I did dreams – not money. I was of no more use to the band. There is no sadness attached to this statement – it is just an actuality.

What did you see as the primary function for a manager and producer back then, and has it changed today?

A manager spoke for the act. He told the press, and therefore the world, who the act was and the act became just that. These days the manager is a connector to the establishment that runs the business, he’s a supportive bean counter. The act speaks for themselves. Jon Landau does not explain Bruce Springsteen, at least he should not. He provides the comfort zone and the arena in which Bruce can explain himself.

As for the producer, I think that unless you are Phil Spector or Brian Wilson, whereby you basically are the act – apologies to Mike Love, who really does not get the recognition he deserves, mainly because of the way he presents himself. Brian is a more sympathetic hero of our times. He is not brash, he is humbled and fits the idea of the heroic Beach Boys better. No, it’s all Brian because everybody loves a tragedy where our hero gets a third act.

No, the producer’s job is to provide the space and circumstances in which the group can do their very best. You get what you deserve. The Stones got me – I was able to take the Stones to America to record, which is where we truly found our home.

The Beatles are more establishment. They got George Martin, they got a structure that suited them in Abbey Road. The big change – or one of them – is that back then, the producer picked the act and in most cases it was his job, not in the case of George Martin, but certainly in the cases of myself, Mickie Most and Shel Talmy, to find the act a recording deal. Mickie did that with the Animals and Herman’s Hermits, and Shel did that with the Kinks and the Who.

Nowadays the act gets to pick the producer, or should I say their co-producer, and look what a shallow grave that is too much of the time.

Is there a day in your time together that sticks in your mind?

The first major U.K. tour, promoted by Sharon Osborne’s father. The Stones were bottom of the bill for six weeks with the Everly Brothers, Little Richard and Bo Diddley. That was one of the big learning curves. And I would suppose that period at RCA Studios where for a magical while, we just didn’t seem able to get it wrong. “The Last Time,” “(I Can’t Get No) Satisfaction,” “Get Off of My Cloud,” “Paint It Black.” All of those.

You are known first for your work with the Stones, and a lot of people may think that’s the crowning moment in your career. But you’ve also worked with everybody from Eric Clapton to Jimmy Page and beyond. What do YOU think is the pinnacle of your time in music?

Every day of it. You get up, you go to work with what you consider very special people. And some days, you are lucky and you get results that are otherworldly, those days when the artists you work with receive something, and they translate it into something the world wants to share. Now I know in 1964 I would have said, “Just write a [bleeping] hit!” But it is more wondrous than that in the long run. Anyone can have a hit, but can they repeat and repeat? That is an actual wonder.

When you and the Rolling Stones parted company, things between you weren’t exactly lovey-dovey. How are things now, and what did it take besides time to get there?

You must remember I live in South America. That is not exactly around the corner from where they live. You know when you get off the train, you do not leave with a season ticket. The Stones is now a big army, something for Vladimir Putin to look up to. You only have time for those who serve the cause. The rest is subjective memory and hopefully some chuckles and smiles. I sent Keith a birthday video for his 70th. We are good, we know who got the silver and that we remain the gold. We just don't choose to wear it.

The age-old debate among British Invasion fans is Beatles or Rolling Stones. Now, all these years later, let me ask you as one who was there: Beatles or Rolling Stones?

I think you have to widen the arena on that one. The Who were so very important, so were the Move, a vital, aggressive band that did not make it to the next level, although some of them did and gave us ELO. Then there is Van Morrison, Eric Burdon. You know, the week the Animals had a record at No. 1, it was just as life-giving as a record by the Beatles, Kinks or Stones.

What the Stones managed to do better than anyone else was be seamless. There were no passengers, no weak ends. The level between road, singles and albums was equal. Where so many bands lost the plot was thinking that having a hit single was a compromise.

You’re going in alongside the Beatles’ Brian Epstein. Is there any special meaning to you about that?

