Talk:Robert Johnson

Proposed "Robert Johnson recordings" article

The current Robert Johnson discography is more like a sessionography – it's organized by recording date, includes unissued recordings, and only mentions the albums in the lead. There was a minimal attempt at a "Robert Johnson's recording sessions"[1] a while back that was redirected. Johnson only recorded 29 songs (42 recordings including alternate takes), so a more detailed article may be workable. Rather than try to squeeze everything into one table, maybe split it up into a separate sections: "Sessionography", "Discography", "Commercial performance", and perhaps a sortable "List of songs" in a "Robert Johnson recordings" article. "List of songs recorded by ..." articles usually include a "Songwriter(s)" column. All of his recordings list Johnson as the songwriter, but biographers have shown that most are based-on/reworkings-of previous songs, so identifying Johnson alone as the songwriter seems misleading (although the official credit/copyrights should still be reflected in the prose). I've put together a rough draft here, which still needs a lead and some introductory prose for the sections. Suggestions/comments? —Ojorojo (talk) 18:45, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

As he only recorded 29 different songs - most of which have their own articles - would it not be simpler to set out most of the detailed information (on alternative recordings and inclusion on compilations) in those articles - with the existing Discography article reformatted, to include a list (but not every detail) of the commercial releases, including compilations? Information on the antecedents of the songs he recorded should be in the article on each song, and I think there would probably be little opposition to all of his songs having their own article. Re-reading your message, is that close to what you are suggesting? Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:20, 14 March 2021 (UTC) PS: So, not a completely new article - expand the existing Discography article, and move it to Recordings by Robert Johnson...  ? Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:37, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

This would not change the existing individual song articles, which should include the antecedents, first album release, etc., although I don't think all of his songs meet NSONGS (not much written about "Dead Shrimp Blues", "Little Queen of Spades", "Malted Milk", "Drunken Hearted Man", "Honeymoon Blues"). Including the List of songs section may be too much, so I re-ordered the sections to give a better idea of having just the Discography, Commercial performance, and Sessionography sections. Are you in favor of retaining the one-table discography format? One problem is how to format it to include the session info, since many of the recordings were only released on the compilations (24 on singles vs 18 on albums) and some single A- and B-sides were recorded at different sessions. Another is how to identify the albums for songs that were not released on singles. Do you have any solutions? —Ojorojo (talk) 00:01, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

@Ojorojo: What you've done looks really good so far, in my opinion. To be clear, we're talking about a major rewrite -- and possible renaming -- of the existing "Robert Johnson discography" article, right? — Mudwater ^(Talk) 00:34, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Rather than have separate articles for a "Robert Johnson discography", "Robert Johnson recording sessions", and "List of songs recorded by Robert Johnson", the idea was to include them as separate sections on a master-type "Robert Johnson recordings" article. Since he recorded only 29 songs (42 recordings), a combined article would actually shorter than many WP discographies alone. The existing "RJ discography" would be a redirect to the new article section and the existing "RJ recording sessions" redirect would be changed from the existing discography to the new article section. If the "List of songs" is left off, perhaps the new article could still be called "Robert Johnson discography", but it would be a major rewrite. The existing discography has been tagged for needing additional citations for 2+ years, is poorly formatted, and lacks details. —Ojorojo (talk) 14:10, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Yes, that makes sense to me. And as I said, I think the draft looks good. — Mudwater ^(Talk) 02:48, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

It's looking very good to me, though I wonder whether the "Sessionography" section should come first, as we are prioritising the importance of listing his recordings, rather than his commercial record releases. Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:58, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

OK, I'm getting a better idea on how to present this. I'll continue to work on the prose for the lead and section. —Ojorojo (talk) 14:10, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

If the draft looks OK, I'll move it to "Robert Johnson recordings", with redirects as noted above. —Ojorojo (talk) 14:41, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Looks good to me - I just tweaked a couple of minor typos. Thanks for your efforts! Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:42, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, done. An image at the top would help, but his copyrighted photos don't meet WP:FUR. I'm sure others will have things to add/tweak. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:37, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Nice! I'll go back and study it more closely when I get a chance. — Mudwater ^(Talk) 21:57, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

In writing the new article, I purposely didn't read the main RJ article. Now, I see that a few details differ and probably they should be harmonized. Also, perhaps some would be better in the new article, such as the "facing the corner" and playback speeds debates. —Ojorojo (talk) 14:02, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Yes, please proceed accordingly. You're all over it, like maple syrup on pancakes. — Mudwater ^(Talk) 22:37, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Legacy

