Shoes Can Change Your Life

ShoesWhat follows is the first in a series of essays we’re calling “Music That’s Changed My Life: GLONO Readers’ Real-Life Experiences.” These are stories that prove the whole concept of Glorious Noise: that rock and roll can indeed change your life. If you would like to share your tales of music’s effect on your world, get in touch with us…

Why I Love Shoes: A Rumination

I have been a fan of the Illinois band Shoes for going on twenty-five years. That seems like a long time, I know, but Shoes have been one of those bands that I forget about and periodically rediscover, as I am rediscovering them now.


I first encountered Shoes in the Fall of 1979. I was twelve. My 28-year-old brother, who was out of school, working, and had enough disposable income to purchase songs he just heard on the radio and liked, bought Present Tense, Shoes? promising major-label debut. He told me he thought they sounded like The Beatles. He had been tutoring me in the Beatles for a couple of years at that point; I could sing every word of every song on Rubber Soul by the time I was ten, and my twelfth birthday present was a trip to see Beatlemania Live. Given the fact that the popular music scene was still reeling from disco and featured bands like Journey and REO Speedwagon, immersing oneself in the sixties seemed the smartest thing to do.

I remember sitting on his bed in his apartment, where first he played The Beatles’ ?The Night Before.? The second song he played was ?Tomorrow Night,? and I made the incredibly boneheaded comment, ?anyone can sound like the Beatles if they cover the same songs.? Of course it wasn?t the same song at all, and yet I think in my naﶥté ‰ identified an undercurrent in their work which has continued to intrigue me and exert the magnetic pull responsible for my periodic rediscoveries.

Listened to as tribute, Shoes identify a specific element in mid-60?s pop which appeals to both my sense of melody and my sense of fun. One can hear the sensibilities of The Hollies, The Byrds, and specifically Revolver/Rubber Soul era Beatles under many songs. To me, the tribute is clearly distinct from what I consider directly derivative.

Derivative music reproduces without reconsidering, often note for note, without acknowledging the debt. Vanilla Ice?s hateful theft of the fabulous riff from the Bowie/Queen song ?Under Pressure,? claiming that he?s not because there?s a stray sixteenth note in there somewhere, is perhaps the most egregious example, but I?d also include (somewhat more controversially) the use of the bass line from ?Taxman? in The Jam?s ?Start??primarily because, in his younger days, Paul Weller was so snotty about the idea that he had been influenced by anyone. ?How can I be a fucking revivalist when I?m only nineteen years old?? he is reputed to have said. I like The Jam, but you have to know where your debts are.

It is true that The Beatles experienced one of their periodic resurgences in the late 70?s. The appalling (but kitschy) Robert Stigwood film of Sergeant Pepper?s Lonely Hearts Club Band, starring Peter Frampton and the Bee Gees, is a testament to that, a testament not unlike the greasy hamburger sandwich replacing the gazebo in the town square which is a central motif of the film. The aforementioned Beatlemania is another.

No, Shoes provided a different kind of tribute altogether, capturing the spirit of a movement in a new way, like William Butler Yeats recreating Romanticism fifty years after the fact. And they did more than that, creating a distinctive sound (punctuated by many sly sexual innuendoes) at the same time. Uncannily like and not like at the same time.

It?s funny, but given their structural role in my identity, I never knew much about the band at all, really. I do know that brothers John and Jeff Murphy formed the band in the early 70?s with their childhood friend Gary Klebe; when Klebe went to study in France, the Murphys made Un dans Versailles/One in Versailles as a gift to him. Apocryphally, Klebe was so bowled over he gave up any idea of having a grownup job and signed on for the ride.

Drummer Skip Meyer came aboard for 1976-77?s Black Vinyl Shoes. This album, somewhat legendary in DIY circles, was made in Jeff Murphy?s living room on a 4-track recorder, and contains all the lo-fi pops and buzzes recreated so painstakingly by more recent practitioners such as Dayton?s Guided by Voices. My own copy of Black Vinyl Shoes is scratched beyond repair, so I?m not entirely sure how it once sounded, but now, loved for a quarter of a century, the vocals feel as if they are coming from another dimension, while the guitars strike straight for the gut. Strange metaphors, to be sure, but I think they address the combination of ghostly and gutsy, of numinous and visceral, that?s at the heart of Shoes? charm.

