The second installment of the archival series, presented for your enjoyment is a 1994 conversation with Mike Rutherford of Genesis and Mike & The Mechanics. What stands out after all these years is how much Mike personified the quintessential English gentleman: friendly yet dignified, open yet reserved.
If you ask your average person on the
street if they’ve heard of Mike Rutherford, you’re more than apt to receive a
blank look. Ask instead if they’ve heard of Mike & The Mechanics, chances
are you’ll score a bullseye. Considering that Mike Rutherford’s musical career
stretches back some twenty years prior to the Mechanics’ debut release in 1985,
this may seem somewhat strange, especially given the nature of Rutherford’s role
in popular music. As bassist/guitarist and songwriter with Genesis, Mike
Rutherford has steadily contributed a wealth of great songs over the years,
from the so-called art rock of Genesis’ early days to the streamlined,
pop-oriented group they’ve evolved into today. Additionally, Genesis has proven
to be the only successful example of a band that can exist along with the solo
careers of its individual members. After the band broke the American market in
1978 with And Then There Were Three, it was decided the time was right
to embark upon solo projects.
Rutherford released two solo albums
during the period 1979-1982, neither of which made any noticeable impact upon
the public. It wasn’t until 1985, when he decided to present his next effort as
more of a group project, that his career outside Genesis bore special interest.
Mike & The Mechanics’ eponymous debut album yielded two top ten singles,
“Silent Running” and “All I Need is a Miracle,” which provided Rutherford with
the confidence to treat this project seriously. Two more albums followed, Living
Years (1988) and Word of Mouth (1991), each one serving to build
upon the previous album’s strengths, collectively securing a position in the
current musical environment, far removed from Genesis. With the band’s newest
release, Beggar On A Beach Of Gold, Rutherford now has two solid,
distinct musical careers, each capable of co-existing with and complementing
the other. A recent sit-down with Rutherford at his Manhattan record company’s
office provided a wealth of information about the Mechanics, Genesis, and the
inner workings of an artist who’s more than happy with his lot in life.
Roy Abrams: How would you characterize the Mechanics’
formative days?
Mike Rutherford: We kind of got lucky, I think. I did a couple
of solo albums; they were okay, but I thought, I’m a songwriter, I want the
best voices to sing my songs. At that stage, the solo album “tag” was not
great. It was a bit like, “Oh God, another solo album from someone in a
well-known band.” It almost put people off. So I thought, well, I’ll represent
it as a band. I wrote the songs, first of all, then looked for the singers.
Paul Carrack (Nick Lowe, Ace, Squeeze) came down. We didn’t know what we had,
really. We had eight songs and (then) the album was out. We were amazed by the
success.
RA: As a non-singing songwriter, what are the
obstacles you face when writing for another voice?
MR: It’s a good
question, because it’s always a problem, not being a singer. It’s been the bane
of my life, ‘cause it’s so easy to sing your own songs! It’s so much harder to
work through another voice. I’ve got two really good, intuitive singers (in
both Pauls); they can take a melody and they’re not frightened to work with it,
move it around a bit and humanize it. I don’t write for a specific voice, but
when I’m doing it, I have an idea that this’ll be great for one Paul; this’ll
be great for the other Paul. You’re not always right, but you often are. When
happens is, later on, when the songs are kind of up and running, they both come
down to my house; I’ve got a studio there. They’ll sing a bit of each──a verse
and a chorus──and you can tell. It’s not me that decides, really, the voices
decide. They could both sing the whole album fine, but one will get behind the
emotion of some of the songs better than the other.
RA: With the Mechanics, you’ve been co-writing with
producer Chris Neil and B. A. Robertson and I see Paul Carrack’s name on a
couple of tracks on the new album. What's the nature of the collaboration compared
with the way Genesis works?
MR: It’s different (with the Mechanics) because most
of the time, I start off at my house, get something going, then the others come
down, we mess around … actually, it isn’t that different; it’s just different
people! It’s like if you have a conversation with two people, it’ll take you
one way; two other people will take you another way.
RA: Your fellow Mechanics seems to have had a degree
of influence upon your musical personality.
