April 19, 2008:
Thank you Larry for agreeing to this online interview, and for your continued
support of The Judy Room. This new CD set is very exciting and has
been generating a lot of buzz in "Judy Fandom" (as I call it) for
quite some time. I have a few questions about the CD anthology and the process
of how anthologies like this get produced.
Larry is co-producer of, and also the man who wrote the wonderful liner note
to, the upcoming FremŽaux & AssociŽs release "Judy
Garland - Classiques et inŽdits - 1929-1956 set for release on May 5, 2008]
When did you first become a Judy Garland fan, and what
was it that first attracted you to her?
I have often asked myself the
same question. I am a baby-boomer, was born pretty much at the exact same time
Judy was fired from MGM, but donÕt really remember her becoming a passion until
the early 1960s. I remember discovering Carnegie
Hall around the time of its release. I also remember being excited at the
release of I Could Go On Singing,
which I immediately ran to see at The Allerton, I
believe, in the Bronx where I grew up. (Not many people were running to see a
new Judy Garland film in 1963.) I, of course, watched The Judy Garland Show diligently at the time of its broadcast. I
remember watching the 1962 special, but not the early 1963 one. A Star is Born had been on TV by then of
course, and I had seen it there, although never on the big screen at that
point. I do remember something unusual though. I remember checking the
newspaper listings as a kid to see if any of her early films were to be played
on the Late Show, or the Late, Late Show, or whatever, and would get up in the
middle of the night to watch obscure Judy Garland films. It seemed the natural
thing to do. Last, my mother grew up in the depression and would tell me how
she would save up to see a Broadway show, so I think my love of the kind of
music Judy Garland sang is somewhat innate. But, I donÕt really remember Òa
moment.Ó In reply to what first attracted me to Judy, I think, above all, it is
her sincerity. Another part of the attraction is also her yearning. A yearning sincerity. Let me say too that I donÕt consider
myself Òa fanÓ, but more of a historian. I have never been fanatical about Judy
Garland, but more respectful of her contribution to American popular music. As
such, my passion for her, her life and work, translated into a desire to know
more about both. So I started reading, watching all the films I could, buying
records as they came out. I would say I became a collector, rather than a fan.
Aside from this new CD release you
just released, what would you list as your favorite Garland recording(s)?
Obviously, Carnegie Hall. I bought the LP way back when, and like many others,
wore it out. It is the greatest live performance of classic American pop in the
20th century. To this day, Come
Rain or Come Shine is an earth-shattering experience. A
really frightening experience. Especially when you compare it to other
recordings of the song by other artists, vocalists or instrumental, which are
calmer, cooler. Judy Garland was not cool, and this is her un-coolest
performance. Only she could sing of love in this way. I finally got to realize
that I was using Carnegie Hall as an
emotional crutch of sorts, and started playing it less. If I had to pick just one track I would
play for people who know little or nothing about Judy to show them the great
artist she was, I would pick Have
Yourself a Merry Little Christmas. All of her incredible vulnerability is
right there, on a razorÕs edge. There are so many other recordings though too,
lesser known. Take Easy to Love from
1938. ItÕs all there. ÒFaraway Part of TownÓ and ÒDo It AgainÓ from 1960 are
also worth a re-listen.
I'm sure many fans are interested
in how CDs get produced and what the reasons are for what's included and
what isn't. What was the impetus behind this new CD set and its
contents? And, about how long did it take to get produced?
The CD took a year and half to
do. The first emails I have with Benjamin Goldenstein date from February 2007.
