Eric Church Has Carolina on His Mind

Eric Church won over fans and (some) critics with his 2006 album, Sinners Like Me. Now, Church is gearing up for what may prove to be his busiest–and biggest–year yet. In the next few weeks he’ll be headlining his own tour and releasing his second album, Carolina. On Monday, Church took some time to chat with Pierce Greenberg in this exclusive interview for The 9513.
PIERCE GREENBERG: Let’s talk about the new album, Carolina. What were some of the differences between making this album and making Sinners Like Me?
ERIC CHURCH: I think with this album, I knew the fanbase this time. When I made Sinners Like Me, I hadn’t met any of these fans that we’ve met over the last three years touring. It’s been a good thing for me.
I know a lot of people don’t like the sophomore jinx or the sophomore record. There’s pressure and all that stuff. But for me, I felt like I had been out there and I had seen these fans—their hands up in the air, beers up in the air, what they sang. I shook hands with them.
I knew when we made this record, I wanted to do two things: I wanted to be true to who we were, but at the same time I wanted to take some chances and throw in a little diversity and maybe peel back another layer of who our fans think we are and show a little growth.
PG: When you sat down to write songs for this album, did that process change at all?
EC: I think, from a writing side, the difficult thing with us is I’m a guy who loves making records. I’m a fan of music history, and country music history and all music. I’m very respectful of the time that I’m being given to contribute some albums to that. In order to do that, in order to get the albums I wanna get—the quality album—it takes some time and that starts with the writing.
We’ve had the better part of three years to make this record. We started immediately after we put Sinners out. I’ve been writing and the label wanted me to put out a record sooner, and it just wasn’t ready. I’m not a guy that’s gonna make a lot of records—maybe I’ll make five in my career, one every three years.
We dot the “I”s, and cross the “T”s, and by the time a record gets out, I promise that it’s worth having.
From a writing side, I think it’s about, if you write 10 songs and you put all 10 on the record, chances are you didn’t write 10 great songs. I have to write 80-100 songs to find out what the true 10-12 best songs are and that takes time.
I try not to put a lot of pressure on myself, and that’s kind of what it’s become. And I’ve seen a lot more things with touring, and I’m married now. There’s a lot more stories. There’s a lot more storylines on this record than on Sinners Like Me.
PG: I was about to ask. How has married life been? Does Katherine come out on the road with you? Is it tougher than you imagined?
EC: It’s going great. I thank God that Katherine and I found each other, because she’s just perfect, especially for what I do.
We’ve been together a long time. We’ve been together six years, so she’s been with me the entire time I’ve been a recording artist. She’s just the perfect person to be with and she does come out. She always picks out NY, Chicago, the West Coast runs. She picks the best cities that I end up in.
PG: Why was “Love Your Love the Most” chosen as the lead single for the new record?
EC: We’ve got a pretty rocking, rollicking, live show. The guys always have their fists in air, beer in the air, the girls on their shoulders—fists in the air, beer in the air—so it’s always a hard thing when you play a ballad or an off-tempo. I find that the beer comes down and the fists come down. So I’m always looking for that song that can be a love song, but at the same time it plays like an anthem.
Of all the songs I’ve had, it doesn’t play like the kind of song it is. When you see the title “Love Your Love the Most,” you think that must be a pretty lovey-dovey kind of song. You have to see it live to see that it’s become one of our top songs.
It’s also the best start I’ve had at radio, maybe ever, but at least since “How Bout You” right now. It’s gonna be great to get out there. We’re really excited about it.
PG: I’m from North Carolina myself, so the title track “Carolina” really hits home for me. How do you hope that the song will resonate with fans across the country, not just in NC or SC?
EC: I think the song is about North Carolina, but at the same time it’s about home and it’s about missing home. No matter where you’re from, it’s very appealing. Everybody’s got that place that they call home, or that place they think about when somebody asks them where they’re from. And North Carolina is that for me.
We played Charlotte one night, and we left Charlotte and we had to get to Nashville the next day to catch a plane somewhere. And we drove by the exit where I live—and it had been about six months since I had been home—and that night we were too busy to stop. It was just a lonely, kind of homesick feeling and that’s where that started.
I think it’s gonna resonate, cause I’ve already seen it resonate. Not only sonically do people like the song, but no matter where you’re from, you can insert your own home and make it appeal.
