Home » On pop music fame, families, fashion, and too much fame: the Bee Gees

Comments

On pop music fame, families, fashion, and too much fame: the Bee Gees — 32 Comments

  1. A unique thing about the Bee Gees mega fame of the late 1970s was that they had been around for well over a decade as a moderately successful act and then they were absolutely everywhere. It doesn’t usually go like that.

    The only other example I can think of would be Fleetwood Mac but the well known lineup had only been together a couple of years so it’s not the same. Plus they weren’t family they were romantically linked.

    Seems like being older and more experienced would help to deal with the intense fame but who knows.

  2. Griffin:

    Yes, the pendulum swung particularly hard for the Bee Gees, many times.

    But in the 60s they were actually not just moderately successful but very successful. They were huge celebrities in Britain and also in many parts of Europe, where they were mobbed regularly and performed to large screaming crowds (I’ve seen videos of both). That fame lasted about 3 years, and then there was a breakup and a few years (about five) in which their albums didn’t sell much, although they still put them out and I think a lot of their stuff from then was very good. Then they started to be successful with “Jive Talkin,” and then shortly after that “Saturday Night Fever” and their mega-mega fame, in which they were the hottest thing in music for a few years. Then it all crashed down.

    And then they wrote and produced some of the biggest hits and albums for other pop stars. But most people didn’t know the Bee Gees were behind that. I had zero idea about it. “Islands in the Stream” was one of the biggest country hits ever. But most people don’t know to this day that the Bee Gees wrote it. “Heartbreaker” was huge for Warwick. Likewise, most people don’t know the Bee Gees wrote it. I knew the song quite well and didn’t know it, for example.

    Then in the 80s and 90s and all the way to 2001 they had huge hits for themselves in Europe and around the world. Most of those huge hits were either not released in the US or radio DJs refused to play them, so unless an American was already a big Bee Gees fan and following their careers closely, we in this country were unaware of those songs. Most of those songs are really good, too, but in a different style. The song they sing in the video (at the beginning), “You Win Again,” is one of those songs:

    You Win Again” is a 1987 song written by Barry, Robin and Maurice Gibb and performed by the Bee Gees. Released as a single in late 1987, it marked the start of the group’s comeback [second or third comeback, I’d say]…

    “You Win Again” was a number one single in Britain, Ireland, Switzerland, Germany, Austria, Denmark and Norway, and reached the Top Ten in Italy, the Netherlands, Australia and Sweden. It also topped the Eurochart for four weeks.

    “You Win Again” entered the UK singles chart at no. 87 in the chart week dated 19 September. It took just four weeks to reach number one, where it remained for four week…When the single reached number one in the UK in mid-October 1987, it marked the Bee Gees as the first group to score a UK number one hit in each of three decades: the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s. It ranked four in the UK’s year-end singles sales chart.

    However, the single was far less successful in the US, peaking at no. 75 on Billboard’s Hot 100, perhaps down to a lingering association between the Bee Gees and the disco backlash that emerged in 1979, when the group (disco icons at the time) were at the height of their fame.

    I think their story and their career trajectory is unique in the annals of pop.

  3. neo,

    I was mostly referring to the US when I said they were moderately successful. They had four top tens in their career by 1975 with ‘How Can You Mend A Broken Heart’ going to #1 in 1971 while having nine other top 40 hits. I would call that moderately successful for a stretch of eight years of charting songs. Then starting with ‘Jive Talkin’ going to #1 they had eight #1’s in four years.

    As you mentioned the hits disappeared after 1979 they only had one more top ten in the US and that was ‘One’ in 1989 which I remember how so many in the music industry were so happy for them because they knew they were more than disco.

    For some reason the UK is (or was maybe) more loyal to aging stars than the US. Cliff Richard has had UK top ten hits in something like seven decades.

  4. I find I have so much to say I could write a book.

    neo:

    I was only reading you for a year or two, when I thought you ought to write a book. In a more perfect world you might have put one together about your political change and gotten it published.

    These days you could only do so if you were associated with a conservative publishing house or had a conservative talk show.

    But the Bee Gees? That might work.

  5. huxley:

    Yes, the Bee Gees would appeal to a wider audience. I’ve thought of it, although I doubt I will. For that matter, I’ve thought of a political change book. Never found the time, and it seems a bit late in the game now that the right has been so demonized. But maybe some day.