I have always been a firm believer in writing letters, or email now. Most of my
creative projects have started with an idea, which I then wrote to someone
about. This is how my earlier CDs, Robert ParkerÕs Child of Hollywood and Judy
Garland ˆ Paris, came about. Also, the programs I produced and hosted
for French public radio came about in the same way. FrŽmeaux & AssociŽs is
well-known in Europe, I knew they had no Judy Garland anthology in their
catalogue, so I suggested one. I got a yes the next day. I wrote to them
because, having lived in Paris most of my life, I knew their passion for
keeping important recordings Òin referenceÓ in their jargon, meaning available
to the public. Insofar as deciding what I was going to put in the box, my first
instinct was to do an all-radio set, but I quickly got a nudge from the company
that this had to be an anthology for the general public as well as, let us say,
a more learned group. Thanks to incredible collectors such as John Walther, Kim
Lundgreen, Fred Mc Fadden, and Christian Matzanke, between their collections
and my own I had plenty of other unreleased radio material, and still do, to do
a 2-CD all-radio set, but realized there is a general public that might want to
experience a less esoteric Judy Garland. Knowing the second CD was going to be
all-radio, I selected at first 18 (the number of tracks allowed me at the
beginning), then 20 for each disc. For the radio disc, my purpose was to choose
tracks never before released. In that my memory is something like glue when it
comes to what has been issued, or not, I knew pretty much off the top of my
head – I emphasize pretty much – which performances would be
new. The only track on the radio CD that has been issued before is the 1935 Zing!. But I chose to include it anyway
because it was on an out-of-print Danish CD, and thought it was historically
important enough to be reissued. Concerning the ÒclassicsÓ CD, these had to be
studio performances. Clearly, these are not all Garland hits. My goal here was
to allow the less knowledgeable but interested general public to sample Garland
in a way that would whet its appetite for more, somewhat like the fans were before they were fans, then something got
them hooked. I think any anthology must try to convince the musically-curious listener
that here is a great artist; then you must convince them by your choices. Lastly,
it should be remembered that, for the set, I was working for a French company
that takes pride in strictly respecting European intellectual property law. In
that European copyright law is different from American copyright law, the very
first thing I did in getting to work on the project was to ask them a series of
very specific questions about what I could and could not use. Their responses
were long and detailed. One example: the film version of Over the Rainbow. FrŽmeaux & AssociŽs insisted, and rightly so,
that they wanted to use it. I told them that the film version was never
released on 78 rpm, a fact they were unaware of. Decca released a Decca version
of the tune, but although it was a big hit at the time, I have never found
it up to the film version, and I refused to use it for my anthology. Fortunately,
MGM Records issued the soundtrack on LP in 1956, and it was based on this
record, over 50 years old, that we could include it. (By the way, I donÕt
have this LP in my personal collection, and Fred Mc Fadden had the kindness
to loan me his. Thanks Fred.) So for the new box, real records were used,
most of which my own. For the transfers done by Grammy Award winner Jon M.
Samuels in New York, I traveled down to the city with these records protected
on my lap. I broke one. For the radio material, no MP3s were used. Since
I live on an island on the coast of Maine, I only got high-speed Internet
in November 2007, by which time all work on the box set had already been
completed.
Are all of the recordings on this
set from your personal collection?
As I said, except for the film Rainbow, yes. The radio disc could not
have been assembled without John Walther in Hamburg, Kim Lundgreen in Copenhagen,
Fred Mc Fadden in Rome (NY), and Christian Matzanke in Berlin. One thing: I
have been collecting for many decades now, but do not feel I own Judy Garland. No
one does. Just as various collectors have been incredibly generous in
exchanging material with me over the years, selfless in their passion, I have
tried to return the favor. Like many whom I have had the honor of getting to
know, I do not pretend to know everything about Judy Garland (or anyone). The
more I know the less I know. Nor is
she my mantra. The recordings in my personal collection, even if I am the one
to have taken the time and money to accumulate them, do not belong to me. The
generosity of the people involved in making the FrŽmeaux anthology is a
reflection of the generosity of the lady herself.
Are there certain recordings that
you can tell us you were unable to include in this set, but couldn't for
whatever reason?
I had two priorities: artistic
merit and sound quality. Some tracks I considered were artistically great, but
the sound was hopeless. For other tracks, the sound was great but the music was
not very compelling. Many of the radio programs are in very mediocre condition.