PG: “Lotta Boot Left to Fill” makes a pretty rash statement to Nashville. Was there any opposition, or at least hesitation, from the label about releasing this song?
EC: They were a little nervous. Actually, the president, Mike Dungan, who I love, lets me be me and lets me make records and I couldn’t be luckier.
He came to me and picked up the record and said, “First of all, I love the record, I think it’s another great record.” He said, “I played ‘Lotta Boot Left to Fill’ for our label, and I’ve gotta be honest, there were some nervous people in the room.” And I just kinda grinned and said, “That’s wonderful.” If they weren’t nervous, I’d be concerned. So, that song is meant to make a statement.
I’m not a big fan of reality TV shows. If you make a great record and you’re respective of the format and you go out there and play shows and do the things you’re supposed to do then I have no problem with you at all.
My problem comes when people come in and don’t make a great record, and they disrespect the format and they try to grab fame somehow versus actually participating in what the music is. And I think this song is about that and it’s about that statement. I’m OK with that.
PG: It seems to be pointing a finger at mainstream country. Do you not consider yourself part of the mainstream?
EC: I hope I’m the mainstream. I hope the mainstream becomes more of what we do, and I think somebody’s gotta wave the flag there. I think there’s a lot of artists out there right now that are considered mainstream that I think make great music.
I think that the stuff we sometimes point the finger at is the stuff that’s maybe in the mainstream that shouldn’t be. I think it’s the reverse of your question. I don’t find that we’re on the outside, I find that we’re on the inside, and we’re just trying to take care of the music.
Again, you come in and make a good record, I don’t care who you are or what you’ve done. Welcome. Fantastic. That’s important to the format and I think the format needs that.
This is the coolest format out there. I really believe that. We’re singer-songwriter-driven, we’re story-driven. The best singer-songwriters across the board—and I love all kinds of music, and study all kind of music—historically is the country music singer-songwriters—Cash or Waylon or any of those guys.
It’s important that we show the world that hey, you may think we’re this, but we’re really much cooler than we sometimes show. And I’m not the only guy. There’s a lot of new guys out there, and girls, that are waving the cool flag, waving the hip flag, and by the same token waving the very cool country music flag.
PG: Also, in “Lotta Boot” you say, “You sing about Johnny Cash/But the man in black would’ve whipped your ass.” Are you trying to say that you could hold your own against Cash?
EC: Nah. He would’ve whooped my ass too. I think a lot of that’s tongue-in-cheek. It’s an older song, I wrote that back after Cash had died. That song could’ve made the first record. I think it’s the oldest song that’s on this record. We just had so much attitude on the first record that we didn’t add it.
We started writing it when Cash had just died and everywhere I turned, it didn’t matter who it was, it was Johnny Cash, Johnny Cash, Johnny Cash. I felt a lot of people were just riding on his name at the time cause he was the cool thing.
I think that’s where the cinema of that song came from. Then again, it is tongue-in-cheek. There’s a lot of that in this song, and there’s a lot of humor in this song.
PG: When I first heard the song, I thought it may have been written regarding a certain tiff that you had with a certain mainstream country-pop boy band a few years ago. Did that have anything to do with it?
EC: I think once the record’s out there, it’s more irrelevant of what I think, and more relevant of what you think or what the consumer thinks. My job is to make the observation, I know the stories behind it, and it’s up to the people to make their own interpretations. So I can say that no, that wasn’t the main motivation for that one.
PG: So, in a couple of days you’re about to set off on the Young & Wild tour with Jonathon Singleton and the Grove. What can fans expect from this tour? Anything new?
EC: Everything is new with us. We’ve got a totally new show. We’re playing the new record which we haven’t played in it’s entirety yet. We’ve never played “Young and Wild” live and we’ve never played “Smoke a Little Smoke” live. I happen to think that both of them will play very well with our fan base.
It’s gonna be a great show. We’ve also added Ashley Ray to the tour. I’d been looking for a girl to open the show, and it had to be the right kind of girl. It had to be a girl that could go out there with a guitar and stand up against the crowd. It takes a special person to go out and do that.
I love Jonathon Singleton, I’ve known him a while—great songwriter. He’s gonna do really well.