    If I write the Bee Gees book, though, I’ll have to use a different name because if it’s associated with the blog that would probably make it harder to publish it.

  6. Neo goes “I am so surprised myself by the experience that I keep trying to analyze it – their music, what the special attraction is for me – and I find I have so much to say I could write a book.

    “That’s – strange. But that’s the way it is….”

    I say write the book!

    My favorite part of “The Weekly Standard” was it’s reviews. In particular, everything written by Terry Teachout, which seemed to be almost exclusively about music. (I wasn’t a subscriber; just a B & N newsstand buyer say, once a month because it was near my allergist’s office.)

    WRITE THE BOOK!

    I still recall his reviews, such as a multi-volumn history of the song. And the fact that no society in history has gone without songs of love and celebrating pair bonding.

    Yet today, we’re trying to sustain our future by going without this psycho-socializing celebration and milestone valedictory.

    It’s madness to me. But am I just an old fogey to worry about it?

    So…WRITE THE BOOK!

  7. Griffin: “For some reason the UK is (or was maybe) more loyal to aging stars than the US. Cliff Richard has had UK top ten hits in something like seven decades.”

    Yes. That’s true. And true in the Netherlands, too.

  8. Griffin; TJ:

    Well, with the Bee Gees it wasn’t just the UK. It was most of Western Europe, as well as other parts of the world. In fact, the US was the only place that I know where the backlash against them happened, and it was mainly driven by DJs (from what I’ve read). They refused to play their stuff, and in those days that could make you or break you.

  9. So musical talent seems to run in families, and families are closely genetically related. Hmmmmm. Could it be that other traits tend to “run in families” as well? IQ, for example. Or would it be racist of me to notice that?

  10. Steve in PA:

    Of course IQ also “runs in families” and I don’t think there’s anyone who says there is not a genetic component of some sort. The question and the controversy is: how much? And how much is cultural? (The same question are relevant to musical talent, by the way.)

  11. As to musical talent, specifically singing, you have to be born with a singing voice, whether or not you ever use it, or train it. So of course it runs in families.

  12. Regarding what makes the Bee Gees unique (or whether they are unique); it seems to me it’s that they rode out all the ups and downs of fame and non-fame as a group (and I know they had periods where they were apart, sometimes intentionally).

    As Roy Nathanson points out, Neil Diamond isn’t a bad example of someone who had periods of fame in the spotlight and wrote successful songs for others during the down time. I think of Todd Rundgren as someone who had a lot of fame early in his career and produced a lot of big albums in between rebounds of personal fame. Michael Jackson and the Jackson Five are a family that had a many decades history of fame through multiple eras of pop, as did the Osmonds. Of course, Paul McCartney has been absurdly successful for a very long stretch, as well as penning hit songs for others. I don’t know if he’s specifically produced others’ albums, but his record company has. Stevie Wonder, Burt Bacharach, Paul Anka… Hall and Oates had some fame as a folk/rock act in the early ’70s then reinvented themselves as a Pop/Video act in the ’80s, and also did a lot of production for other acts between and since. Bruce Springsteen started copying Bob Dylan’s (Robert Zimmerman who started out copying Woody Guthrie) folk style and has gone through several conversions in his long career, mostly with the same band, but sometimes branching off on solo efforts, and also writing hits for others, including female vocal acts.

    It’s not that unheard of that a musician who is talented as a performer also has a knack for songwriting and producing other acts. I think the real difficulty is a group staying together over a long stretch of time, and that’s probably where the Bee Gees deserve the most credit.

    Regarding the Bee Gee’s more consistent fame in Europe; EuroPop is its own thing, and different from U.S. pop. (I guess we now also have K Pop.) Actor David Hasselhoff was huge in EuroPop (still is, for all I know), yet he would struggle to sell out a small coffee house in the U.S. ABBA is a good example of a EuroPop type band that also found quite a bit of success in the U.S. Had ABBA stayed together they would have likely stayed just as popular throughout Europe, regardless of the cycles of their fame in the U.S. It’s much more common to have stars “age in place” in EuroPop, transitioning to more easy listening/adult ballads as they get older, along with their fans.

    None of this is to take away from the Bee Gees’ talent; it’s safe to say they are in the upper 10% of pop acts, talent and consistency-wise (and one could fairly argue smaller percentages; upper 5%, 3%…) But the real greats often can do writing, singing, production, multiple instruments, performing… (McCartney, Wonder, Rundgren, Eno, Moby, Prince…) What seems to be especially hard is to endure in such a fickle market, and adapt and re-adapt to its frequent changes while still remaining cordial enough with one’s bandmates over a multi-decade, very intense, very personal work environment.

