joejackson.com rss

Live BBC Sessions 12/29/2009

New 2 CD box set of live BBC sessions from 70's and 80's More info.

Rain Sheet Music 04/10/2008

Three songs from Rain (Too Tough, Invisible Man & Rush Across the Road) are now available as sheet music

Joe Jackson channel on YouTube 02/01/2008

Check out some great videos on Joe's YouTube channel.

Joe now has a myspace page 12/07/2007

Visit Joe's myspace page at http://www.myspace.com/joejacksonmusic

Rain 09/01/2007

Joe's new cd, entitled "Rain", was released worldwide by Rykodisc on January 29, 2008. The cd has ten new songs all of which were performed on this last tour.

MESSAGE TO SMOKERS 07/01/2007

Dear Smokers, You are the scum of the earth. Bad enough that you are intent on committing suicide, but with your noxious fumes you are committing nothing less than murder too. The preceding statement should sound pretty familiar by now. If you believe it, don't bother to read any further. But if you're skeptical, consider this: you're being made into scapegoats by people who are nowhere near as honest and noble as is commonly assumed. In fact a lot of them are downright nasty, and it's about time you started standing up to them. From July 1st, smoking is banned in every pub, restaurant and club in England - including private clubs, but then again a pub is private property too. I could bemoan the loss of property rights; I could also have a good rant about the loss of tolerance and free choice. But the real issue is that the only possible justification for this ban is blatantly, and provably, so phoney that it stinks to high heaven. I refer, of course, to the grotesquely-hyped but elusive phantom of 'secondhand smoke'. Some people seem to think smoking is being banned just because they don't LIKE it, or because it has in some circles become unfashionable. But these are no concerns of the government, and they can easily be addressed by good ventilation systems and/or separate spaces, according to market demand. If, on the other hand, tobacco smoke in the air - even on well-ventilated premises, even in separate rooms, even, if the antismoking brigade has its way, OUTSIDE - is putting innocent bystanders in mortal danger, then I'd say tobacco should be completely illegal, since it would clearly be worse than heroin. But first, I'd want to see at least one proven case of death caused by ETS (Environmental Tobacco Smoke). Because I, and many other people - scientists, academics, activists, and just plain skeptics - have been researching this issue for many years, and we haven't come across one yet. Take a look at www.davehitt.com. Mr Hitt's article 'Name Three' is a grimly hilarious account of how he went to just about every antismoking authority in the USA in a fruitless quest to find three real-life cases. I've been in debates myself in which I've asked antismokers to name one, and been repeatedly ignored. Once I was told this information could not be revealed because of 'professional etiquette'. Just last month, I had an article about smoking bans published in a German magazine. The editor removed the line 'there is not one proven documented case of death caused by secondhand smoke', claiming that there was one such case in Italy. I investigated. The case in question was the death of Monica Crema, whose husband succesfully sued her employer, Pariba Bank, claiming that she had been killed by smoke at work. SECONDHAND SMOKE KILLS! said the headlines. But the verdict was appealed. This time there was a proper trial, and it was found that Ms Crema had actually died from a food allergy. And the headlines said . . . well, nothing, actually. I could say that even a few cases would still be pretty insignificant compared to all the deaths irrefutably caused by booze, or cars, or even prescription drugs. But the fact is that the antismokers' case for ETS collapses when subjected to the slightest scrutiny. Unable to produce actual proof, they tell us that ETS kills because they say so, and we wouldn't understand, so we must take their word for it. And at this point I need to 'zoom out,' so to speak, and briefly address the bigger picture. There's an old saying: 'trust me, I'm a doctor'. But I'm asking you to trust me because I'm NOT. Many people these days, including newspaper editors and politicians, are simply not willing to challenge or question medical authorities. They are assumed to be the only people on earth who are never wrong, biased, dishonest, or corrupt. But unquestioning faith in any authority is naïve and dangerous, and this is just as true in the case of 'health' as in the case of religion or politics (they all claim to know what's best for us, after all). If you don't think I - or you - have the 'credentials' to question the Chief Medical Officer, then we can't question the Prime Minister or the Pope either - in which case they are free to pursue all the phoney wars and Inquisitions they fancy. I don't claim any special insight; the only thing that sets me apart from a lot of other people on the issue of smoking is that I've kept an open mind and really looked into the evidence. And I can promise you that on this issue (and frankly, quite a few others) the mainstream medical power structure is, not to put too fine a point on it, full of shit. Not to mention increasingly mean-spirited and dictatorial. 