The current largely unsourced Legacy section promotes the view that Johnson had virtually no impact on blues music or musicians. However, this ignores the fact that his "Dust My Broom" and "Sweet Home Chicago" became blues standards before his rediscovery (although based on earlier songs, subsequent versions follow RJ's). Pearson and McCulloch wrote that these songs "would have connected Johnson to the rightful inheritors of his musical ideas—big-city African American artists whose high-powered, electrically amplified blues remained solidly in touch with Johnson's musical legacy". [p. 28] Elmore James, who had a hit with "Dust My Broom" and recorded "Crossroads" (both in 1954), was clearly influenced ("Johnson's influence upon Elmore James's music always remained powerful" [Herzhaft p. 162]). Palmer notes that "it's his version [Johnsons's 'Sweet Home Chicago'] that survived in the repertoires of performers like Magic Sam, Robert Lockwood, and Junior Parker" [p. 126] (Parker's version was a hit in 1958). Sonny Boy Williamson I popularized Johnson's "Stop Breaking Down" in 1945. [ibid.]

Wald's quote in the Legacy section ("As far as the evolution of black music goes, Robert Johnson was an extremely minor figure, and very little that happened in the decades following his death would have been affected if he had never played a note") ignores the fact that some of his songs became well-known before his rediscovery. The Legacy section also includes "Johnson's greatest influence has been on genres of music that developed after his death: rock and roll and rock." [no source] Besides the lyrics and some of the melodies of Cream's "Crossroads", the Stones' "Love in Vain", Zeppelin's "Traveling Riverside Blues", etc., these songs and most of the rock adaptations show very little of Johnson's musical influence. Propose to add more balance of the Legacy section (all referenced, of course). —Ojorojo (talk) 14:39, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Rift: It's interesting that Johnson would be mentioned in the Detroit Free Press in 1949 ("the work of Robert Johnson, who made many fine records in this vein", added to "Boogie Chillen"[2]). To mention him in a review of one of the biggest blues hits in 1949 seems contrary to the idea that Johnson was "little noted" or "an extremely minor figure" before Charters or King of the Delta Blues Singers (late 50s–early 60s). Are there more early mentions of Johnson? —Ojorojo (talk) 17:02, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

It's very interesting. I don't have full access to the publication - here - though I can see from the clip that the wording in the edit is accurate. Do we know who was the record reviewer for the Detroit Free Press in 1949? Ghmyrtle (talk) 17:57, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

I tried google searches for various combinations of "Free Press", "Detroit", the writer "Jim Wilson", "Robert Johnson", "John Lee Hooker", "blues", etc., but nothing. I'll try some more later. Maybe Rift has something to add. —Ojorojo (talk) 18:23, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Looking at this a little more, it seems that the first to comment to any significant extent on Johnson's songs was Rudi Blesh in his 1946 book Shining Trumpets (text available here; quoted here and mentioned in some other sources). It would be very useful and informative to put together a short paragraph citing not only the musicians who played his songs in the twenty or so years after his death, but also any published commentaries. Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:48, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

PS: There is a little more about the reviewer Jim Wilson here - and a chapter based on an interview with him here, from page 132. Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:58, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Looks like Wilson's not just an academic type or revisionist, but had a closer connection to the actual music of the time. I agree it's time to provide some balance to the largely POV "Legacy" section. I'll begin by removing the unsourced material (tagged for 4+ years) and we'll see what's left (re-add or re-word what you think is worth saving). —Ojorojo (talk) 13:23, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Some points to consider (pre-rediscovery):

• Hammond's "From Spirituals to Swing" "advocate[d] a position of preeminence for the late Delta blues musician". [Gioia p. 188]
• "Big-city African American artists whose high-powered, electrically amplified blues remained solidly in touch with Johnson's musical legacy" [Pearson and McCulloch p. 28]
• Long lasting influence on Elmore James [Herzhaft p. 162]
• "[Post-war] Mississippi singers strongly influenced by ... Robert Johnson" [Palmer p. 159]
• Blesh's 1946 review – fanciful, but shows his records did receive critical commentary
• Wilson's 1949 mention of "Robert Johnson, who made many fine records in this vein" in review (again shows critical attention)
• "Stop Breaking Down" – Sonny Boy Williamson I (1945), Baby Boy Warren (1954), Forrest City Joe (1959) recorded it; several call it a blues standard
• "Dust My Broom" – No. 9 hit for Elmore James in 1952, became a standard
• "Sweet Home Chicago" – No. 13 for Junior Parker in 1958, Roosevelt recorded in 1955, also a standard
• Influence on contemporaries (Shines, Edwards, Lockwood, et al.)