For us, we’re gonna keep doing what we do. Our fans are very passionate, they sing every line. They bring it every night.
PG: We like to wrap up interviews on The 9513 by asking this question: What is country music?
EC: Country music is the greatest representation, musically, of real life. Simply, it’s become American music. Rock and roll used to be American music, I think it’s become country now. We’re a pretty big umbrella—we’ve got some pop, we’ve got some country, we’ve got some rock. We’ve got this thing to pull from that’s pretty broad and diverse.
I think the great thing about it is the growth we’ve seen country have from time-to-time. The contraction period—it always contracts to a truer place than it was before. I think that if we go through boom and bust and boom and bust, I think I see some really cool things right now.
There’s a lot of really good singer-songwriter-driven music, a lot of real cool country music out there right now. I haven’t seen the fan base this songwriter-driven in a long, long time. I’m very excited about the future, and I can’t wait to be a part of it.
Popular Stuff
Sponsor
Tagged In This Article
Current Discussion
- Keah: Why the hell are we talking about Taylor "not-so" Swift?
- Music Lover: Finally, whatever we like or not, she'll stay quite a long time in music. All we can do is watch ...
- Music Lover: The vocal problem TS has is not about the fact that she was born with thin, flat vocal or her ...
- Joey: The reason why she sounds decent in studio is because it's auto-tuned. And her winning grammy for white horse? I ...
- Steve M.: I prefer live acts. But i again question how you can expect a long career if you can't sing live. ...
- Music Lover: I know, I also don't like TS winning Vocal awards except Grammy for White Horse. That deserve a debate. TS ...
- Steve M.: If you think 40 is old, then you are in for a shock later in life. Again, how is it ...
- Music Lover: You sound like an old stubborn man. Let's stop here. I've read your comments about Taylor and I know how ...
- Steve M.: How is it rude to point out she can't carry a tune live?
- Music Lover: Oh ho ho!!! Here we go, again. You seems like you don't really read my comment. Yeah, I already said that ...
While the voice of country’s future took home this year’s big honor, a legendary voice from country music’s past scored a win for Album Of The Year. Check out the winners in The 9513's 2nd Annual Country Music Awards now!
Josh Turner's fourth album, Haywire, furthers his reputation as one of the leading men in contemporary country, a true, traditional voice in an ever-changing Nashville scene.
Having played on more than 500 albums and toured with artists that range from Hank III to Dolly Parton, Randy Kohrs has become one of the go-to musicians when there’s a need for a resophonic guitar
Sammy Kershaw – “Better Than I Used To Be”
As the title track off his upcoming album, “Better Than I Used to Be” is a straight-up look back on the career of a country music staple.
Emily West Featuring Keith Urban – “Blue Sky” Emily West turns in a gorgeous performance on “Blue Sky,” hitting notes few of her contemporaries can reach.
What does Alan Jackson like on his eggs?
Cheese and corn; he still likes bologna; a load of salsa; hens? Answers to the questions you'd never dream of asking. (
In each and every instance, the best country albums of the past ten years were built on the backs of songs -- stories about you and me from birth to death and stories that paint landscapes rooted in every region of America and beyond. These are the top country albums of the decade.


47 Comments
RSS for comments on this post | Trackback URI for this post
March 9, 2009 at 4:44 pm Permalink
Nice interview, Pierce. Eric seems to have a pretty high opinion of himself, though. What do you think–does the album warrant the amount of confidence he has in it?
I disagree with some of what he says (more time taken to release an album does not ensure quality), but what I’m most interested in is the number of times our readers will raise their fist when they listen to the album after it’s released.
March 9, 2009 at 4:59 pm Permalink
Eric is no Jamey Johnson, but it sure sounds like he thinks he is. Eric’s music has always struck me as expendable….
March 9, 2009 at 7:23 pm Permalink
The whole ‘great records take time to make’ idea has always struck me as crap – the Beatles used to put out a minimum of one album a year, often more – a lot of folks think they made pretty good records…
March 9, 2009 at 9:02 pm Permalink
Brady, I’m still up in the air on where I stand with this album. It’s somewhere between “better than average” and “really good” but I’m gonna need a few more listens.
The instrumentation/production on this is what really separates it from other, similar artists (see: Jake Owen’s latest). It certainly stretches the definition of country, at least production-wise. (If I had a little more time to listen to it, I may have asked him about that.)