  13. The sad thing about the talented Cissy Houston: she was told on a vision before her daughter was born that she would bury her own child. It was revealed on the written program for Whitney’s funeral.

    The terrible burden it must have been, for a mother to carry such prophecy! I’m sure she couldn’t wish such thing upon anyone.

  14. Rufus T. Firefly:

    You’re certainly correct that their longevity as a group is unusual. And although there are a few singer- song writers who write hits for both themselves and others, that’s unusual for a very successful group to do, as well.

    But I wasn’t referring to those things. I was referring to their music itself and the sound they create, which many people describe as drug-like, addictive, soothing, happy-making, highly emotional, etc.. I’m definitely not referring to their falsetto period, which was comparitively short. I’m talking about the whole body of work through many genres.

  15. Cocaine Cowboys on Netflix. Bee Gees played at a family wedding. These days, would be possible to destroy BeeGees’ reputation because they (unknowingly?) played for major drug traffickers.

  16. neo,

    First, I agree with the other comment’ers; if you feel a Bee Gees book is in you, by all means write it! And put me down for buying a copy as soon as it’s released.

    Now, as someone who may be a bit more objective* when looking at the group, and their oeuvre; as I wrote, it’s fair to rank them in the rarified air of pop groups, but when I look at other, gifted musical artists what makes the Bee Gees unique, in my mind, is how well they endured all the ups and downs and twists of fate together, without any one of them really going off the deep end.

    But is it that unique for people with their level of talent to have hits that span decades and genres as well as writing and producing hits for others? Look at Paul McCartney! Not three guys. One. He didn’t do anything specifically disco during that era, but he did write some decent songs with that danceable beat. Some of the songs he’s gifted others have been the biggest hits those acts ever had. And he’s done at least one album side playing all the instruments (I believe he also engineered and produced that one.) McCartney has written at least one Musical and several, well received classical works.

    And Stevie Wonder! John Lennon would talk about how the four Beatles would work furiously performing, writing and recording (four guys) and Stevie Wonder kept matching them all on his own. But the Beatles couldn’t stay together long.

    How about Carole King? She wrote plenty of hits for plenty of voices, male and female. Look at this list! https://secondhandsongs.com/artist/2270/works
    The Everly Brothers! The Animals! The Monkees! And she was a talented performer in her own rite. Not a group. One woman.

    Gordon Sumner?! AKA, Sting. He’s kept on top of pop trends since the early 80s, having huge hits in all the decades since.

    I would guess you are likely not as familiar with the record production side of things, but the Bee Gees are nothing unique there. Quincy Jones has been a phenemenon! He wrote, arranged, produced an enormous number of huge pop hits and film soundtracks in a ridiculous number of genres. My guess is the Brothers Gibb would very much relate to this Jones quote: “We had the best jazz band on the planet, and yet we were literally starving. That’s when I discovered that there was music, and there was the music business. If I were to survive, I would have to learn the difference between the two.”

    And there are other musicians who were successful alone or in a group that also arranged, produced and wrote for other groups, often in different genres. I don’t want to go on about Todd Rundgren, (you can read about him here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Todd_Rundgren) but along with his own success over decades across many genres he produced a wide variety of huge albums for what were previously unknown acts. Rundgren felt he understood the formula for pop hits early in his career (and wrote several, very successful pop hits) so started experimenting and branching into other aspects of music to broaden his horizons. Prince, Brian Eno, Jeff Lynne (ELO), Alan Parsons … All performers who also wrote and produced. Pour yourself a tall drink and sit down and start reading the list of songs Berry Gordy wrote and/or produced for others!

    Again, these are some of the most talented people in the world, but it’s not that unusual that musicians with talent, like the Brother’s Gibb, find other outlets for their talents when the demand for live performances slows. That’s why I like that Quincy Jones quote. Jones was happy as a touring jazz musician and would have likely spent his career doing just that, if it was paying the bills. It wasn’t so he found other outlets for his music.

