any thoughts on the pseudonym the stones chose for the themselves on some of their early tracks (i referred to this on the thread on james phelge) ?

i remember when i first got hot rocks, being mystified by the name as "play with fire" was credited to nanker/phelge. it's such an awful sounding name, which makes it memorable, and then once you realize it's their pseudonym, then it's like you're in on the inside joke.

incidently, wyman claims that "paint it black" was supposed to be credited to nanker/phelge. not sure if there's anything to support that other than woman's word.

part of me wonders that if they'd picked a better sounding name, they might have stuck with it more.

Nankering with the Stones!




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

Classic Brian! Great pic

I wonder if Nanker Phelge USA still exists as an entity?
Allen Klein got it kn a few of the late 60s album credits..."manaufactured by....
The naughty boy.

interesting discussion of nanker phelge and "paint it black" from IORR of years past:

[www.iorr.org]

Quote
Turner68
interesting discussion of nanker phelge and "paint it black" from IORR of years past:

[www.iorr.org]

A long time ago I myself used to think that Nanker stood for Jagger and Phelge for Richards, not originally wanting to use their own names in the beginning (I assumed). Very much later really, I learnt that Nanker, Phelge meant the whole band. No Internett or wikipedia available then, covering any detail of your favourite band, which the Stones were in the process of becoming for me, outstreched from 1964 to 1965.

Part of my original misunderstanding probably came from the cover of my old vinyl album ROLLING STONES. That is, vol 1. Bought by me in early 1966 having obtained a record player for Christmas 1965. Because the cover indicates song no 6 as "Little by Little" ( Phelge, Spector). In contrast, German Decca's wonderful compilation from 1964 (?) AROUND AND AROUND on the very vinyl record gave "Empty Heart" and "2120 South Michigan Avenue" as created by Nanker - Phelge. That is, the latter two songs from Nanker - Phelge and the former seemingly, in my understanding, from one of those two, Phelge, together with Phil Spector.

That contrast in the details contributed to harden my misunderstanding, which as a consequence stayed with me till long after I ought to have become aware.

Quote
Witness

Quote
Turner68
interesting discussion of nanker phelge and "paint it black" from IORR of years past:

[www.iorr.org]

A long time ago I myself used to think that Nanker stood for Jagger and Phelge for Richards, not originally wanting to use their own names in the beginning (I assumed). Very much later really, I learnt that Nanker, Phelge meant the whole band. No Internett or wikipedia available then, covering any detail of your favourite band, which the Stones were in the process of becoming for me, outstreched from 1964 to 1965.

Part of my original misunderstanding probably came from the cover of my old vinyl album ROLLING STONES. That is, vol 1. Bought by me in early 1966 having obtained a record player for Christmas 1965. Because the cover indicates song no 6 as "Little by Little" ( Phelge, Spector). In contrast, German Decca's wonderful compilation from 1964 (?) AROUND AND AROUND on the very vinyl record gave "Empty Heart" and "2120 South Michigan Avenue" as created by Nanker - Phelge. That is, the latter two songs from Nanker - Phelge and the former seemingly, in my understanding, from one of those two, Phelge, together with Phil Spector.

That contrast in the details contributed to harden my misunderstanding, which as a consequence stayed with me till long after I ought to have become aware.

i still find it a little confusing!

One of the very petty parts of Keith's book Life is when he has a quick go at Brian about pulling a nanker.

Jezz Keith, ease up man, you were doing it right in to the 1970's.

I wish there was more details as to how they decided some of these early tracks were Nanker Phelge and not Jagger Richards.

[books.google.com]

Quote
His Majesty

I wish there was more details as to how they decided some of these early tracks were Nanker Phelge and not Jagger Richards.

Yeah, it would be good to know more of that. Now we can basically just look at those numbers that were credited to 'Nanker Phelge' and compare them to Jagger/Richard ones, and like listen there if there is something 'internal' to explain the distinction.

Some thoughts:

The first NP songs were mostly blues intrumentals, seemingly having born from a loose jamming, with no much musical pre-thought: "Stoned", "Now I've Get the Witness", "Michican Avanue". Really easily seen as 'collective efforts', the basic riffs/ideas borrowed from somewhere else. When the first NP tune was released ("Stoned"), they probably hadn't even thought of writing proper songs (ALO hadn't by then locked Mick and Keith into kitchen...). "Little By Little" is also a quite straight 'borrowing' from "Shame, Shame, Shame", the lyrics re-written by Spector and Jagger (drunk). (We should also note that Ian Stewart got credit for some of these tunes - he was a part of the Nanker Phelge collective then). "Empty Heart" has more structure than a typical blues jam, but not much. It is easy to imagine that the song was born out of collective, probably someone coming up with the basic chord sequence, and the others just fooling around. It sounds like that..