I’m really interested to see what CM thinks of it. (I think he’s doing the album review)
I also want to see how “Lotta Boot” is recieved here…very interesting song, and I thought it warranted the amount of questions I asked on it.
March 9, 2009 at 10:34 pm Permalink
We’ve got a pretty rocking, rollicking, live show. The guys always have their fists in air, beer in the air, the girls on their shoulders—fists in the air, beer in the air—so it’s always a hard thing when you play a ballad or an off-tempo. I find that the beer comes down and the fists come down. So I’m always looking for that song that can be a love song, but at the same time it plays like an anthem.
People who think like this are a big reason why so much of contemporary country sucks.
March 9, 2009 at 11:14 pm Permalink
Nice interview, Pierce. I liked that you asked the Johnny Cash question.
I’m really interested to see what CM thinks of it. (I think he’s doing the album review)
I am, and my goal will be to write a review that has people stopping every few lines to pump their fists, raise their beers, and hoist their significant others on their shoulders. It will be a rocking review because, like Eric Church, I believe that rocking out is the only way to connect with an audience.
Okay, so actually I haven’t even heard the album yet.
March 10, 2009 at 2:17 am Permalink
“The instrumentation/production on this is what really separates it from other, similar artists (see: Jake Owen’s latest). It certainly stretches the definition of country, at least production-wise. (If I had a little more time to listen to it, I may have asked him about that.)”
Does he have the same producer as on his first album? I thought that was a bit heavy on the rock production, and thought that might be because the producer comes from a mainly rock background.
March 10, 2009 at 8:33 am Permalink
“they’re not going to sit there and listen to every line. Instead, they’re going to have on their bikini tops and go “wooo” and not even listen to what you’re saying but, you know, bob to the beat. It shouldn’t matter, it’s just music, it’s just music.” — Elizabeth Cook
March 10, 2009 at 9:07 am Permalink
Whatever the point of pasting that quote was, it doesn’t really have any applications in this context.
March 10, 2009 at 9:23 am Permalink
Sure it does; it was prompted by Matt C.’s and CMW’s comments with respect to Church’s about audiences at his shows. Key phrase: “it shouldn’t matter.”
March 10, 2009 at 9:43 am Permalink
What works well at a live show for frat boys and girls in bikinis doesn’t necessarily translate to radio or listening in any other environment. So when keeping fists in the air becomes the main goal, then yes, it does matter, especially for someone who has tried to position himself as the next Kristofferson. There’s a huge disconnect somewhere in there.
If you want to argue that Elizabeth Cook’s quote somehow stated the goal of her music was to keep fists and beer in the air at her live shows, then go ahead, because that’s what Church said.
March 10, 2009 at 10:13 am Permalink
Who said anything about “the goal,” much less the “main goal?” The guy was answering a question about why the song was chosen as the first single, and a couple of posters decided to riff on his answer as a symbol of what’s wrong with contemporary country, etc. But – and this was Cook’s point – there’s nothing wrong with “frat boys and girls in bikinis” enjoying the music, and nothing wrong with making music they enjoy.
March 10, 2009 at 10:25 am Permalink
I’m somewhat in the middle on this. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with appealing to your audience (heck, I think that’s one of Taylor Swift’s strengths).
I think people are a little too harsh on Church because he’s “billed himself as the next Kristofferson.” I don’t think he’s ever said in any interview “I’m the next Kristofferson.” It was pretty much just a PR campaign for the first album that some marketing people dreamed up.
I’m not sure an artist (much less a new artist) should be judged based on “what they think of themselves” that doesn’t even come from their own mouths.
The good news is that Love Your Love the Most is by far the weakest track on the album.
March 10, 2009 at 10:28 am Permalink
“there’s nothing wrong with “frat boys and girls in bikinis” enjoying the music, and nothing wrong with making music they enjoy.”
Jon,
I agree with you there but I’m sure there are plenty of people here who won’t. Even if ‘back in the day’ there were artists that were doing just that.
March 10, 2009 at 10:30 am Permalink
Church said he was looking for the love song that plays like an anthem…sounds like a goal to me.