    Regarding the sound they create, that’s a different thing. You, me and others have written about the unique sound of other vocal harmony groups; especially family groups. The Bee Gees had that uniqueness. But if it’s sound(s), or spectrum of sound; Quincy Jones mastered jazz, latin, electronic, Motown, classical, movie/tv soundtrack, produced “Off the Wall” and “Thriller…” Or look at Carole King and all the different styles of groups and vocalists she wrote hits for.

    *I do not have a crush on Barry, for example.

  17. Rufus,

    If I were to rank the Bee Gees for all artists in the ROCK ERA I think they probably would be around 10-15 or so.

    My list:

    1. Elvis Presley
    2. The Beatles (if we include all the solo stuff they may be #1, McCartney could be top ten alone)
    3. The Rolling Stones
    4, Motown (hard to separate Miracles, Supremes, Gaye, etc since so many didn’t write own songs)
    5. Elton John
    6. Michael Jackson (including Jackson 5)
    7. Led Zeppelin
    8. Stevie Wonder
    9. Madonna

    Gets tough at this point and that is where the Bee Gees would come in.

  18. theduchessofkitty,

    Have you heard of surgeon Dr. Mary Neal? She was an agnostic (atheist?) he somehow lived through a severe series of injuries kayaking while being submerged underwater for 15(?) 20(?) minutes. Before being freed she had a life changing near death experience where she was told of one of her son’s impending deaths. He died about 10 years later. I heard her interviewed by Eric Metaxas where she told the story in her own words. Truly incredible, except I do believe her.

  19. Stevie Wonder started out as a Motown artist though he later branched out. And the Miracles’ singer Smokey Robinson wrote a number of memorable Motown hits not only for his own group but others including the Temptations, Marvelettes and Marvin Gaye. Most of the hits were written by the staff producers who were the key to the operation along with the fantastic studio band, the Funk Brothers.

  20. FOAF,

    Yeah, Stevie Wonder’s most critically loved work came in the 70s after he got more creative control from Motown so I think of him as separate. Seems hard to pick one artist from the Motown sound as ‘the’ best.

  21. Rufus T. Firefly:

    I actually have become much more aware in recent months of the production side of things.

    Also, the Bee Gees didnt just write hits for other people. They wrote many mega hits for them.

    But none of that is really what I’m talking about, which for me is their sound. It’s not just that family harmony thing, either, although they certainly have that and that appeals to me (Everlys, for example). They have something extra and different, an extra harmonic vibration of some sort to which some people are extra-sensitive. And I seem to be one of those people, it turns out. And so to me they are very different than all those other people and groups – many whose work I like a lot. But to me the Bee Gees are in a completely different category and are number 1.

    It’s strange, i know.

  22. Griffin,

    I’m not fond of ranking art. Not that I think it’s wrong, I just struggle with doing it.

    Unless the ranking is very specific, where facts can be compared. To do a ranking on what Neo seems to be impressed with regarding the Bee Gees this might possibly work:

    A list of songwriter(s) and units of a song sold for all songs that appeared on the Billboard Top 100 between 1965 and 1985 (the years the Bee Gees were making hits for themselves and others).

    Maybe start by limiting the list to songwriters who had at least 10 songs make the list in that period. Then you have to weight the songs. Obviously units sold should be important, but duration on the list may also be important. We also may want to weight number of covers by additional artists. For example, the Beatles’ “Yesterday*” is one of the most covered pop songs in history. So we might want to also give extra points to success of the song from multiple artists. Neo is also impressed by the different genres the Bee Gees writing spanned, so I don’t think she’d give a lot of credit to a band like the Rolling Stones who have likely charted in 5 – 7 of the prior decades because all their hits have been “Rock.” I think she’d also want some weighting for charting in countries outside the U.S. Interestingly, I don’t even think Elvis Presley would make the top 500. He likely shares a few co-writing credits on a few songs, but I think most all his songs were written by others.

    Based on her writing, I think that comes close to pin-pointing where she thinks the Bee Gees were especially exceptional as pop artists.

    That looks like a fair amount of research, but I’m guessing the Bee Gees may make a top ten if an analysis of hits in that 30 year period were done.

    *Coincidentally written in 1965, the year the Brother’s Gibb first charted.

  23. neo,

    It’s not strange. Not at all. Art can be very personal. For example; I cannot stand to hear the Beatle’s “Blackbird.” Either their version, or any of its many covers. It just about rips my heart out. I have no idea why. I’m not even sure if I think it’s a great song or an awful song, but there is something about it that rips into my very soul and tears it to shreds. It’s an incredibly personal feeling.