'Public health' was originally created to tackle big, tangible issues like communicable disease, malnutrition and industrial pollution. In recent years, though, it has shifted its attention to interfering in almost every facet of the private lives of people who aren't sick: generally-comfortable Europeans and Americans, who, whether we smoke or not, are overwhelmingly likely to live longer and healthier lives than ever in history. Thus Public Health justifies its agenda by fearmongering and statistical junk science. The World Health Organisation, one of the biggest forces driving Antitobacco, is a case in point. While AIDS, typhoid and dysentery are rampant in the Third World, and two million children a year die because of lack of clean water, the WHO spends 76% of its budget on paying its staff and renting fancy offices in places like Geneva. In recent years it has turned to the pharmaceutical industry for funding, and funnily enough, has at the same time promoted the persecution of you, the smoker, to the top of its agenda. I say 'funnily' because these noble souls couldn't possibly be biased, could they? I mean, what with the world's 1.2 billion smokers being a target market for pharmaceutical nicotine products and antidepressants? This is not a conspiracy theory. The antismoking movement has phenomenal momentum because (a) it is being given a free ride by politicians and media, and (b) IT IS STINKING RICH. Pharmaceutical money is a big reason, but there are others, including punitive taxation and a little thing called the Master Settlement Agreement, struck between the tobacco industry and US states in 1999, which gives American antismokers alone close to a $1 billion a year to play with. It's not surprising that more and more interests have climbed on the antismoking bandwagon. What IS surprising is that so many people persist in seeing it as a righteous crusade. I repeat: these people are nannies and bullies, and unelected and unaccountable bodies like the WHO should not be dictating policy to democratically-elected governments, especially when, in the case of smoking bans, THEIR OWN RESEARCH has proven that 'secondhand smoke' doesn't hurt anyone. That's right: only a small minority of studies show any risk from ETS, and they're not the best ones. The biggest and most scientifically credible studies so far are still the 10-year European one by the WHO and the 39-year Californian one by Profs. Enstrom and Kabat, neither of which were able to find any danger. Many other studies have shown that exposure to ETS actually REDUCES risk. This sounds absurd, but it's what happens when your numbers are so tiny and unreliable that they can go either way. If you do enough studies and play around with the statistics enough, you can 'prove' just about anything. That much-publicised '25% risk increase' is actually an INSIGNIFICANT INCREASE ON AN ALREADY INSIGNIFICANT RISK. And that's only if you accept, in the first place, a statistic cherry-picked from a small minority of flawed and biased studies. As for smoke containing arsenic, so does tap water. And benzene? So does coffee. In every case, the AMOUNT is too small to hurt you.To spin this kind of 'evidence' into a public health menace, and the basis for legislation to turn a quarter of the population into pariahs, is outrageous. It would make just as much sense to ban food in restaurants because cooking causes carcinogens, or ban music in nightclubs because someone's hearing might be damaged. Are you getting the picture yet? I've heard antismokers say the ban is not a witch hunt against smokers, but all about health. But the ban will do NOTHING for the health of the nation, and a witch hunt against smokers is EXACTLY what it is (why do you think they're trying to ban smoking outside, too?) Antismokers are masters of double-talk. For instance they're not forbidding smoking in the pub - that sounds, well, forbidding - they're making the pub 'smoke-free'! They're giving you MORE freedom, not less! Isn't that wonderful? Okay. Go on. Say it: 'smoking is bad, so isn't anything that discourages it good?' But it's never good when authorities lie to us and then use those lies as justification for draconian