Now might be as good a time as any to address my major complaint about Shoes, however. I?m not quite sure how to phrase this, and though it struck me at the time, it?s only recently I?ve been able to put into words the damage they may have done to me as a young woman. Women in many of Shoes? early songs embody every misogynistic archetype inherited from the medieval toolchest: distant goddesses, virginal and inaccessible, or rock-bottom bitches, cold and cruel. And the songs are primarily about the women and what they?ve done wrong, and only secondarily about the persona singing the song. (Take Jeff Murphy?s passive-aggressive ?Every Girl,? in which the thought that the narrator of the song himself might be at least partly responsible for repeated romantic failures is not even considered, or John Murphy?s ?Cruel You,? in which the narrator regrets that even pulling a gun on his beloved has failed to bring her to heel. Freudian indeed.) Because of this early indoctrination, I expected relationships to be vexed, difficult, resisted, or regretted. In fact, they were mostly pretty pleasant experiences, compared to what I?d been prepared for.

Shoes? brief flirtation with major label recording?and major-league success?was the period during which I encountered them, and during which I wrote them my first, barely literate, fan letter?the first (and one of very few) I ever wrote. I received a hand-written response from a friend of the band on shoe-themed stationery, pretty heady business for a quiet kid in a small town. (A recent scan of boxes of old crap failed to turn up said letter, but I found an alarming amount of other Shoes-themed material, including a valentine from 1983; not one, but two, fan club membership cards; and my own writing, ennobled today by the euphemistic term fan-fic, but which I would never have dreamed of showing to another soul.)

The album, as I?ve said, was Present Tense, and the singles ?Tomorrow Night? and ?Too Late? were minor radio hits. (I recently saw ?Too Late? on VH1 Classics, reminding myself just how gorgeous they were to me, and reducing me instantaneously to preteen status.) It looked, then, as if they were poised to ascend the heights. Many excellent tracks besides the singles grace the album; my personal favorite is ?In My Arms Again,? though I prefer the grittier and gutsier live version on the EP Shoes on Ice. Perhaps it was the pressure of performing live, perhaps it was late in the evening, but Shoes? characteristic sweet melodies are almost entirely stripped from this version, leaving Jeff Murphy?s sexy growl, particularly in the all too short last part, where a repeated verse becomes the framework for a buildup in intensity and tension. It?s the moment when I most regret not having (yet) seen them live.

1981?s Tongue Twister had fewer gems, I think, but a more consistent production style. ?Your Imagination? (one of Shoes? few triple-credited songs) is just terrific, as are ?She Satisfies,? ?Girls of Today,? and ?Hate to Run.? Physically, it was a beautiful record, with a stylized cover, though it never spoke to me quite the way Present Tense had done. It could be because, as I got older, I became more aware of those gender implications mentioned above; as a budding feminist I bristled at the service-industry tone of ?She Satisfies? (?That was satisfactory,? I hear Gary Klebe say in my head) even as I completely loved the structure of the music.

I felt similarly disconnected from Boomerang, which I think is Shoes least successful total album. They seemed to be turning into a singles band, where the great songs were really great, and the so-so songs genuinely so-so. (As a fan, I can only identify two or three songs in the whole catalog which annoy me so much I skip over them.) There?s a strange disjunction in Jeff Murphy?s ?Bound to Be a Reason?; though couched as a romantic (or perhaps merely brotherly) renunciation, the music itself features Murphy?s oh-so-effective growl (it always makes me melt, anyway), and the throbbing melody all but dares the subject of the song to sleep with someone else. I?m also a big fan of ?The Tube?: thematically similar to and roughly contemporaneous with Black Flag?s ?TV Party,? but in my opinion smarter, because it depends less upon a loutish persona. One can only imagine what Klebe might have come up with in today?s cable-saturated environment. Unfortunately, songs like ?Tested Charms? fail to escape the ?la belle dame sans merci? vibe of the early work.

