The world described in 4 Way Street: The Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young Reader, edited by Dave Zimmer (Da Capo Press; $17.95), although of the last third of the 20th century, is seemingly as far removed from today as is the 19th century. Listen to David Crosby in 1970, talking with Ben Fong-Torres for a Rolling Stone interview, on the subject of ticket prices for CSNY: “the last time that I checked on it. . . our top scaling was $6.50. If it is $7.50, I’m sorry it is, ’cause I think it’s outrageous.” That’s like tales of cigarettes for 15 cents a pack and gas for 30 cents a gallon (although the comparative multiplier for concert tickets for an act that has the magnitude that CSNY did then is much greater today).
This is a world where Stephen Stills auditions for becoming one of the Monkees and doesn’t get the gig because he is dentally challenged. He’s asked for a recommendation. He suggests Peter Torkelson. Tork gets the job. Tork gets rich. Stills joins Buffalo Springfield. Tork buys a Laurel Canyon estate. The Monkees end. Tork goes broke. Stills buys the estate.
A world of Joni Mitchell, John Sebastian, Clapton, Ringo, Hendrix, Garcia—when they were at their peak of vitality (and in the case of the last two, still vital)—dropping by to jam.
It’s a world where Crosby gets booted from the Byrds because the ranted about the Warren Commission (!) during the band’s set at Monterey.
A world wherein David Geffen, then a CSNY manager and not yet a bazillionaire, would tell New Musical Express in 1972, “An artist shouldn’t work too much, because the more you’re on the road the less you’re able to be in touch with yourself. We’re more interested in an artist remaining creative than in generating huge fortunes of money.”
A world when CSNY was the American alternative to Blind Faith (i.e., they were the American originals despite the fact that N was from England and Y from Canada; the other group contained a bunch of money-grubbing ponces).
And there is more of this. Much more in the 31 pieces that Zimmer has collected from venues ranging from Creem to Crawdaddy, from Hit Parader to People. There is a patina covering these texts, a certain richness to the coverage, as though they are papers found in an archeological excavation of a temple of yore.
A fundamental sense that grows by going through the pieces is that Crosby, Stills, Nash, and Young were musicians first and foremost, people who were more concerned with and interested in working their craft with consistency, dedication and intensity so that the craft would be elevated to artistry. So far as they were concerned, it wasn’t about personality—although because journalism often relies on controversy to sell the papers, what is often known about the four is that the four-way street was one of repeated head-on collisions—but about performance. The past tense is used here because (1) this is a retrospective collection and (2) it is not clear whether that remains the case for all four of the musicians, as except for Young, the others have essentially dropped from the macro view of the scene. But reading about the band and the individuals who constitute it is a lesson of not only what was, but a cautionary tale for those who can create what could be.
It wasn’t all roses und sunshine in the CSNY camp, at least according to the Neil Young biography “Shakey” by Jimmy McDonough. They definitely had the hippie esthetic and ideals when they recorded their debut (without Y), but that really only lasted until they saw how much money could be made. In the 70’s CS&N (and rarely Y) pretty much became the embodiment of everything that they railed against during the 60’s, as they had lost their focus and were in it mostly for the money……for the drugs and booze and whores too, but mostly the money. By 1974 they were essentially a nostalgia act, and Stills and Crosby were serious addicts. Probably the most interesting tidbit of info from the book was how much CS&N bowed to whatever Neil wanted. If he was going to work with them, it would be on his terms and his terms alone, and noone every really questioned it. If they did Neil would say “fuck it” and walk out.
So for all of the information out there that paints them like 1 big happy family, it’s interesting to hear the real story…..at least the story from Neil’s perspective.
Although I admittedly took the angle of it being a different day, I should note that there is not the wearing of rose-colored granny glasses from Haight Street chronicled in the book. But I think the four are/were more keenly aware of the music qua music that they were making–or trying to make–than other bands (then or now) tend to be, at least in public.
And as for the importance of Y to the others, the last piece in the book, an interview with C that was conducted by Ian D’Giff and posted on musictoday.com in March ’02, C answers the question “Let’s bring it back to CSNY. Any future plans after the tour?” by saying, in part, “And, of course, a lot of it is largely up to Neil. CSNY is largely up to Neil. Neil, in popular terms, in terms of his draw, is bigger by himself than the three of us are. And we know that.”
It’s one big disfunctional family. But when they function. . .
I think you are correct when you say “There is a patina covering these texts, a certain richness to the coverage, as though they are papers found in an archeological excavation of a temple of yore.” because things are so very different today. But I was only trying to point out that the “legend” of CSNY as a touring act was for the most part significantly different from reality. The tales of CSNY tours in the early 70’s, as told in “Shakey”, indicate that Stills’ and Crosby’s excesses seriously detracted from the quality of the band’s performances, some of which were downright embarassing. I think this is alot of the reason that Neil wanted very little to do with them most of the time. So although they were (and still are to some degree) able to create magic together at times, band tensions and drug use made the magic moments fewer and far between as the 70’s wore on.
Anyone here that total shit late 80s record CSNY did? Ugh.
Don’t forget the piece of shit late 90’s record that CSNY did as well.
Having given a fresh listen to both “Looking Forward” and “American Dream,” despite the previous two comments, I would suggest that anyone–especially those who number themselves as Y fans–check them out. I think that they’ll find themselves to be appreciatively surprised.
I have too take some exception with the notion that Blind Faith was a group of “moey-grubbing ponces”. The plain fact of the matter is that while the opportunity to make jillions was there Clapton and his compadres turned their back on it.
Meanwhile if one were to review their CSNY history they would find that wealth and all its myriad pleasures and pitfalls were enjoyed too the utmost by CSNY.
Clapton and Winwood have never been driven by the desire to accumulate vast wealth in my opinion but simply happen too be very good at what they do to the extent that it affords them the opportunity to make an exceedingly good living from it.
I have too take some exception with the notion that Blind Faith was a group of “moey-grubbing ponces”. The plain fact of the matter is that while the opportunity to make jillions was there Clapton and his compadres turned their back on it.
Meanwhile if one were to review their CSNY history they would find that wealth and all its myriad pleasures and pitfalls were enjoyed too the utmost by CSNY.
Clapton and Winwood have never been driven by the desire to accumulate vast wealth in my opinion but simply happen too be very good at what they do to the extent that it affords them the opportunity to make an exceedingly good living from it.