    For years I thought modern jazz was just noise; chaos. I couldn’t tolerate it and assumed everyone who claimed to like it was just saying that to appear hip, and erudite. An “emperor’s new clothes” sort-of thing. But as I played more music myself, and eventually grew more and more familiar with the structure of jazz composition it has become my favorite music.

    It’s also not odd that others would experience the same thing you do when hearing a Bee Gees’ song. There seems to be a point where fame breeds more fame; almost a mass hypnosis sort-of thing. There were plenty of women who ignored Leonard Cohen until they didn’t. But there is also something “true” about certain art, even if not everyone experiences it.

  24. neo,

    What I find the most interesting about you and the Bee Gees is your relative age when this occurred. I don’t think that is very common, but I think it’s a very positive indication. I read that science shows most of us lose our openness to new music in our late 20’s, early 30s. Our tastes tend to be developed by then and do not change. I think it’s a testament to your curiosity and flexibility that you were not only open to listening to the Bee Gees with new ears, but you’ve willingly been doing a lot of research to educate yourself in a new area; music theory and composition.

    From reading what you’ve written on the subject I have a strong feeling you’ve already discovered the answer to your fascination. You find certain types of harmonization particularly interesting and there is something about the harmonies that people who share genes and spend years practicing together that particularly appeals to you. I shared a video from a pianist who explained the vibrations of notes and how they overlap and do not overlap on specific chords. I think if you looked at oscilloscope readouts of the Bee Gees’ voices and compared that with oscilloscope readouts of other vocal harmonies you like you’d find a very discernible, tangible pattern. Something identifiable.

    So I don’t think there is anything odd about your enjoyment of the Bee Gees, but it is atypical you are doing such a deep dive into a pop music group after decades of little interest. But it’s a very positive thing to continue to want to learn and understand completely new things*.

    *My lengthy writing on this thread is mainly an attempt to help you understand that it’s not so particularly unique that the Bee Gees were outstanding songwriters and performers who could also write hit songs for others and their writing spans genres. Folks like that are not a dime a dozen. They are in rarified air. But other folks they share that realm with can also do it. It’s sort of like being a great oil painter, sketcher and sculptor. Different things that few people master, but there are some artists who can relatively easily master all three disciplines. What is, however, extremely rare in pop music is to have a career charting hits in multiple decades with the same group. That is very rare.

  25. Rufus,

    Lists like that are always subjective. Mine was a combination of chart success, record sales, cultural impact, longevity, and artistic ability.

    Elvis was huge in the first four of my criteria which is why I had him number one.

    Honestly Paul McCartney is probably the most ‘successful’ musician in the history of the world financially so he could be number one easily.

    Anyway just my opinion.

  26. Rufus T. Firefly:

    Thanks!

    I’ve noticed that there are quite a few people experiencing something similar to me with the Bee Gees – an appreciation late in life. But I had no idea, when it started for me, that the others existed. So it wasn’t a mass anything for me; it was quite solitary. The Bee Gees just harmonically resonated with me, and I mean that in the literal sense.

    I also enjoy their interviews, but that came later, after I discovered the music. As I think I mentioned in one post or another, my ex-husband and various other love interests of mine throughout my life have been members of multiple-brother families with a very good sense of humor among the brothers. That is a strong characteristic of the Bee Gees also, one that I really like. So it’s very familiar and entertaining for me, too.

    And it’s SO interesting that you mention “oscilloscope readouts of the Bee Gees’ voices.” I have thought that very thing myself – that if I could see some analysis of that sort of thing, I might find the scientific quantitative answer to the fascination they exert.

    They were obsessed with music, singing, and composing songs, starting at an extremely young age. I’ve learned that that is often true of songwriters – it is something they are driven to do, for the most part. And sometimes siblings end up performing together from an early age. But the Bee Gees are somewhat unique, I believe, in that from the moment they first sang together (they were either 5 and 8, or 6 and 9) they became obsessed with singing together as a group and writing songs as a unit, and that’s mostly what they did for the rest of their lives with just a brief time out, despite periodic altercations (as they mention in the clip). They often described themselves as having felt like triplets as kids, although only Robin and Maurice were the fraternal twins. They also were delinquents as kids, but one day when they were 9 and 12 they decided to go straight, because they felt they would either end up in prison or become big stars. They chose the big star route.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>