laws. Besides, a lot of the 'scientific' fearmongering about 'passive' smoking is simply an extension of what has been done to exaggerate the dangers of 'active' smoking. There IS a risk, for some people, in heavy long-term cigarette smoking, just as there are risks in heavy long-term drinking, or eating a lot of certain foods, or driving a car too fast too often . . . the currently fashionable desire for 'zero risk' is not only illusory but frankly childish. Even lung cancer - the one disease which can be convincingly linked, statistically, to smoking - only happens to a small minority of smokers, and even then, usually within the normal age-range of death. Antismokers never talk about what happens in real life, but about things like a '2,000% risk increase'. Well, maybe. If I buy 20 lottery tickets instead of one, I would have a 2,000% increased chance of winning. But I'm still very, very unlikely to win. Anyway, all we hear about smoking nowadays is the potential danger, which builds the impression that danger is all there is. But tobacco is a natural antidepressant, improves memory and concentration, has a strong protective effect against Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, and several other diseases, helps in controlling weight, and, for God's sake, IT GIVES PLEASURE. Why is it so hard to get across the point that pleasure is essential to human life, and that pleasure is healthier than fear? But, you say,120,000 deaths per year are caused by 'smoking-related diseases'. Here we go again: firstly, it's only an 'estimate'; and secondly, a 'smoking-related disease' is NOT a disease proven to be CAUSED by smoking. They've just added up all the deaths from any disease in which someone thinks smoking may be a factor. Thus the total includes thousands of NONSMOKERS who die from, say, bronchitis or strokes. It also includes people who quit smoking 20 years before, and smokers who die of heart attacks in their 80s. It's not EXACTLY a lie. But it sure as hell is misleading, and deliberately so, and it's these people, not you, the smoker, who should be ashamed of themselves. Are you getting the picture yet? If so, what are you going to do about it? I have a few suggestions. - GET EDUCATED. Smokers need to know the true facts; the more we know, the better we can fight back. For a more detailed exploration of the issues, you could start with my own essay SMOKE, LIES AND THE NANNY STATE(downloadable from www.joejackson.com) or if not the essay, then the long list of websites, books and articles which comes at the end. Check out www.forestonline.org and www.forces.org, two long-established campaigning groups who have, among other things, the full downloadable details of every 'secondhand smoke' study ever done. Other good places to go are www.antibrains.com and www.smokersclubinc.com. - JOIN A CAMPAIGNING GROUP andDONATE MONEY! FOREST gets support from tobacco companies, but it's the only one that does, and they're still poor compared to the 'Antis'. FORCES and in the UK, Freedom 2 Choose (www.freedom2choose.co.uk), who are mounting a legal challenge to the ban, need your support. - DO NOT ALLOW YOURSELF TO BE BULLIED. Do not apologise to anyone; on the contrary, explain to people why you're a victim of unjust discrimination. You are enjoying a legal pleasure with a long and honourable history, and you're contributing £10 billion a year to your country in tax revenue. Be proud. - BAD LAWS DESERVE TO BE DEFIED, flouted, protested, or circumvented in any way possible. Carry a pocket ashtray so they can't get you for littering. Start a petition. Lobby your MP. Otherwise, forget about being polite and not rocking the boat. No oppressed group ever changed things without calling attention to itself. This means civil disobedience and making the law as difficult as possible to enforce. - Wherever possible, DO NOT patronise places which forbid smoking. DO patronise places which make an effort to accommodate smokers, either legally outside or illegally inside. - SOCIALISE AT HOME. Create your own pub. Invite your friends. Smoke, save money, drink what you like, close when you like, and generally do what you like without being spied on by CCTV cameras. The only way to turn the Hospitality Industry into a better ally is to WITHDRAW your support. The smoking ban will not last forever. But the less resistance there is, the longer it will last, the more the 'Antis' will crow about what a great success it is, and the more it will serve as a template for all kinds of other social engineering. Every witch hunt seems invincible until a few people have the nerve to stand up to it. Stop being so damn passive. And don't despair; after all, we (not the likes of ASH) are the Party People. Don't stop the party.