And yes, I understand Cook’s point, and I agree that there’s nothing wrong with anyone enjoying music on a superficial level. But she’s not making music expressly for the purpose of entertaining girls in bikinis who aren’t even listening to what she’s saying (her words).
March 10, 2009 at 10:31 am Permalink
“The good news is that Love Your Love the Most is by far the weakest track on the album.”
Pierce,
But that will only become ‘further evidence’ about how “crappy” country radio has become to some and, make no mistake, I don’t listen to it that often but my job requires me to listen to the stuff they play and most isn’t as bad as people say.
March 10, 2009 at 10:40 am Permalink
Who are all these anonymous people you speak of Matt B?
March 10, 2009 at 10:54 am Permalink
He didn’t say it was his “main goal,” which was your phrase, and he didn’t say it was the “goal of [his] music,” which was also your phrase, and he wasn’t talking about making music “expressly for the purpose of entertaining girls in bikinis,” either, which was also your phrase. He was answering a specific question about a specific song; context counts for something, you know.
And BTW, Elizabeth didn’t say anything about “superficial,” and I don’t know that she’d agree with that dismissal, nor would a lot of country artists over the years. Do you think Bob Wills and the Texas Playboys were playing for “listening room” audiences looking for the next Kristofferson? What the hell is the point of raising some kind of standard of seriousness for the audience to live up to? Sheesh.
March 10, 2009 at 10:59 am Permalink
Brady,
I wasn’t counting you or Brody or Jim in that anonymous list of people.
March 10, 2009 at 11:19 am Permalink
Yeah dude, context counts for something and he said he wanted songs that made people keep their fists and beer up in the air. Just because he didn’t explicitly say the word “goal” doesn’t mean it’s not implied. Of course you know what imply means, though, because you took my words about Cook’s comment and applied them to Church–a little too literally, in fact. This semantic BS with you is kinda annoying.
“And BTW, Elizabeth didn’t say anything about “superficial,” and I don’t know that she’d agree with that dismissal, nor would a lot of country artists over the years.”
So I guess the words are just there to make it sound pretty, is that it? And I didn’t say there had to be any sort of standard of seriousness that’s applicable to music in all forms.
“Do you think Bob Wills and the Texas Playboys were playing for “listening room” audiences looking for the next Kristofferson?”
They would’ve been waiting a helluva long time for the first Kristofferson.
March 10, 2009 at 11:54 am Permalink
There goes my Jason Aldean theory.
March 10, 2009 at 12:02 pm Permalink
“They would’ve been waiting a helluva long time for the first Kristofferson.”
Brady, for the win!
March 10, 2009 at 12:44 pm Permalink
I for one CAN’t WAIT for this album. I am surprised that many of you don’t like Eric Church. His first album was absolute GOLD IMO. Maybe alot has to do with me liking him so much because I am more his age demographic(Being 21) I really do feel I relate to all of his songs. I can maybe understand why an older crowd may not appreciate him as much.
If you ever get the chance to see this guy on tour, TAKE IT! He puts on a heck of a show and really will stand out in your mind.
March 10, 2009 at 12:50 pm Permalink
Er, Eric is 31.
March 10, 2009 at 3:05 pm Permalink
Eric Church is one of the new country artist who wants to be an outlaw by what his music has to say, but also wants to be played on the radio (Jason Aldean also pops to mind). He comes off as a good ole boy who can appeal to other good ole boys and a few redneck girls. But it is all an image limited by sales. He wants to sell records so he is not going to make music that offends the public thought or even shocks it. He told that story about the record ex so that we would think he was being bold and raw. He is as bold as a safety pin. As long as fame and money are involved he is not going let his music be as daring as he would like us to think. He is no Elizabeth Cook.
March 10, 2009 at 3:12 pm Permalink
The point is, Brady, that he was replying to a question about one song, not laying out an all-encompassing approach to material; the rest of the interview made that pretty clear. So singling that out as though it were symptomatic of his general goals as a musician, or as representative of something that’s wrong with contemporary country music, etc. is just off-target. And yes, sometimes words are there just to make it sound pretty or fun, and FYI, sometimes there aren’t any words at all. And Bob Wills’ audiences weren’t waiting for the first Kristofferson, either. They were wanting to dance, hoist a few beers and (shudder) have a good time. If that’s a big reason why contemporary country music sucks, it’s a big part of why country music of any period sucks. Which I don’t know about you, but I don’t think it does.