Interesting. Of course, without Brian Epstein, you and I would not be having this conversation. For he is the one who persevered and got his lads that all-elusive recording contract and those lads, the Beatles, changed the world and made it possible for all of us to find our various places in it.

I really believe that Brian Epstein was sent to do just that, that Brian Jones was sent to form the Rolling Stones and I was sent to uncover them and start them on their way. I am just lucky that I got to stay here longer.

That said, the RRHOF is in a very strange place. You are the very first writer who has chosen to be in touch with me over my induction. That is, no doubt, why you are getting this much thought. As honored as I am, and as much as I’d like to see the likes of Bob Crewe and Shel Talmy inducted for their recorded work, I’m not sure the background boys should be a part of what the RRHOF has become: a televised spectacular.

We are not really appropriate to the international forum the [Hall of Fame] now has; we don't sing. All we can do is get up, thank the act, thank God and give thanks for your family for putting up with your demons.

This is not the private, raunchy, no-holds-barred party at the Waldorf Astoria where Ahmet Ertegun spoke his brilliant mind and Phil Spector accepted his induction supported by three bodyguards.

No, the [Rock Hall] has adjusted for the times and … I think it may have become an event for performers only and their fans. Rush last year, Nirvana and KISS this year. Perhaps they should hold a Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Olympics in Cleveland and induct everybody they've missed before they are either dead or in wheelchairs.

Y’know, the last RRHOF [induction] I went to was in 1998 to see my friends, the Mamas and Papas, get inducted. They needed a chorus of three voices on stage just to fill the vocal space of Cass Elliot. Michelle Philips got up and thanked the academy and Phil Spector played piano and we all sang along.

Now, for the HoF to survive, it’s gone Simon Cowell and that, unless you are a Rush or KISS fan, is a shame.

What do you think of the state of rock ’n’ roll today?

That I would leave to my children. It’s their call. I still miss Buddy Holly, Eddie Cochran and the Everly Brothers. I worry less about rock ’n’ roll and more about the song. Most rock ’n’ roll is as mindless today as it was before the ’60s, and that's OK. We all deserve a break after being underpaid or overpaid at work.

But I miss the writers writing for the world, giving us a lyric of despair and hope about the times. Everybody is so wrapped up in their teched-up, isolated world that they only know how to write about themselves. Where’s the new Sam Cooke, Stephen Stills? Who will write the anthems that bind, and how, even if they are written, will those songs get through?

[www.cleveland.com]



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2014-04-11 17:17 by bye bye johnny.

Nice reading, thanks for posting!

Excellent. ALO is always a good read. Thanks for the post.

He's very honest about the Stones not needing him anymore. And his comments about the anti-Beatle thing are interesting.

Thanks


-----------------------------------------

Great interview. ALO is extremely intelligent and offered some interesting insights about both his role in the creation of the Stones image and career, and the pop music scene of the 60s. Has he ever written a book?

Great read. Nice to know Andrew's still with us, though I have always wondered why he chose to make Bogota his home, apart from the obvious reason.

Thanks, that was worthwhile.

Quote
71Tele
Great read. Nice to know Andrew's still with us, though I have always wondered why he chose to make Bogota his home, apart from the obvious reason.

I think you got it right there

Quote
TornAndFried
Great interview. ALO is extremely intelligent and offered some interesting insights about both his role in the creation of the Stones image and career, and the pop music scene of the 60s. Has he ever written a book?

Several.

Quote
blivet

Quote
TornAndFried
Great interview. ALO is extremely intelligent and offered some interesting insights about both his role in the creation of the Stones image and career, and the pop music scene of the 60s. Has he ever written a book?

Several.

Yes, and they are all quite fun to read.

Thanks for the article, BBJohnny. I am looking forward to hearing what he has to say on stage at the ceremony.

Will any of the stones team pitch up to the RRHF ceremony do you think ?

ALO's being inducted by Peter Asher. There's been no mention of any Stones attending.

Sadly, ALO won't be there either. According to Chuck Yarborough, he's in Germany recuperating from surgery.

[www.facebook.com]

An interesting read, thank you, bye bye Johnny.