MR: The two Pauls have got a real R&B background;
they’ve come up through that area, and I think that rubs off on me. I’m
naturally a bit English in the way I write and in the way I do things. They
seem to loosen me up, which is good.
RA: If memory serves me, you were heavily influenced
by R&B yourself in Genesis’ early days.
MR: Yeah, although Peter (Gabriel) probably more than
me. I was very much into Tamla-Motown, although when I started writing songs
with Genesis, it seemed to be millions of miles away from Tamla. Those
influences are always in you; once they’re in there, they’re in there. I think
the Tamla-Motown period had some of the best songwriting that’s ever been.
RA: Are you consciously aware of any type of flow of
ideas from the Mechanics to Genesis, and vice versa?
MR: No, I’m not, but it’s quite likely there. So much
of what happens at this stage of your career, your musical life, is
subconscious. Certain things must carry over a bit.
RA: “The Living Years” was written after losing your
father; as one of the most eloquent statements about loss, was the writing and
recording of the song at all cathartic for you?
MR: It didn’t really help. It was painful. I wrote it
with B.A. Robertson; he lost his father, too. It was upsetting for us to do. We
had a few conversations about it, saying, “Look, is this right?” You’re in a
difficult area there. We were worried that it would come out a bit schmaltzy …
a little bit sweet and sort of awkward. B.A. and I said, “We’ll do it, and if
it doesn’t feel good, we’ll scrap it.” The recording of it was very upsetting.
We had to stop a few times, come back the next day. It didn’t really heal
anything, but it was good to do, because it’s had this amazing effect on other
people. To write a song that everyone likes is great, a bit of happiness, a bit
of joy, but to have a song that actually changes people’s lives … that’s sort
of incredible, really. It if only happens once in your career, it’s amazing.
RA: Many songwriters have their own method of doing
things, as well as a distinct wellspring of inspiration. How about you?
MR: There isn’t. I don’t know where anything comes
from. I do find that when it comes to writing, the less you think about it, the
better. The worst thing to do in songwriting is to deliberately try, you know
what I mean? There are two parts to writing, I feel. There’s a bit where
something is formed, the original idea for a song or a section. That, for me,
is the best moment of the whole process. After that is what I call the slog
work, where I try to put it into form. That, to me, is less creative, and if
I’m having a bad day, if nothing new is coming, I’ll move to something that’s
up and running already, and try and develop that instead. It takes a bit of
work … but the creative bit, when (the idea) first appears … I don’t ask!
RA: Your guitar playing has evolved greatly over the
years. After (Genesis guitarist) Steve Hackett left, how long did it take for
you to get comfortable in the lead guitarist’s role?
MR: It took a good few years to really settle with me.
I had to sit and figure out what I could do properly.
RA: The pressure on you during the making of And
Then There Were Three (recorded just after Hackett’s departure) must have
been pretty intense.
MR: Well, change is good. I didn’t look for the change
when Steve left, but I believe that if you’re in a band, the more you can
change, the better.
RA: As long as we’re on the subject of Genesis, any
thoughts on Steve Hackett?
MR: I think he’s a very strong, unique player. I’m kind
of surprised he left, but I understood it. His time was unfortunate. He left to
do solo stuff, literally about a couple of years before we all thought the time
was right. A band has to get to a certain level before it can take a couple of
years off. I think he’s very original, Steve. But I think he’s a band player. I
know he’s fronted other bands, but I think he would excel in a band situation
where he wasn’t carrying the whole thing.
RA: 1977’s The Geese and The Ghost, from
original Genesis guitarist Anthony Phillips, was almost a duo effort in that
you performed on it, and most of the songs were co-written by you. (Phil
Collins also appears on a couple of tracks.) Fans of the “early Genesis” sound
view this record as a rare gem. Any plans to record with him again?
MR: Yeah, I might! I spoke to him about ten days ago.
He’s godfather to my daughter. You never know!
RA: Do you keep in touch with any of the other
ex-members of Genesis?