March 10, 2009 at 4:00 pm Permalink
I personally loved his first album. I thought it was full of pretty good hooks. Im a little aprehensive about this next one, but in my opinion, even an album not quite as good as his last one will be better than alot that have come out.
March 10, 2009 at 4:18 pm Permalink
Church’s “music” is completely disposable. I predict as many people will be listening to him in 15 years as there are people who are listening to Perfect Stranger and Jeff Carson CDs NOW.
March 10, 2009 at 4:20 pm Permalink
First, don’t get me wrong ….I really like Eric’s music. But…having said that….I saw Eric early last year and I could have sworn he said back then that the new album was ready, but he didn’t know when the label was releasing. Hmmmmmmm?? Something seems to smell fishy with his canned interview replies.
March 10, 2009 at 4:57 pm Permalink
Cardsgal,
Jeff Carson may come and arrest you for that comment…
March 10, 2009 at 5:28 pm Permalink
“….I saw Eric early last year and I could have sworn he said back then that the new album was ready, but he didn’t know when the label was releasing.”
I think it was originally due to be released last August. It was probably delayed because the single released then didn’t do well.
March 11, 2009 at 9:46 am Permalink
In Nashville nobody’s ever completely sure when an album will be released until it actually gets released. A “release date” is an elusive creature here.
March 11, 2009 at 9:49 am Permalink
So basically what Eric is saying in this interview is that he aspires to be the lead singer of a touring bar band. Really, does anyone think great artists are concerned with whether or not the crowd is holding their beer up in the air?
March 11, 2009 at 12:31 pm Permalink
Hi Pierce! How are you? Great article with a great artist :-)
Take care,
-Ø.
March 11, 2009 at 3:24 pm Permalink
I don’t disagree with the sentiment of “Lotta Boot to Fill” but I think “Two Pink Lines” kinda disqualifies him from taking any kind of moral high ground on mainstream country.
Nice interview.
March 12, 2009 at 1:15 pm Permalink
“So basically what Eric is saying in this interview is that he aspires to be the lead singer of a touring bar band. Really, does anyone think great artists are concerned with whether or not the crowd is holding their beer up in the air?”
Well, in the first place, that’s not “basically” what Church said, not even close. If one wanted to be fair in boiling down the contents of the interview as a whole, all one would need to do would be to take his third paragraph, for which the rest of the interview serves pretty much as an elaboration (and remember, you’re focused not on the results, but the aspiration). If, on the other hand, one wanted to be superficial and snarky and self-congratulatory about one’s superiority to “frat boys” et.al., well, one would make comments much like those that have in fact been made by you and others.
As for what great artists are concerned about, I’d say it depends on which great artist you’re talking about. Maybe you should narrow your question, Jim, by making that “artistes.” Because lord knows there have been plenty of great country artists (without the “e”) who devoted a good deal of their attention to making sure that their audiences were having a good time.
March 12, 2009 at 1:37 pm Permalink
Eh, Jon, surely “I aspire to keep my audience dancing” is different from “I aspire to keep my audience weeping in empathy” and from “I aspire to keep my audience singing along” and from “I aspire laughing.” And all of those are different from aspiring to have the audience “fists in air, beer in the air, the girls on their shoulders.” All those things would be interpreted by specific audiences as having a good time. But they don’t show the same sense of who the artist wants to please, or how.
March 12, 2009 at 1:59 pm Permalink
If, on the other hand, one wanted to be superficial and snarky.
Oh, one does. One does indeed.
Here Jon, let me explain to you what I did.
See, I took Church’s statement and I then analyzed what it “actually” “meant” in a humorous manner.
I mean, the dude said he doesn’t like to play ballads because people put their beer down. He freaking said that. I mean, think about that for a minute–when you take everything he said about his live performances in this interview and look at all of it together, how can you infer that his goals are anything more than the goals of a bar band? Isn’t the point of a bar band to keep the mood high, the beer flowing and the people on the dance floor? And isn’t that exactly what he said he wants to do?
March 12, 2009 at 2:02 pm Permalink
Some are more different than others, and some of them, like dancing and singing along, are a lot closer to beer in the air than they are to weeping in empathy or stroking chins and muttering “so true, so insightful, so artistic.” Maybe I’m missing some deep social significance to beers in the air as a particular form of audience reaction, but it don’t look that bad – or that different from dancing – from up on stage.