Smoke, Lies, and the Nanny State 05/01/2007

Joe has attracted a lot of attention recently for speaking out against antismoking hysteria and smoking bans. This new essay, the culmination of 4 years' research, replaces his previous essay The Smoking Issue. Click here to download PDF

Nice Review of Heaven & Hell 03/01/2007

Preview of Heaven & Hell in Boston Globe 03/06/2007

Night Music - Joe Jackson Interview 10/01/1994

(edited from several) Q. Night Music is quite a departure from your earlier work . . . A. Yes and no. I guess it's up to you whether you want to emphasise the differences or the similarities. In some ways it's very much like Night and Day; they're both very un-rock'n'roll and built around keyboards, with some strings, but no guitars. Q. Have you turned your back on rock'n'roll? A. I don't even know how to answer that . . . I suppose in the sense of not wanting a lot of noisy electric guitars and being kind of angry or aggressive . . . then maybe I have, for this record, anyway. I've no idea what I'll be doing next year. But right now I think there's plenty of noise and aggression out there. I wanted to make something beautiful, soft and lyrical. That's the sort of record I felt like hearing, so I made it myself. I don't know where it fits . . . maybe nowhere. But I don't think 'stylistic purity' is something artists should really worry about. It's a critic's hangup. Q. We don't hear so much of your voice on this album. There are four instrumental tracks and three other singers. How did that come about? A. I'm a pretty limited singer, actually, but I've started to think there's no reason for my limitations as a singer to limit me as a composer. And I started off writing instrumental music as a teenager; piano pieces, string quartets, and so on. Songs came later, because I didn't know how to approach writing lyrics and I still think it's very difficult; the music comes easier. Actually the lyrics on this album are quite minimal. Sometimes in the past, I've felt that I'd said all I had to say in one verse, but I had to slave away trying to come up with more lyrics which were redundant, just because the form demanded it. But this time I just said what I wanted to say and let the music find its own form around that. The exception is 'The Man Who Wrote Danny Boy,' which tells a story. Q. What's that song about, and how did you come to use Maire Brennan's voice? A. It's a variation on the old 'Faust' story; a man is tempted to sell his soul to the Devil, but in this case, to write a song that will live forever. It's not clear whether this really happens or if it's all a dream - this whole album is about dreams, and reflections in the night. But anyway, he's getting more and more carried away, there's fire and brimstone and bells tolling and the earth is opening up beneath him and so on - and then you hear his wife interrupting and saying, more or less, 'for God's sake can't you just get over yourself and come to bed?' (Laughs) . . . I've always thought that men are more likely to be dreamers and fanatics, and get carried away with grandiose schemes and so on, and women are more practical. Q. Are you concerned that with such a sophisticated project, people will accuse you of being grandiose, or pretentious? A. That's the kind of thinking that holds people back from creating anything new. I've already heard 'Oh, Joe Jackson thinks he's Mozart now . . . his own Ein Kleine Nachtmusik' - which never even occurred to me. That kind of thing hurts, but I won't let it hold me back. This is what was inside me at this point, I can either bury it because I think some people might not get it, or I can let it out. The most pretentious thing I could have done would have been to try to pose as a rock star. Q. A lot of this album is melancholy. Are you feeling melancholy these days? A. No, not really. You can be happy and write sad songs and vice versa - sometimes it even works better that way, maybe because you're more objective. I like melancholy, it can be pleasurable. It's not the same thing as depression. But there are happy songs on this record, too; 'Flying' is about getting older and wiser, and 'Only The Future' is about suddenly realising that no matter what worries you might have, there's at least a chance that everything will be OK! 'Sea of Secrets,' too, I think is happy. It's about falling asleep and looking forward to dreaming, like a deep-sea diver who's about to go down into the depths and bring up some kind of treasure. And it ends the album with a feeling of happily drifting away. Someone told me recently that they liked to fall asleep while listening to this album, and this is the only time when I take that as a compliment.

Sony Classical Releases Joe Jackson's Heaven And Hell, A New Musical Interpretation of the Seven Deadly Sins 09/01/1997