I missed Silhouette when it came out, but caught up with it much later. By that time, I was ready to forgive the somewhat alarming foray?full force, guns blazing?into synth-pop. I always thought Shoes were strongest when they trusted their own ears, and the attempt to capture the zeitgeist of the mid-80’s didn’t seem to quite make sense to me. But it is, decidedly, a Shoes album, and some of the songs are really catchy, particularly John Murphy’s ?Twist and Bend It,? and Jeff Murphy’s ?It’s Only You,? which sound like Shoes on coke. The reinvention of ?When Push Comes to Shove? on the live album Fret Buzz is gloriously refreshing, suggesting that many of the songs on Silhouette might be ripe for such a rediscovery. Despite the synthesized guitars (and drums, and even?gasp!?vocals), Shoes are indeed under there, somewhere, as it turns out. A young friend of mine, recently confessing his fascination with retro-80?s synth-pop, was delighted at the copy of Silhouette I passed along to him.

I caught 1989?s Stolen Wishes much closer to its release. Shoes returned burdened by some really unfortunate 80?s haircuts (though those of us who had poodle perms in the mid-80?s really cannot throw stones). In some ways, Shoes really should have been the first nerdcore band?I mean, cute as they were, they didn?t look like rock stars, they looked like guys from your algebra class, a la Weezer. But we have to keep time in mind too, here: even in 1989, nerdcore wouldn?t be an option for several years. Apparently, however, they had met a nicer class of women, which all true Shoes fans were pleased about (we were always rooting for them, after all), and which helped me personally to reconnect to the band. Also, ten years after my first introduction to them, I was able to shake the teeny-bopper approach and listen to the music from a fundamentally different perspective.

Musically and thematically, I think Stolen Wishes is probably my favorite Shoes album, connecting for me on almost every song. They’re both raunchier and goofier than any of the other records (including, for example, the only explicit reference I’ve ever discovered to the female orgasm, in John Murphy?s ?Feel the Way that I Do?). I love the predatory sexuality of Gary Klebe?s ?Can’t Go Wrong??that sort of sexual assurance is missing, I think, from Shoes? earlier work, and provides an essentially positive view of relationships?even if they are just about sex. Similarly, the barely veiled metaphor in Klebe?s ?Your Devotion? always makes me smile. And the pure mid-60?s pop riff of Jeff Murphy?s ?Love Does? is graced by the emotions the song itself expresses, and John Murphy?s ?Never Had It Better? is pop genius, pure and simple. I revel in the weird simile of ?Love is Like a Bullet??second only to 20/20?s ?Jet Lag? as a bizarre metaphor for emotional experience.

I went hunting for Stolen Wishes primarily on the basis of hearing several songs covered on the terrific tribute compilation Shoe Fetish, released in 2001. (Finding Stolen Wishes in a box of old tapes, I realized that I had almost forgotten about this album; recently, it?s been almost all I listen to.) The real discoveries on Shoe Fetish are the retellings of Shoes? songs?not merely the recreations. Given the issues I have with the band, I guess it?s not surprising that my favorites are the female singers of Big Hello doing ?Tomorrow Night,? the AstroPuppees doing ?The Tube,? and The Masticators doing ?Your Imagination??Shoes have always been such a boys? band that the female energy is refreshing, and these versions seem a bit edgier than some of the safer songs on the CD.

One of the things I always really liked about the band is their absolute equity. The balance of singers and songwriters on any given Shoes album is always roughly equal: 1/3 Gary Klebe, 1/3 Jeff Murphy, and 1/3 John Murphy. Like The Beatles, they divvy up singing based on who wrote the song, and occasionally there are triple-authored pieces like ?Girls of Today,? in which each take a part, or ?Three Times,? which is really a triptych of songs segueing smoothly into each other. This equity is quite refreshing. One doesn?t get the sense that one sometimes does from XTC, one of my other favorite bands, that Andy Partridge reluctantly allows Colin Moulding his three songs per album?no, here the collaborative process seems quite different. I?m not sure how else one would negotiate the complicated process of having three gifted songwriters in one band. Sometimes I wish they wouldn?t, when I?m having a Gary day or a Jeff day or a John day, but mostly it works, like an idealized polygamy, engaging in turn with different consciousnesses, different experiences.

