Tuesday, October 14, 2008

Of Wonderous Legends (O.W.L.) [Locust 2008 re-release originally from 1972]


I first put Of Wondrous Legends (O.W.L.) on after a bit of indecisiveness. Juggling between reading local Denver historian Phil Goodstein’s In the Shadow of the Klan: When the KKK Ruled Denver 1920-1926 or listening to the latest Locust release (a fantastic esoteric label out of Chicago), I decided to wait on delving into Denver’s villainous past and instead found myself drifting away to a very different hidden history. An ambitious and ambiguous first release, O.W.L. is a once lost (with an initial pressing of less than twenty) and strange treasure from 1972.

Stephen Titra, the architect of O.W.L. works with vast instrumentation in creating a union of baroque-folk, politically and historically laced poetry and progressive but sneaky rock that veers on the folkier side of the British Invasion. Sneaky in its ability in housing a sense of wonder, visions of the past, present and future (well a time which can only be romanticized, considering I didn’t live through a single year of the 70’s) and an unexplainable desolation; the kind commonly felt in listening to something that’s laid to rest in a coffin for decades.

As the liner notes reveal, Dawson Prater of Locust stumbled upon one of the original 20 pressings while thrifting along Chicago’s Western Ave. Dawson describes his first listen as follows: “Once home, I put on the record, sat back in a favorite chair, listened as the album took subtle shape and stared at the litho for awhile. By album’s end – after hints of the record’s enchanted, inward looking some cycle – I was suitably knocked out”. After experiencing the mesmerizing sounds of O.W.L., Dawson hunted Stephen Titra down (who was still living in Chicago) and finally released what unadventurous mainstream labels wouldn’t take a chance on more than thirty years earlier.

Like much of early 70’s folk-rock, Of Wondrous Legends may not have aged too well. But then again no one has been able to experience its aging process, which gives the overall art a novel, but cryptic beauty. Even the brilliance of Tim Buckley and Roy Harper haven’t aged as well as they should have. But whose fault is that, the artists, or confused and scattered modern notions that dictate the relevance and hipness of the past?

Bardos Freedoom

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

I aways say "You sign on when you sign in." The concept of 'aging well' is a pretty subjective one...

This review sure needs a sound sample to illustrate it's historicalness. Great insight, this quote "But whose fault is that, the artists, or confused and scattered modern notions that dictate the relevance and hipness of the past?"

In a time where everything obscure is being hyped and revered, even the context of the context is suspect.

But I'm gonna beat your ass for bashing early Tim Buckley- that stuff is timeless :-) Sure the later stuff falls apart, but it sounded like that when it came out. Some of us were there, youngster!