"Tell Me", the first Jagger/Richard tune released by The Stones, however, is altogether a different story. Clearly a typical 'crafted' pop ballad Mick and Keith learned to write songs "(and offered to others to record: "That Girl BelongsTo Yesterday", "It Should Be You", "As Tears Go By", etc.). And they did it by themselves, without any input by the others. I think "Good Times, Bad Times" (the next released Jagger/Richard tune by the Stones) is a similar case, despite being a clear blues tune. It sounds like someone has really having sat down to write it (probably one of the very first tunes by Mick and Keith that was suitable for the style of the Stones).

It looks like that in those very early days the distinction was clear. Mick and Keith 'really' wrote the songs credited to them, and Nanker Phelge was basically the band strumming blues, using without a shame collective resources from the blues tradition.

But this black and white situation started to change into more grey quite soon. If we look at the rest of the NP credited tunes: "Off The Hook", "Play With Fire", "The Under West Coast Promotion Man", "The Spider And The Fly", "I'm Allright" (well, let's forget "We Want The Stones"..)... Clearly strongly Diddley 'inspired' "Alright" sounds similar jam-based collective work as the earlier NP songs (it was sometimes credited to Phelge/McDanields). "Promotion Man" and "Spider" are basic blues tunes with original lyrics (a'la "Little By Little"). "Off The Hook" has more over-all originality, but still rather'basic'. Was it is easier to refer to an odd pseudonym than taking personally credit for musically not so original songs? Or since there was not much creative power used to any distinguished melody work, was is just more handy or just to give the whole group a credit ("let's 'borrow' together"...?). Like with "We Want The Stones"...

However, during the same time, they were releasing things like "What A Shame" under Jagger/Richard, which is as much 'blues standard with some original lyrics' as the songs mentioned...

And, to make this even more difficult, then there is "Play With Fire", which I think is a total anomaly among all the Phelge credited songs. I mean, that is damn coherent, musically original and independent sounding piece of work. It is very similar to many Jagger/Richard credited songs from the era.

The only explanation I come up with is based on having read that the song was created in the studio. Mostly probably by Mick and Keith, but, however, they didn't have brought up the song there, like they had typically done with the songs that would had been then credited to Jagger/Richard. Now, this is pure speculation, but from its base I dare to suggest that the distinction between Phelge and Jagger/Richard tunes was based on the simple principle that if the song was somewhat created by Mick and Keith before entering the studio, then it was 'theirs' and they would get the credition. If not - if the songs were created in the studio, and probably anyone there being involved contributed somehow or not - it was attributed to the collective.

The premise of this suggestion is that when MIck and Keith started writing songs, they were using rather 'traditional' means - really having the basic chords, melodies and lyrics worked out before offering their songs to others. However, their working methods changed later - they might come up with some sketches, and started to use the studio as the place in where they - with the help of others - seriously developed those ideas/songs. They hade now more time and luxury, and probably self-security and guts, and, especially after "Satisfaction", more power within the band, for that. Probably for someone like Bill Wyman some of these new ways to work reminded him of the way "Nanker Phelge" used to work, but seemingly Mick and Keith were thinking differently. From their point of view, it probably felt unjust for them to give credit to "Nanker Phelge", since it was them two who did most of the creative work anyhow.

However, we need to note that nowadays "Off The Hook", "The Spider And The Fly", and "I'm Allright" are credited to Jagger/Richards. Plus there is a group of songs hat are said to be credited to Nanker Phelge, but never released, things like "Andrew's Blues" and "Stewed And Keefed", which are similar cases like most of the NP 'blues jams/pastishes' they ended up releasing (and seemingly written in the studio under 'creative' circumstances..)

- Doxa



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2015-08-16 00:54 by Doxa.

Yeah, the change in credits for some tunes is interesting.

Interesting look at the history of the band's songwriting process and the resulting credits, thanks Doxa.

Whew Doxa that'd some analysis there. Very interesting. Especially the part about songs created in the studio.

I'm guessing the use of NP was just used to control where the publishers money was going. Perhaps NP was registered in Amsterdam and Jagger/Richards in England or some other such technicality. Perhaps they used NP when they wanted to throw extra $ at the others registered as NP who they wanted to see have some income.