And in any case, to take Church’s confession with respect to keeping an eye out for a song that gets the beers in the air as a statement so revealing that it trumps everything else he has to say in the interview about what he wants to accomplish hardly seems justified.
March 12, 2009 at 2:08 pm Permalink
Jon, all I can say is that if you find a frat full of guys who actually two-step (vide your Bob Wills reference above) I wish you’d let me know, so I can hang out around there. IMO, there’s a difference between dancing and raising fists’n'beers, but I’m coming at this as someone who despairs of getting most guys to dance any more.
March 12, 2009 at 2:13 pm Permalink
“IMO, there’s a difference between dancing and raising fists’n’beers”
OK, but is the difference between eliciting one and the other then difference between being a great artist and being a bar band hack? And what if they’re jitterbugging instead of two-stepping? ;-)
March 12, 2009 at 2:16 pm Permalink
Whoa whoa whoa. Did I ever use the word hack?
I did imply that bar bands, as a rule, are not “great artists,” but that’s a long way from calling them a “hack.” Eric Church most certainly is not a “hack.”
March 12, 2009 at 2:26 pm Permalink
OK, I’m willing to go hang out with guys who can jitterbug, too.
March 12, 2009 at 2:46 pm Permalink
“The point is, Brady, that he was replying to a question about one song, not laying out an all-encompassing approach to material; the rest of the interview made that pretty clear.”
I was gonna let this die, but since you made the snarky remark yesterday and replied again today, I’ll bite. Church’s comment about beers and fists wasn’t a meaningless, off-the-cuff remark. He said it in response to the first question, repeated it in response to another question, then reiterated it. Besides, why should we assume that it’s “a hard thing” if his audience takes down their fist or beer on that one song, but it’ll be fine on the next song or the one after that?
And no one is claiming that all music has to strive for broad, far-reaching significance, but when so much on the radio doesn’t try to reach for anything more than pandering well…it sucks. That’s the point others were trying to make. You’re attempting to narrow things a little too much.
Unrelated to the previous discussion, but Church’s comments about crossing his t’s and dotting his i’s, waving the cool flag, and making records that matter come across as little more than self-congratulation. I don’t think it’s been brought up yet, but the first single he released didn’t even make on to this album.
March 13, 2009 at 12:42 am Permalink
“I mean, the dude said he doesn’t like to play ballads because people put their beer down. He freaking said that.”
Well, uh, no, Jim, he freaking didn’t. For a guy who insists on precision when it comes to his ownlanguage, you’re surprisingly imprecise when it comes to others’. Church said it was “hard” to switch to a ballad in the middle of a rockin’ show. The difference between “it’s hard to” and “I don’t like to” should be pretty obvious.
As for the “bar band” stuff and keeping beers in the air being “exactly” what he wants to do (and, you and others have repeatedly implied or said outright, nothing more), one can pursue that line of argument only by ignoring the rest of the interview. He wants to “throw in a little diversity” and “peel back another layer of who our fans think we are and show a little growth” – statements which directly contradict the notion that all he wants to do is reinforce the beers-in-the-air status quo among his fans. His comments about the title track suggest that he’s interested in more, and so do his comments about the “Lotta Boot” song. To ignore all that in the way that you (and others) have done makes it just about impossible for a disinterested reader to think anything other than that you see Church as an artist with only one limited and obviously objectionable goal. You didn’t need to use the actual word “hack”; the implication was unmistakable, and if it’s not one that you intended, then you need to, um, fine tune your comments.
I hold no particular brief for Eric Church, who as far as I know I’ve never heard. But coming down on him based on a highly selective and distorted reading of his interview rubs me the wrong way.
December 15, 2009 at 10:46 am Permalink
This guy is such a poser trying way too hard to prove his “authenticity.” Eric Church manages to combine the worst elements of country music and Southern rock creating something uniquely horrible. Why is he so dorkily angry during his shows?
December 15, 2009 at 11:01 am Permalink
I dont care if Eric Church is authentic or not. All I care about is the fact that the songs Ive heard from him are songs I’d prefer not to hear again.
Leave a Comment