Here is a rather excellent essay by author Martin Halliwell which explores Neil Young’s long-running fascination with dreams.
From The Musical Transcendence of Neil Young by author Martin Halliwell:
Dreams for Young are sometimes a puzzle to solve and at
other times a new geography to explore, corresponding to the two
dominant dream theories of the 1960s: the Freudian theory in which
dreams are a working through of repressed psychic matter; and the
existential humanist view of dreams as an alternative topography.
Dreaming is rarely a doorway to the state of lost innocence for which
Young yearns in “Sugar Mountain,” but it has the capacity to transport
the singer and the listener elsewhere. Through the act of dreaming Young
can drift purposefully, pulling together sounds, images and colours in
creative ways, and can explore the twists and turns of the unconscious
where one image blurs with the next. The nature of dreams means that
their shape keeps morphing. This can lead the dreamer towards deeper
meaning, but can also drift away into impressions and noise. At times
Young searches for direction–such as the quest on his 2007 track “Spirit
Road” to discover the “long highway” within — and at other times
escapes from meaning into a play of imagery and sound.
We can identify this second trend in one of Young’s early dream songs,
“Broken Arrow.” This six-minute coda to the second Buffalo Springfield
album Buffalo Springfield Again seems to be inspired by the early-summer
release of The Beatles’ concept album Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club
Band, leading Young to incorporate crowd noises from a Beatles concert
and the opening distorted snippet of a live performance of “Mr Soul,”
sung by drummer Dewey Martin. Despite its musical variety there is
little input from the band, except for backing vocals by Richie Furay,
added after Young had recorded the song in September 1967. Its power
stems from Young’s sound experiments and the visually arresting figure
of a Native American standing alone on a riverbank with an empty quiver.
This image of the ‘vanishing Indian’ with a broken arrow suggests
either surrender to an unstoppable force or an offering of peace.
What
makes this a mysterious image is that there is no discernible enemy in
sight; instead the verses describe a triad of social pressures (fame,
adolescence and marriage) as if modern social organization has defeated
the nobility of the Native American.
Full excerpt at The Musical Transcendence of Neil Young by author Martin Halliwell.
Also, Martin Halliwell's new book is titled Neil Young: American Traveller (Reverb).
For more on Neil Young's dreams, also see:
‘The Visitor’
by Neil Young + Promise of the Real
"All in a dream, all in a dream
The loading had begun
Flying mother nature's silver seed
To a new home in the sun
Flying mother nature's silver seed
To a new home"
Labels: analysis, book, dreams, lyrics, meaning, neil young, songs
(Off topic – sorry.)
Do we know when Toast (the released version) was mixed?
Because if you listen to the Are You Passionate mix of Goin' Home, you can instantly hear why Crazy Horse (from the other side of the mixing control room) weren't totally impressed by these recording sessions back in 2001.
The mix is limp and grey and flat sounding (what I call the "wet cardboard" effect). The vocal is tentative — it struggles to find the melody, and is submerged by the guitars. The lead guitar hits a series of bum notes that kill the mood.
The bass has no real depth or presence. The overdubs might as well not be there. Poncho's masterful second-guitar performance is buried.
And in the end, Neil just aborts the performance.
The feeling is: "this isn't quite working". Which is frustrating. For the musicians and producer and the listener.
But the mix on Toast is the opposite of all that. And it's the *same* take — the same version! Neil and John Hanlon knew there was something special in this performance, and they went in and brought it to the surface.
This is an album where the production, the overdubs and the mixing all play a huge part in the success of the music.
That's not a criticism! The production is part of the art.
Similarly, many people wear makeup to accentuate their natural beauty. Nothing wrong with that, and it's the same principle.
In the music world, an audible sense of production only becomes a problem when a) it detracts from the music's natural beauty and b) when the production covers up a lack of substance.
(Much of Le Noise, in my opinion, is an example of the latter. The production is impressive, but the effect is a hollow one.)
On Toast, extensive work has gone into making Goin' Home sound as good as humanly possible. The bum notes have been chopped (as minimally as possible), the vocal has been heavily compressed to even it out and add some heft, there's a 3D sense of vocal echo, the abrupt ending is faded out...
It sounds magical. And, unlike the Are You Passionate attempt, it's been mixed with both gutsy horsepower and real colour. This is the spirit of David Briggs in the mixing room.
The Are You Passionate mix of Goin' Home is like a documentary. We might imagine it's Neil telling us "this is why I re-recorded this album".
Whereas the Toast mix is designed to take this rough diamond of a performance and present it to the world in the best light possible.
PS: the mixes of Goin' Home are different enough that some listeners have imagined them to be two different takes. Understandable!
But there are some extra overdubs on the Toast mix — so the two aren't musically identical.
E.g notice the twinkling piano (and what sounds like the church organ) rising out of the mix just before the final guitar solo — helping propel it into a higher gear.
I think these are inspired touches, instantly reminding of the overdubs we hear on Drive Back from Zuma. Another power-chord-based song that somehow feels entirely different to its 2001 cousin.
Scotsman.