MR: Funnily enough, it’s actually quite an interesting
time because I saw Pete (Gabriel) about ten days ago. I had a long meeting with
him and Tony (Banks). We’ve been asked for years to do a rarities album, all
these B-sides. We’ve always avoided it because they always get promoted as “The
New Album,” and they’re not. We’re thinking of doing a boxed set thing, in
three parts. The first part (would be) with Peter; unreleased live stuff. No
one’s ever heard Peter sing “Supper’s Ready” live, I don’t think. We found some
demos from the first album, sons that have never been heard by people. I think
people who like Genesis would be interested in Pete’s singing. Good vocals,
actually, rubbish backing harmonies from the rest of us──awful! We’ve talked
about it, and I think we’re gonna finally put this together.
RA: Recording that first album must have been an
extraordinary experience for a bunch of guys who were 15, 16, 17 years old at
the time.
MR: It was great! You’re right, ‘cause in this day,
anyone can go into a studio and make a couple of tracks. In those days, we were
given a chance by Jonathan King, who was our producer on the first album, to
make a record. That was a very important thing for us because although the
record wasn’t very good, we saw what it was all about. To get a bunch of guys
together at that age to make an album was unusual, and I think that really
helped us.
RA: Phil Collins has gone on record about his belief
that Tony Banks has become the single most important member of Genesis due to
the fact that it’s his musical contribution to the group that keeps Genesis a
unique entity apart from his solo career and yours. What are your thoughts on
this?
MR: Well, there’s a lot in that. If you think about
it, the way we work now, most of the time, when we go into the studio, Phil is
singing, Tony’s playing keyboards, and I’m playing guitar, so an awful lot of
the chord structures come from Tony. I think (Phil’s statement) is very true;
he’s a very big part of Genesis.
RA: How have you been able to keep Genesis going in
the light of the solo careers?
MR: We get on great, for a start. (But) we’re not the
kind of band who carries on just because we get on great. When we go in to
write a new album, it’s risky, the way we do it. We don’t take any songs in, we
just go in and jam, and cross your fingers, on the spot, it’s always happened.
And that inspires you to stay with it. With the solo stuff, if you have three
guys in a band, you’ve got to accept that you’re gonna have certain levels of
success. I mean, Phil’s had huge success, I’ve been in the middle, and Tony
hasn’t done quite so well. No one begrudges anyone anything. I think if we were
a lot younger, we’d have found it harder to take. When you’re young, you’re
very sort of big-headed and you can’t see the big picture. I also think that
because we’re not together all the time, that helps.
RA: How do you view the current musical environment?
MR: I like a lot of the American stuff. I like
Nirvana, I like Pearl Jam, Hootie and the Blowfish. England, I would probably
say, is less creative at the moment.
RA: What’s in the cards for Mike & The Mechanics
in 1995?
MR: 1995 is the Mechanics’ year. Phil’s on tour until
the summer and the Mechanics didn’t tour for the last album because it
(conflicted with) the Genesis album. I think I’m gonna put the album out and
get a feel as to what kind of a tour we’ll do.
RA: Any parting advice for the songwriter/musician?
MR: Be patient and don’t take short cuts.
RA: Did you ever foresee making a living from music,
let alone a lifetime career?
MR: That’s the big difference between musicians
starting now and our day. There was no idea that you could make any sort of
living out of this. Money was not part of the equation. Now, people see that
you can make money in this business, and I feel that it draws people in for the
wrong reasons. In our day, all the bands were going around just having fun. Any
new area of art or whatever you want to call it, when it starts it will be
small and quite wild and fun; then it becomes bigger and it becomes a business
and it’s developed into that. It’s a fact and you can’t change that. But it’s
sad. I’m very glad I started when I did. In our day, there was one band the
sounded like The Who, one band that sounded like Genesis, one band that sounded
like The Kinks. There weren’t that many bands.
RA: You were trailblazing …
MR: Hopefully, yeah. But it’s interesting. Here we are, we’re still enjoying ourselves and──touch wood──doing well. It’s strange because it was meant to be music for young people. That was always the feeling, wasn’t it?
© Roy Abrams 2021
Originally published in The Island-Ear, March 13-26, 1995 issue
No comments:
Post a Comment