Secondly, there’s a phenomenon which is now starting to get some more scientific support. Most people stop enjoying new music after the age of about 35. Most people also need to experience something more than once to tolerate it. The number I recall is seven. Seven tastes of a food which is completely new to you (no spices in common with other foods). Seven listenings of a new song (which is why almost all the CDs I’ve bought of new music the past decade or so were soundtracks, where the common leitmotif nature of film scores means you hear a riff that many times or more during the movie). Anyway, recently a study on memory indicated that the peak years are 22-37, and then you start losing memory, but until you’re in the early 60s you’re also gaining experience which can compensate. And I’m thinking, maybe you don’t like Outlaw Pete because you’re starting to reach that age break where it’s harder to like new different things straight off.

I’m in group 2 on Springsteen. I don’t have the disposable income to go to many concerts. I don’t like many recent songs unless I’ve had to hear them a lot while chauffeuring my daughter or Weird Al filked them. I’d define your degrees of fandom as: #1: have many complete original albums, or perhaps bought a compilation album and realized how many good songs were on it. #2: bought a compilation album (or two, given the longevity of some of our artists these days) because you knew there’s be at least 2-3 songs on it you wanted to own. #3: own no albums by that artist. I put my favorite Bruce songs on my rock and roll playlists for when I put the headphones on and crank out work. There are many more songs by the artists of my half generation (my Elizabeth is 23), and my more common playlists are classical albums, film soundtracks, or novelty songs. But I digress.

I’ve seen that in some respects Bruce follows my favorite group, The Beatles, in being eclectic in his songs. I mean, the Beatles started out singing about holding your hand and love me do, young universal feelings of romance, and evolved into maturing feelings of loss and aging, and then went every which way as they liberated themselves from the Pop 40 format. I mean, Yellow Submarine? Rocky Raccoon? Mean Mr. Mustard? Almost all of The White Album (which I think was meant as a takeoff on “white noise”, an attempt to show that music is far broader than most people think and one man’s music is another man’s noise. But maybe that’s just me) is songs that are rather unlike most of what The Beatles did earlier. Similarly, Bruce has done some great songs on common rock and roll common man (okay, mostly common American) themes but he also put Chopsticks in “Blinded by the Light” and sang about Quinn the eskimo.

So I’ll suggest that maybe Pete the Outlaw doesn’t seem all that outlandish to me, given what Bruce has already done, and you may want to consider whether the problem is with the song or a reflection on an aging brain.

Upon reflection, it will be very hard for most normal people to get that the way I mean it and not take it as insulting. My wife, for example, goes bat guano crazy some times when she can’t remember something. I just accept that aging beats the alternative and look it up on the internet, if convenient. One of the greatest bridge players defines his skill that day as “heat one”, “heat two”, or “heat three”, and he says that part of the greatness of the best in the world is to recognize how well they are doing and adjust their efforts accordingly. For example, Manny on a bad (heat three) day might decide after two badly fooled swinging strikeouts to choke up a little and just make contact. I consider that self awareness to be what drives being able to make that adjustment. So I’m suggesting this not to say that you’re older, but rather in the hopes of enlightenment so that you can continue to apply experience to improve performance even if your brain is starting to slow down a bit. As a reader (and proof reader) I see no signs of you dropping off. I’m really just trying to help.

Artists do retractions all the time. Sometimes they even do it the moment an album is released, by never once playing the song live, not even on the tour supporting the album in question. Genesis has never, ever, not even once, performed half the songs from Duke.

(On the other hand, one can never assume anything either; U2, for example, has very very rarely performed “The Unforgettable Fire” since the tour supporting the album’s release, but that’s due to technical issues rather than a retraction.)

Brian #9 — I wouldn’t say “Squeezebox” is THAT bad, though I would certainly put it in the bottom quarter of their work. “Shiny Happy People” always make me think of the bit Denis Leary did for MTV way back then: “OK, I want all the shiny people on this side of the room, and all of the happy people on this side of the room.”

Aaron #29 (and by way of explanation to Rutbag #35) — Nice Michael Scott reference. Don’t remember; was “Short People” on that list (I know “Fast Car” was)?

Gate #30 (and all those who wrote about the “great artist/crappy song” conundrum) — You want cringe-worthy? Since so many others have brought up Bob Dylan, he did a whole ALBUM of cringe-worthy AND gave it the rather inexplicable title of “Self Portrait”.

More for Rutbag #35 — Got to agree with you on the “world is round” thing; I answered “No” myself. It’s an oblate spheroid (as opposed to a football, which is a prolate spheroid).

Great work as always, Joe. As Paul White #8 points out, it is indeed amazing how much you can cover in one posting.

Hey, maybe you should write a book!

“All Lost In The Supermarket” is probably one of the only workable uses of the word “supermarket” in a song, probably because the word itself Clashes with music as a genre.

“Squeezebox” is still a funny cool song. You guys-n-gals’ve just heard it too many times to like it any more.

Tom Waits & Jon Stewart together would be a great stage act, but at the end Amy Winehouse’d have to come out & beat them senseless with a microphone stand.

I do like Queen of the Supermarket. It’s like a poor man’s Outlaw Pete–not quite as exciting musically, but *some* interesting lyrical ideas, and a manageable length.

I still don’t understand Bruce’s fascination with the “bullet mic” for his blues songs. I actually like the way he does the blues–Reason to Believe was great in the last tour–and the bullet mic is tolerable in the studio (Good Eye, Jersey Devil), when the vocals are somewhat coherent. But on the Devils Tour and at San Jose, the bullet mic blues songs are unlistenable. The sound in general has been terrible at Bruce’s shows lately, and it’s a real pet peeve of mine, given his earlier reputation for walking around the arena to test each section’s sound.

But all that said, I’m looking forward to the tour. I really like the new album, even if the lyrics are often subpar, because it just sounds so darned good. And I love the idea of shaking up the set by putting Badlands first (no more long crowd schtick, just pure intensity), and moving Born to Run to the end of the main set (just cause it’s so predictable as an encore). Actually, I’d love to see a show with Max’s teenaged son Jay on drums–I hear he’s great and really pushes the tempo, which can plod at times with the old man.

Speaking of kids, Bruce’s daughter Jessica is really making a name for herself on the equestrian circuit, winning several prestigious events in Florida. She’s been interviewed a few times on NYC television and seems very down-to-earth (like her father) and articulate (not like his father!).

Mark S: Murder Inc. was actually written in 1982, recorded for what became the Born in the USA album, but not released until 1995. So that’s truly the exception that proves your rule. I personally disagree with you, but his career has certainly been different since that great run between Greetings and Tunnel. FWIW, I think Human Touch was lame, Lucky Town good but minor, Tom Joad great lyrically but dull, The Rising very good but not quite great, D&D interesting but minor, Seeger fantastic musically but a genre exercise, Magic very good but not quite great, and WOD a fun listen but inconsitent lyrically.

I think this last part is where I’m most interested in what a great musician would retract from her earlier years. Would the popularity of a song ruin it? Would horrible or great covers of it ruin it? Would seeing it in commercials ruin it? I know this sometimes gets asked in interviews, but I would love a book of Rock retractions.

That said, perhaps Springsteen will later retract Outlaw Pete.

Just another example of the concept that tastes differ, and there’s very little that’s truly laughable… especially to the 90% standard… with the exception of “According to Jim”.

Domo arigato.