I have no facts about any of this I'm just suggesting that following the money would be a good way to analyze the use of the name. Not sure when they quit using the name either but I'm guess it corresponds to some business decision concerning the writers credits.

Keith will no doubt get full or 50/50 (with Jordan) song writing credits on his new album, though he has said in interviews that much of it was written in the studio.
I wonder what the other band members think of that.

NP was definitely a more democratic approach - I don't think Keith or Mick came in the studio with a complete score for a lot of songs.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-08-16 01:24 by LuxuryStones.

Weren't the NP songs more or less songs they lifted from other artists, and re-arranged?

Jimmy Reed (Little By Little, The Under Assistant...), Bo Diddley (I'm Alright), Holland/Dozier/Holland (Now I Got A Witness) etc...

Play With Fire is an interesting one. Doesn't seem to fit the "lifted & rearranged" category.
All the Stones except Keith & Mick were asleep when they recorded it. Spector and Nitzsche are on it,
so is that why it was designated an NP track? Or simply to share some income with the others to quell some complaints?

Somewhere in Rolling with the Stones there's a breakdown of who got what percentage for one track -
I forget which. It's very surprising and worth looking up. We don't know how they divided the money.

Quote
with sssoul
Play With Fire is an interesting one. Doesn't seem to fit the "lifted & rearranged" category.
All the Stones except Keith & Mick were asleep when they recorded it. Spector and Nitzsche are on it,
so is that why it was designated an NP track? Or simply to share some income with the others to quell some complaints?

Somewhere in Rolling with the Stones there's a breakdown of who got what percentage for one track -
I forget which. It's very surprising and worth looking up. We don't know how they divided the money.

Yeah, like I wrote above "Play With Fire" is an "anomaly" among Phelge credited compositions. The rest seem to be more or less collective jams or rather strong borrowings from blues standards. The pattern we find in them - pretty much the one Dandie stated above - we can not easily find in them. Besides, as you pointed out, the rest weren't even involved when recording it - that is: having not anything to do with it. It could be that it was a kind of compensation for the others. Released as the B-side of their next single (The Last Time"), would make some rather nice extra money I guess.

But ironically, the rest had much more to with the A-side, especially Brian Jones with that signature riff. And if we think of Dandie's 'criterion', wouldn't "The Last Time" should have been a perfect candidate for a Nanker Phelge song, since it borrowed quite a lot from already published song? "Play With Fire" sounds very much more original song than "The Last Time" (to my ears, and regards to what I know now)... Who knows, if they - ALO? - wanted to establish Jagger-Richard as a Lennon-McCartney caliber writing team, so to have a stong A-side under their name, was a part of it? The same pattern was followed in their next single. "Satisfaction" was credited to Jagger/Richard, while the B-side "The Spider And The Fly" or "West Coast Promotion Man" (depends on the market) to Nanker Phelge. Since they were a singles band at the time, these were rather big things. Probably they still were such a democratic band by then that they wanted share the cake a bit more fairly still?

However, if it is co-incidental or not, Nanker Phelge disappeared from credits after Allen Klein joined in.

But yeah, like you mentioned, we don't know how Nanker Phelge credits were shared. Except we know many of Jagger's share of performance credits... Here they are in a chronological order (from Wyman's ROLLING WITH THE STONES, p. 194).

"Stoned": 1/12
"Little By Little": 1/12
"Now I've Got The Wittness": 1/12
"Empty Heart": 1/10
"2120 Sth Michican Avanue". 6/12 !!!!
"Play With Fire": 4/12
"It's Alright": 2/15

And from ALL the Jagger/Richard songs from the given time (prior Klein days) Jagger got 3/12 !!!!!

Interesting numbers, no? Ironically, if go back to "Play With Fire", he had a bigger share of the cake in that one than he got from its A-side "The Last Time" that was officially credited to him!! Also, it is interesting the biggest share he ever had from those days was from an instrumental in which he did next to nothing ("2120 sth Michican Avanue") - half of its credits!!!

It looks like the motive in sharing the cake didn't go exactly according to contribution done in the given tune, but more like compensating something in the bigger picture.

But I know you lnow all about this, with sssoul, because it was you who initially brought this issue on the table: [www.iorr.org] (a great thread from 2007 - check those who are interested...)

- Doxa



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 2015-08-16 12:58 by Doxa.