Recently, as part of my rediscovery, I?ve been filling holes in my own catalog, and so happened to catch up with 1994?s Propeller and 1995?s Fret Buzz at the same time. Some critics have suggested that the band has remained basically consistent throughout their long career; I can?t see it that way. Propeller shows the band stretching their skills in some unusual directions, from the moody cello of ?In My Mind? to the psychedelic ?Treading Water? and the frankly obscene (but, you know, in that good way) ?Animal Attraction.? The divergence, though, seems like a good idea to me and suggests that this band simply keeps developing and getting better as they allow themselves to wander out of their traditional milieu. Even the heartbreak songs here (a Shoes? staple, always) reveal a maturity and intelligence developed over years. For example, the ache at the bottom of songs like Klebe?s ?The Last of You? is thematically similar, but miles away from his ?Not Me? off Black Vinyl Shoes.

Like Shoes on Ice, the live Fret Buzz features stripped-down and much edgier versions of the songs I know from studio production. It features some of my favorite tracks from both Silhouette and Propeller?particularly an almost primal version of the fairly hard (by Shoes’ standards) ?Tore a Hole? shifting even the melody line in its reinterpretation. And the only unreleased track, Klebe?s ?In Harm?s Way,? drips with existential angst.

We haven?t heard much from Shoes in a while, though they still play out now and again (most recently at the International Pop Overthrow Festival in Chicago this spring). But in a recent correspondence, Jeff Murphy assured me that ?Shoes never goes away, we just go in and out of music-making phases.? (Jeff himself is working on a solo disc this year.) Though I’m still missing the career-spanning compilation As Is, I don?t expect to have my opinion changed too much. Shoes are who they are, and I wouldn?t have it any other way.

Shoes hit me at that really special time, when I was defining who I was and what I liked, and they are a crucial part of who I understand myself to be. With innocence and charm, as well as kickass guitars, they were the first band who really belonged to me. Like rereading your first love letters, rediscovering Shoes periodically has been both bittersweet and grounding for me.

14 thoughts on “Shoes Can Change Your Life”

  1. Great piece. I love this band and could never figure out why they didn’t achieve more mainstream success in the early 80’s. I also came on board with “Present Tense,” which is a nearly flawless example of turn of the 80’s power pop. Well done, Mary.

    Oh, and I think Paul was just grouchy when he made that “revivalist” crack, as you might be too if everyone kept accusing you of raiding the Who/Kinks/Beatles song books. Jam covered a couple of Beatles tunes, but I’m not sure how many of those are available. I’ll have to get out my box set.

  2. What! someone covered And Your Bird Can Sing!?! Why did I not know this, it’s my favourite Beatles song of all time! Thanks muchly for the heads up!

  3. I have disected many of Shoes albums myself being an engineer and musician. Most of them are produced as well as the best of them. I found them on MTV in ’81 and age 14, and have been hooked like most. I often correnspond with Jeff Murphy via email, seems like a real nice guy, down to earth. I have covered Shoes songs as well. I am looking for those Elecktra videos and the self produced “In Her Shadow” video; if anyone has a clue…send info along please.

  4. Yep, had the pleasure of working with Jeff about 14 years ago on a couple of tunes. Super nice, down-to-earth guy and he knows his shit, excellent producer/engineer. My drums have never sounded as good as when he was spinning the dials…

  5. Great article! Shoes are one of my all time favorite bands. It’s reassuring to read that Shoes never go away. I’ll be one of the first to buy a new CD whenever they choose to release one.

  6. I love Shoes too, one of my all time fav bands. I first saw them at ChicagoFest at Navy Pier, must have been late 70s. They blew me away. I too thought they were very reminiscent of an early Beatles and am also surprised they never got more popular. I have the Black Velvet Shoes and Present Tense albums, very prized posessions in my catalogue.

    I’m glad to read they are still around from time to time, I’ll have to relive some of my youth and check them out again.