The Composer Speaks about his Composition An astonishing listening experience, Joe Jackson's Heaven and Hell shatters the boundary between "popular" and "classical" music to bring us a unique composition. A series of trenchant interpretations of the Seven Deadly Sins, it draws together classical stars - soprano Dawn Upshaw, violinist Nadja Salerno-Sonnenberg - and artists better known in the "pop" world - Suzanne Vega, Joy Askew, Jane Siberry, and the Crash Test Dummies' Brad Roberts - and vibrantly showcases Jackson's composing, keyboard, and vocal skills. Peter Gelb, president of Sony Classical, terms the record "a tour-de-force of composition and performance." And for the composer himself, the album's "timeless theme" provided a springboard for the kind of project he does best - one which incorporates elements of several traditions, but transcends genre or fashion. While Jackson's vocals shine in parts of Heaven and Hell, the singer says, "I can't be limited as a composer by the limitations of my own voice." Similarly, Jackson can no longer be defined as a "singer-songwriter", but only as a composer, and one who defies categorization. "My musical background is very eclectic, and it just doesn't feel natural or honest to me to work within one specific genre," says Joe. "I think this project is a kind of musical collage, putting together elements from all over the place, but with a definite purpose; they're all there for a reason. Anyway, I think the question of 'what style is it?' is the least important one. What's important is whether something has passion and originality, whether it stimulates and moves people, whether it's alive." For Sony Classical, too, Heaven and Hell embodies a pioneering approach. Peter Gelb comments, "In working with artists like Joe, who transcend genre, we're trying to redefine the role of a classical label. We want to return to the idea of classical music as an emotional experience for the listener. Using musicians, from whatever background, whom he felt would best interpret his ideas, Joe has come up with exactly the kind of record that, while it's brilliantly inventive, will also strike that emotional chord." Joe's perspective on the new signing is simply that "I went where the most enthusiasm was. And so-called 'classical' labels seem to be more open-minded than pop labels right now." Recorded at Avatar Studios in New York City in the winter of '96-'97, Heaven and Hell grew out of two years of intensive research into the literature and iconography of Sin. "I'm a sinner - we're all sinners," says Jackson. "I wanted a theme to hold an album together, and the Deadly Sins just kept growing on me. At first I thought, 'it's been done before' - but actually that's one of the things that makes it interesting - it's a universal theme that everyone interprets differently." Joe says that the resulting song-cycle is very much about paradoxes and contrasts: Good and Evil, Beauty and Ugliness, Pain and Pleasure. "I was intrigued by the idea that all of these Sins are inside all of us, but they have dark and light sides - they're gateways to either heaven or hell. For instance, a certain amount of Pride is good - when it manifests itself as self-respect. But the bigger someone's Pride gets, the more dangerous it is - that's why it was always considered the worst Sin of all, the Sin of Lucifer, because if you're overtaken by Pride, you're capable of anything - all the other Sins. Or Sloth, which is a much worse Sin than people realise. Every time you hear someone say, "I can't be bothered," or "it's not my problem," or "what's the point?" that's Sloth talking. It's totally negative and it leads ultimately to nihilism and despair. But then again, if you're a workaholic, a dose of Sloth might be exactly what you need. So, everyone has a different kind of Sin-chemistry". Jackson also found a great deal of humour in his chosen theme: "a lot of the record is satirical and funny, at least to me, anyway!" The actual sequence of the Sins was also inspirational. "Traditionally, they're in a specific order, from the least bad to the worst, and the order suggested a musical structure to me. For instance, Sloth is right in the middle, and it's a sort of zone of negativity, so it's the 'slow movement', if you like. But then you have Anger, and there's an explosion of energy which gets you out of that zone." Heaven and Hell begins with a dramatic "Prelude", with Nadja Salerno-Sonnenberg's blistering violin performance representing the Devil - both charming and menacing. "Fugue 1/More Is More" (Gluttony) draws on imagery from Dante's Inferno and Noah and the Flood, and detonates in a flurry of notes: a four-part Fugue representing furious Excess. "Angel" grapples with Lust. "The point of view is of a young guy who's horny and confused," says Joe. "It's like he has a little cartoon angel on one shoulder and a devil on the other, both tempting him." The archetypal voices of the Virgin and the Whore are enacted by Suzanne Vega, with sly and sometimes bizarre innuendo ("Hey Rufus, how's the rain on the rhubarb?") - and Dawn Upshaw, whose part is based on a lovely 14th century latin hymn to the Virgin Mary. "I had a hard time with Avarice," says Jackson of the next piece, "Tuzla". "I've never really been motivated by greed or money." Reading about profiteering in war-torn Bosnia, however, and realizing that war is at least a matter of greed as it is of violence, inspired Joe to write "not so much a song as a little play, with different voices commenting on the action from different viewpoints." These include voices of Conscience, Forgetfulness, Cynicism and Greed, as well as the voices of average citizens who've been "reduced to commodities ('a bar of soap, a can of oil', etc.) - they're no longer human, they ARE what they have to sell or trade." The wry "Passacaglia/A Bud and a Slice" ("They say Lucifer's free / What shall we do? / Don't ask me") features Brad Roberts as the voice of Sloth ("I wanted 'lugubrious,'" says Joe, "and he's Mr. Lugubrious!") Then comes the aural assault of "Right", featuring two stellar rock drummers, Kenny Aronoff and Dan Hickey. "That was a great session," says Jackson, "they were like gladiators in the studio, trying to outdo each other." A third drummer, a street musician by the name of Jared Crawford was added, playing plastic buckets right in the middle of Times Square, captured on a portable tape machine at the height of the rush hour. Jackson acknowledges that "Right" is the closest the album gets to out-and-out rock'n'roll. "Rock'n'roll has a limited emotional range, but it's really good at Anger." "The Bridge" examines Envy from the viewpoint not of the Envier, but the Envied. "Being envied is horrible," explains Jackson, "because there's nothing you can do about it. The other person (as the lyric says) 'broke the bridge on their side'." The soaring melody is sung by Jane Siberry. Heaven and Hell concludes with the astonishing "Fugue 2/Song of Daedalus", a piece both beautiful and terrifying. "The whole thing is a building process," Jackson says, "from serene self-confidence to monstrous egomania, with the narrator finally declaring himself to be God. Meanwhile the strings behind him get more and more twisted and dissonant." Offering no facile resolution, however, Heaven and Hell ends at a crossroads, with a reprise of Nadja Salerno-Sonnenberg's demonic violin. "The ending is ambivalent; two chords alternating endlessly without resolving into one key or another," Jackson says. "If you see the whole work as a central character's journey, then at the end he's either damned or he's realized he's gone too far, and he has to pull back. It's your choice." No such ambiguity lingers about the aesthetic success of Heaven and Hell. Joining and surpassing the very best of Jackson's work, it establishes him more than ever as one of music's true visionaries.