A good point that of emphasizing the difference between the Stones and the Beatles by doing concerts/making records - a similar point Jagger did in STONES IN THE PARK.

Stu's 'fate' does not seem to worry ALO much - and he refuses to take all the responsibility for that. That the Stones themselves had more to do with kicking Stu out, and probably having a bit bad conscience for that, is seen in the way Keith treats Stu's memory in LIFE, and attributes to him more than Stu probably deserves in forming the band. I take that Keith some sort of paying back to Stu.

By contrast, if ALO has some regrets, and some sort of bad conscience that is more to do with Brian Jones. That's the impression I got from his books, and also here he rather strongly points out the importance of Brian ("forming the band").

- Doxa

Quote
AOL
Do you remember the names of the Manfred Mann group? I doubt it. Funny thing is, as time passes the idea of acceptable looks changes, and dear Ian does not look unlike Morrissey, or a member of any number of groups who have made it.

Spot on, always thought that too



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-04-05 00:19 by bv.

Quote
brownsugar86

Quote
AOL
Do you remember the names of the Manfred Mann group? I doubt it. Funny thing is, as time passes the idea of acceptable looks changes, and dear Ian does not look unlike Morrissey, or a member of any number of groups who have made it.

Spot on, always thought that too

Bloody Stu was born in a wrong time... I guess he would have been great on The Smiths, or make that band swing a bit more...

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-04-05 00:20 by bv.

Quote
bye bye johnny
ALO's being inducted by Peter Asher. There's been no mention of any Stones attending.

Sadly, ALO won't be there either. According to Chuck Yarborough, he's in Germany recuperating from surgery.

[www.facebook.com]

Oh yes, I had forgotten about his surgery. That is too bad. He was the main reason I was looking forward to the show.

Great! Thank you!

Indeed a nice read........always know where is talking about.........

__________________________

Interesting to read his current thoughts, thank you for this, bye bye johnny.
(Are you in Cleveland?)

~"Love is Strong"~

read stoned and stoned 2 great reads not just about the band but what else was going on.......M

If you've got an hour to spare...






"As we say in England, it can get a bit trainspottery"

Interesting to read. Thanks for posting. (Ironic for a recovering addict to live in Bogota, Colombia, of all places.)

The guy always cracks me up. Would love to bs, over a meal, with ALO.

I saw him in Vancouver in 2010 introducing 'Charlie Is My Darling' in a small theatre and then doing a Q and A afterwards. It was a bit surreal and fantastic.

He was quite acerbic then, seems a bit mellower in this interview. Thanks for posting, and excellent read.

Music reverting to its pre-dylan vapidity is something I have noticed as well. Very interesting. I think as a society we suddenly became skittish about anything intellectual or soulful because we're terrified of learning too much about things we'd be better off not knowing. "We walk the high wire..."

Looks like ALO will be skipping the induction by choice, not as a result of his recent health issue. Below is a recent Twitter exchange.

Future Rock Legends @futurerocklegends

@loogoldham How do you feel about Peter Asher being the one to induct you into the Rock Hall next week? Are you going to Brooklyn?

Andrew Loog Oldham @loogoldham

@futurerocklgnds like brian epstein i was not consulted as regards this matter & like dear brian i will not be going.

[twitter.com]

And this from his recent talk in Berlin:

“I think those people basically hijacked the name 'rock 'n' roll,'” Oldham told an audience during a talk in March at the Berlin School of Creative Leadership. “I won't be there. I'll tell you why.... It's a television show. Twenty years ago it was an incredible party in the Waldorf-Astoria where everybody could behave exactly as they could 20 years ago. And then it became a business. I think it's healthier to stay home.”

[www.latimes.com]

good article . does anyone know if Andrew Loog Oldham will be at the induction ceremony? i know he broke his leg a couple of weeks ago

Quote
TheGreek
good article . does anyone know if Andrew Loog Oldham will be at the induction ceremony? i know he broke his leg a couple of weeks ago

See above.