    The Chicago area little-known groups I’ve also “discovered” and followed over the last 25 or so years like Shoes and Venessa Davis and the Dooley Brothers also have been (and still are) such an important part of my roots.

  7. This was so great to read because I had the same experience! I grew up in Chicago-land and my big brother was totally into Shoes and used to see them live and stuff. I was just a little girl and totally dug listening to his records. Today I have my own copies of the records, and of course appreciate/understand it a lot more than when I was 8! You have to get ‘As/Is’ – it’s amazing.

  8. Thanks for writing a piece about The Shoes.Since buying “Present Tense” and “Black Vinyl Shoes” in ’79 I have been unable to trace any information about this band.As back then I thought that I had stumbled across the missing link between The Beatles,Velvet Underground, and the future of rock music, I bought two extra copies of “Present Tense” as gifts for friends in a lonely attempt to promote interest in the group.Neither my friends, nor it would appear any outer circle, shared my enthusiasm for what was dismissed as a 60’s retro sound. The Shoes masterly use of teen-pop idiom as a template for their lush arrangements was delivered in a powerful style that I thought complimented their garage-punk neighbours. The chemistry had been tried before but rarely so skilfully and consistently accomplished. It has long been an enigma to me that the band didn’t achieve some cult underground following at least.(Well not in the U.K. they didn’t) Big Star,another great band of the time in this genre of music were similarly denied their due recognition, though their C.D’s are thankfully on current catalouge.

    Thanks again for an interesting study, and information by which I might start tracking down the elusive Shoes albums.

  9. Megan, here’s the lyrics to “Too Late”.

    Every time I see you

    Oh, I wish I could believe you

    Do you ever mean a thing you say?

    You lied, I tried to

    Overlook your careless way of love

    And when you called I never turned you down.

    Too late, too late

    Too late to see

    Too late to let you run away

    You’re never serious

    Oh no, you’re so impossible

    I never understand the games you play

    Was it me that changed you then

    Or was it someone older?

    Are you ever lonely now and then?

    Every time I see you

    Oh, I wish I didn’t need you

    Can you love or don’t you even care?

    Too late, too late

    Too late to see

    Too late to let you run away

    Oh, I should have known you’d slip away

  10. You can get CDs of all albums through the band’s website – BlackVinyl.com

    I was also into MTV very early – at 12 I discovered Shoes through the Present Tense videos. I haven’t see the videos in, gosh, at least 15 years but I can still picture them in my head…

    Found Present Tense at a used record shop in 1986, played it all the time – truly the only vinyl I owned that got any regular use with the onset of CDs. I was unaware of any other releases – I grew up in Florida and they got no radio play on any of the stations I listened to.

    In 2002, after playing the album again and being awestruck that I still loved it, I started searching the internet. That’s how I found their website. Black Vinyl Records is their own label and they have their entire catalog available for sale. I e-mailed with a few questions.

    Imagine my surprise when I found out the Jeff who was politely answering my e-mails admitted to being THE Jeff. Forget my 3 kids, my husband – I was corresponding with one of my first Rock crushes…. sigh… He’s so nice he even agreed to sign the Present Tense album cover that I sent with my order. (Gary and John signed it, too.)

    I bought all their CDs, loaded up the CD changer and introduced my then 2 year old to the magic that is Shoes. She still requests them and sings along to alot of the songs.

    I happened to go to their site last April (as I do every few weeks) and saw that they were performing live at the IPO festival that Mary mentioned. That they were playing that very night, in Chicago, and that I lived in Atlanta was only a minor hindrance.

    Told my hubby that his three day early birthday present to me was going to be a solo overnight trip to the Windy City. Within 3 hours I was on a plane. Fourteen hours after seeing th post on their site I saw them live for the first time ever. WOW!!

    Great voices, great music, I wish they could have played longer. Totally worth the effort to go see them!!!

    I was hoping they’d play the IPO again this year but they’re not on the bill. I will definitely look for another show – this time maybe I’ll have a little more notice though…

    Kara

Leave a Reply to Paul Cancel reply