Critic Gets it Right SHOCK 10/01/2000

"It's always good to have one's preconceptions confounded: Joe Jackson, I admit, has never really made much of an impression on me before, but it's impossible to ignore an album that presents a musician in such confident command of both his subject-matter and his musical vocabulary as Night and Day II. A belated follow-up of sorts to the acclaimed 1982 song-cycle that regarded Jackson's expatriate home of New York with the keen eye of a newcomer, Night and Day II traverses similar territory, but with the added weight of experience colouring his vignettes of vibrant city life. There's a distinctly theatrical side to Jackson's songs: condensing entire lives into a few vivid lines, they're like mini-musicals, each hinting at a whole world of desire and pain. It's a risky business: at his worst, Jackson can resemble a more gifted Billy Joel; but at his best, his grasp of orchestral techniques brings him close to Leonard Bernstein. There's certainly a distinct flavour of West Side Story to songs such as 'Hell of a Town' and 'Stranger Than You', where pizzicato strings and Latin percussion underpin his musings on New York, "a town where there's always somebody stranger than you". It's a panorama that's fascinating and ugly by turns, Jackson conveying both the magnetic glamour and excitement of life in a cosmopolitan metropolis - the reflective 'Stay' is as much a musical embodiment of the Manhattan skyline as Gershwin's 'Rhapsody in Blue' - and the inevitable downside, where stress breeds paranoia and humans take on a more reptilian aspect. A series of guest vocalists helps to bring Jackson's characters to life: Marianne Faithfull effortlessly evokes the aching regret of the lonely careerist in 'Love Got Lost', and Sussan Deyhim likewise captures the immigrant's baffled awe in 'Why'. There's an appropriately soiled pride, too, to the bitter reflections of Dale De Vere's lady-boy hooker in 'Glamour and Pain', in which Jackson eschews his usual orchestral-jazz stylings in favour of a mannered disco pulse more akin to the Pet Shop Boys. The stand-out tracks are those in which Jackson confronts tragedy with dogged perseverance, through a bereaved Latina's recollections of a nightclub fire disaster ('Happyland'), and a son's letter home recounting his search for a runaway sister ('Dear Mom'); the latter, in particular, expertly encapsulates the late-20th-century atomisation of family structures. Not the prettiest of pictures, but one of the more revealing." - Andy Gill, The Independent (London)