There are undoubtedly more. As a side note, Jon Waxman's liner notes to King of the Delta Blues Singers, Vol. II mention contemporary rock, the Stones, and Johnny Winter, but no mention of blues artists. Columbia was clearly marketing it to the rock audience (whereas Vol. I was more aimed at folkies?). —Ojorojo (talk) 16:07, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Good work. I don't have the Pearson and McCulloch book - I may need to track it down. It doesn't have great ratings, but looks as though it may cover the ground. Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:58, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

I used excerpts/previews for the Dust My Broom and Crossroads articles, but don't have their book. I started a draft here, if you're interested. —Ojorojo (talk) 18:05, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

I couldn't find more mentions of RJ in the Detroit Free Press, but there are many music-related articles by Wilson, who apparently had a weekly column (scroll down to page 10 or so). A search of black newspapers from the era might show more articles that mention RJ. —Ojorojo (talk) 13:35, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

I have the books by Blesh, and Pearson/McCulloch, on order, so when they arrive I will see if there is any more to be added - and I will also look through the books I already have to see if they mention any other early references to Johnson. Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:38, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Before I saw your comment, I picked up Pearson and McCulloch's book and a few others at the library. They identify commentary in a 1942 "critical overview" titled The Jazz Record Book (now added to the Legacy section), but besides Hammond and Blesh, but that's it. They do have a lot to say about the marketing to the folk and then rock audiences. —Ojorojo (talk) 15:27, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

I now have both books, and have tweaked the wording of the 1937 Hammond quote per Pearson and McCulloch. I've also added a paragraph on Samuel Charters' 1959 references. Feel free to tweak further! Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:38, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Looks good. I've removed the under construction tag, although I'm sure the prose could be improved for flow and paraphrasing. I haven't explored RJ's influence on rock beyond Berry, but it seems that it has more to do with other than his actual music. Quoting Clapton, Plant, et al., is one way to go (Keef has some good ones). I'm not sure how much more can be added. —Ojorojo (talk) 15:32, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Alleged "low fidelity" of his recordings

Hi. Semi-retired professional audio professional here, credit as engineer on many CDs, awarded a Grammy for Best Historical Recording some years ago.

The current text of this article says that Robert Johnson "... participated in only two recording sessions [ ... ]. These songs, recorded at low fidelity in improvised studios, were the totality of his recorded output." The part about improvised studios is well-documented. "Low fidelity", however, is an opinion given without evidence, and I would like to remove it from the text.

The LP and early CD re-issues of those 78 rpm recordings were indeed muffled and distant sounding. Unfortunately, they were the only versions available to the public for many years, and a lot of people's opinions were formed by them. But more recent re-issues, such as the "Centennial Collection" CDs on Legacy Recordings and the excerpts used in the PBS series "American Epic", sound wonderful--one might say astonishingly so. They're clear, present, life-like and well balanced. And that's not due to any artificial processing; rather, the dull, limited sound of the earlier re-issues was due to overly aggressive filtering to remove noise. (Copies of the old 78s still exist, and when played back on proper equipment they, too, sound good.)

If I had time, I would add a sentence or two in an appropriate section about these more recent re-issues, giving references to favorable, published reviews. But I don't have that kind of time right now. So am I justified in simply removing those three words of unsupported opinion, "in low fidelity", from the current text, even though, being honest, I realize that I am motivated by my different opinion from whoever wrote those words?

Best regards to all. DSatz (talk) 18:10, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

@DSatz: Just seeing your comment (I've been on a break) and agree. I went ahead and removed "at low fidelity". Any comments on the "corner loading" and increased playing speed ideas that have been floating around for awhile (now in the Sessionography and Discography sections of Robert Johnson recordings)? —Ojorojo (talk) 15:34, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

This is cool; if the text in the body does not have cited support for the statement in the lead, it's fine to remove it. --Jayron32 15:48, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Charles Dodds and Robert's conception

The 1st paragraph of the "Early life" section is a bit weird. When did Charles Dodds leave Hazlehurst - before or after he married Julia; before or after Robert was conceived? Nurg (talk) 08:41, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Charles Dodds married Julia before Robert was born but also left for Memphis before he was born. Charles Dodds also changed his last name to Spencer. All this information is in Up Jumped the Devil I think this specifically is in chapter 1/2. I don't know the page numbers as I have the digital copy. Williameditorguy (talk) 00:01, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Age at death

At the Delta Blues Museum in Clarksdale they have a copy of his death certificate, which says he was 26 at the age of death, not 27.