Volume 4 - Press Release 03/01/2003

"I think that even the most rootless traveler sometimes has to put his foot down somewhere familiar," says Joe Jackson. "You can't only go forward. Sometimes it's healthy to look back." Quite a statement for an artist who's not known for repeating himself. So it's all the more impressive that Jackson has chosen to renew an old collaboration on his new album. The 11-song collection reunites Jackson with the scrappy band that accompanied him on the trilogy of LP's - Look Sharp, I'm The Man, and Beat Crazy - that first established him as a major artist in 1979/80. Volume 4 - whose release coincides with the 25th anniversary of the recording of Jackson's landmark debut Look Sharp - is a stunning comeback for one of the classic bands of the post-punk era: Jackson (vocals and keyboards), Gary Sanford (guitar), Graham Maby (bass), and Dave Houghton (drums). Produced by Jackson, the album strongly echoes the band's early work, without straining to imitate it. The all-new compositions merge the early albums' raw rock'n'roll energy and barbed lyrical wit with the emotional depth and musical sophistication of Joe's later work. Volume 4 is a bracing blend of sonic adrenaline, lyrical insight and sterling song craft. As on the early albums, the Joe Jackson Band put their distinctive stamp on an assortment of styles, from the jangling melodic pop of "Still Alive" to the jazzy, hyperactive "Fairy Dust" and the greasy funk of "Dirty Martini". Tunes such as "Awkward Age", the retro glam-rock anthem "Little Bit Stupid" and the ska-pop excursion "Thugz R Us" are among the catchiest Jackson's written, reveling in the spiky humor which has always been a key element in his songwriting. "Take It Like a Man" and "Bright Grey" show that the band can rock at least as hard as they ever did, while)) three more introspective songs ("Chrome," "Blue Flame," and "Love at First Light") show a sensitivity and maturity only hinted at in 1979. Jackson seems as surprised as anyone that the reunion has occurred at all, let alone yielded such stellar results. "I never thought this would happen," says Jackson, who is based in New York but keeps a house in his hometown of Portsmouth, England. "But at some point it struck me that 2003 would be our 25th anniversary - which was quite a staggering thought! I started to wonder if some kind of reunion might be fun, and the more I thought about it, the more appealing it seemed. At that point, I had about six finished songs, and I realised they'd all work well with that band, so I started getting excited about the idea of a new album. Next I sat down with each of the band members to see how they felt about it, and they were so enthusiastic that at that point it seemed silly not to do it!" Look Sharp was released into the charged post-punk atmosphere of January 1979. The album's hard-hitting, melodically concise tunes and passionately articulate lyrics struck a responsive chord on both sides of the Atlantic. The Jackson/Sanford/Maby/Houghton lineup was remarkably productive, refining its approach on I'm The Man and stretching into new sonic territory with Beat Crazy. When they weren't in the studio, the band toured almost continuously. "We were together for a much shorter time than I realised," Jackson notes. "We got together in the summer of '78, recorded Look Sharp in August, and just kept going through to the end of 1980. We toured very hard, but then again, we were very young and it was an adventure. This was all heady stuff, because so much of it was new - traveling internationally, playing bigger places, being on TV. It's kind of like you've gone through a war; you'll always have that bond because of what you've experienced together." After Jackson reassembled his former cohorts in the UK, it didn't take long for the musicians to tap into their old chemistry. "We did seven small warm-up gigs in England, just to sort of get our juices flowing," Jackson explains. "By the third or fourth, we were just flying. These guys blew me away, they played so great." That chemistry continued to produce sparks when the quartet began recording Volume 4 at Ridge Farm in Surrey, England. "The recording process was fast, fun, and easy, which isn't always the case," says Jackson. "We recorded in ten days, about the same time as Look Sharp. We did it completely without computers - no ProTools, no sequencers, none of that stuff. Just live to 24-track analog tape. I overdubbed some of the piano parts, but most of the songs are 2nd or 3rd takes." "I've been intrigued by the idea of nostalgia lately, and there's a nostalgic element to this project, even to some of the songs," Jackson says. "That's something that surprised me, because I'm not a very nostalgic person. But now my feeling is that it's a healthy thing as long as you know what you're doing and don't get trapped in it - sort of like a recreational drug. I could never have done this ten or fifteen years ago, because then I was more concerned with moving on. But now I'm at a point where I'm comfortable with what I've done and with where I am now, and this just feels right". There's nothing nostalgic about the artist's enthusiasm for Volume 4. "I've got to say I love this album, and it feels very special to me. It's always special when something you never thought would happen happens, and then turns out even better than you imagined; I mean, how often does that happen?! It's not quite like picking up where we left off, but it doesn't feel like twenty years have gone by, either. It almost feels like we took three or four years off and then came back to make the killer fourth album. I think this is the best thing we've done." Jackson is equally excited about the prospect of hitting the road with his old compatriots. "We're gonna do quite a big tour, and hopefully go to some places that we never got to the first time around, like Australia and Japan. I think we're all really enthused about going on the road, and it's very sweet to have this opportunity again."

Different For Girls 12/29/2006

Women Artists And Female Fronted Bands Cover Joe Jackson

(Skipping Discs (USA), 2004) is the third female covers compilation CD in a series that has seen the label dedicate previous CDs to The Doors and David Bowie.

The most successful covers tend to be those which bring something new to a song, often completely reinventing it. Too often on tribute albums 'cover' has become synonymous with 'copy', a trap that the Doors compilation largely avoided but which the Bowie album didn't, though at least with this series the very fact that you have female singers interpreting songs originally performed by men means there's an immediate shift of focus (and occasionally, of necessity, of lyrics too), so they are never anything less that interesting.

Arguably Joe Jackson is the most accomplished (and probably the least well known) song writer so far tackled in this series and thus should give greater scope for interpretation, and the fine opening track "Is She Really Going Out With Him?" from elaine k bodes well.

Fiona Lehn's mostly faithful interpretation of "On Your Radio" retains, indeed, adds to the original's energy and power and, of the 'copies' on the album, is clearly the highlight. Essra Mohawk's reading of "Steppin' Out" is competent, but very safe. Amy Fox's "Be My Number Two/Shanghai Sky" is a straightforward piano/voice interpretation with some subdued strings. Whitney McCray's dynamically flat "Breaking Us In Two" is a disappointing take on a fine song, while "Home Town" is efficiently handled by Mary Lee's Corvette and has nice changes of atmosphere and tempo.

It's Maxine Young who takes on the challenge of "It's Different For Girls," probably Jackson's best known song, and chosen as the title track for this collection. She does a thoughtful job, not attempting what would be a fairly futile task of a straight copy, but prepared to take the opportunit to put enough of herself into it to give it a new slant. It's not entirely successful, but still very worthwhile.

Reinterpreting songs can be a risky business and while Idle Mirth's take on "Another World" deserves plaudits, it doesn't quite come off as there's a lack of dynamics and while it floats along beautifully, ultimately it's too repetitive.

On the other hand, Lisa Mychols work with "Look Sharp!" shows what can be done with a little imagination. One would imagine this to be one of the more difficult songs to put a new spin on, but it is standout track on the album. It opens faithfully before bursting into some stunning Steely Dan type harmonies and it builds and sways and powers and dips and the vocals have terrific character.

The album closes with two of the strongest tracks, Alice Lee's soulful "Sea Of Secrets" and darkblueworld's deceptively complex and powerful "Take It Like A Man"--both bringing more than their share to this particular party.

As is almost always the case with compilations, the quality varies as much as the interpretations. The inclusion of back to back readings of "Got The Time," by Beth Thornley and Fabulous Disaster is an interesting and instructive piece of track listing.

Overall this is a good and thoroughly enjoyable album with the two undoubted highlights being Lisa Mychols "Look Sharp!" and Fiona Lehn's "On Your Radio." By some distance these are also the two finest vocal performances on the disc as well, both instilling great character into their respective songs. - Jamie Field in Kington, England and Russ Elliot in New York

Joe Jackson, William Shatner, and Ben Folds 08/15/2006

Joe appears on three tracks of Shatner's shockingly brilliant album Has Been, produced, arranged and co-written by Ben Folds. The single, a cover of Pulp's Common People, features Joe's vocals. There were two live shows (at the El Rey in Los Angeles, also featuring Henry Rollins and Aimee Mann) and a performance on the Tonight Show with Jay Leno.

Joe Jackson, Todd Rundgren, and Ethel 05/15/2006

Joe's previous tour (in 2005) was a triple-bill with Todd Rundgren and the string quartet ETHEL. Joe played a solo set (as did Todd) and everyone played several songs together at the end of the show.

Tour News 06/15/2006

In June/July 2006 Joe toured with Graham Maby on bass and Dave Houghton on drums. The set included songs from throughout Joe's career, some unusual cover versions (including songs by Duke Ellington, Ian Dury and Frank Zappa) and six new songs. The trio had such a good time they're now starting to plan some more dates for next year, and possibly some recording.

Stoker 02/07/2007

Joe is currently working with writer Raymond Hardie and director Judy Dolan on a project for the theatre. A Gothic melodrama with a strong undercurrent of black humour, STOKER is a look into the life and mind of Bram Stoker, creator of Dracula and a much more interesting character than most people realise. Set in Victorian London (with flashbacks to Stoker's strange childhood in rural Ireland) STOKER is neither a musical nor an opera, but a hybrid piece in which certain characters sing while others do not, and action is complemented by live music much as it was in the melodramas of the day. Bram Stoker was himself deeply involved in the theatre as manager of the greatest actor of his time, the charismatic and tyrannical Henry Irving; his friends also included Oscar Wilde and Prime Minister Gladstone. All of these characters play a part in the drama, and STOKER deals with many themes, including the influence of Ireland on England (and vice versa), the plight of immigrants, and the theatre itself. Ultimately, though, it's the story of an underrated man who drew on the dark side of his life and imagination to create a character which astonished everyone around him. We'll update this page as this project progresses.