For example, a 1936 After YouÕve Gone.
I would have loved to include it, but the sound was dreadful. Strangely, that song
was performed for the same radio show as On
Revival Day, but the sound on the latter was far better than After YouÕve Gone, so I used it. New
copies of radio shows turn up regularly, so it is always possible better
versions will surface. Insofar as studio dates, recordings had to be 50 years
old. I would have loved to use ItÕs Love
IÕm After, a great performance from Pigskin
Parade, but since the songs from the movie were never released on 78, I
couldnÕt use them. FrŽmeaux forbade me from transferring material from CD, SACD,
Laser Disc or DVD, so using the CD of Pigskin
Parade, a French CD by the way, as a source was out. In FrŽmeauxÕs
view, an engineerÕs transfer of a sound recording is copyright protected too.
The sound on a CD is thus protected, and cannot be infringed on. Other
companies would have been less scrupulous. A word about photos: European
copyright law states that photos are protected in the same manner as books.
That is, books and photos are not free of copyright until 70 years after the death
of the author or photographer. Thus, most books and photographs from the 20th
century are protected. Needless to say, the dozens of unpublished or rare
photos that I, Christian Matzanke and Kim Lundgreen proposed were rejected for
this reason. The cover shot was purchased from a Paris agency.
Tacking onto that, if you were
to produce a "Volume 2" are there certain recordings that you can
tell us that you would include, and why?
I would include any recording
of artistic merit and acceptable sound quality. I have already started to draw
up a list, and hope that Patrick FrŽmeaux and Claude Colombini,
who head the company, might be receptive to a Volume 2 in the near future,
but think it best to wait for the reviews and sales on this one before saying
anything more specific than that there are dozens of excellent radio dates
waiting to be issued, and that I also have Decca test pressings, the V-disc,
more of the Gumm Sisters, and many other unreleased live dates in my library.
It certainly was a pleasure – and an education – to collaborate
with Benjamin Goldenstein, who is a great professional, and a man of courtesy
and exactitude. I would be honored to work with
him again. I must say that it amazes me that here in 2008 there remain so many
unreleased performances still on the shelf.
Judy's radio career has been
sadly under-represented on CD, yet many performances are easily available
from private collectors on eBay and online discussion forums. Do
you have any thoughts or theories as to why?
I have occasionally bought radio
performances on eBay, and itÕs great that itÕs there. Better there than
nowhere. One obviously needs a well-stocked bank account to buy some of the other
stuff. Clearly, people make money off Judy Garland, which has been the case for
a long time. Who am I to judge? In
one of my meetings with Sid Luft in the early 1990s, he told me that ÒJudy
Garland makes more money dead than alive.Ó Concerning the online discussion
forums, besides The Judy Room, I tend to limit my consumption. That these radio
shows are on file here and there is great.
This is the first CD compilation
since 1998's "Judy" boxed set to cover such a wide range of Judy's
career. Did you plan this from the beginning or did it sort of happen
that way as the project progressed?
The new set was always going to
be an anthology covering a set time. Scott SchechterÕs 1998 Judy box was along the same lines. But I
would not call that set nor mine a compilation, but more an anthology. A
compilation copies and pastes; an anthology should be an intelligent overview.
Being that this set was produced
in France, what is Judy's persona to the general European population? Is
it much different than here in the U.S.?
I lived in Paris from 1971 to
1997, and learned much about the French appreciation of Judy Garland during
those years. You must remember that JudyÕs peak years at MGM were during the
war, when France was occupied. Her films did not always cross the Atlantic
right away. American cinema, including the musical, is highly respected over
there, as are the great American directors and actors. But, the Garland films
that are most appreciated there are the ones that are, first and foremost, good
films. The French thus value movies like The
Pirate, Meet Me in St. Louis and A Star is Born because they are great
films done by great filmmakers with great actors, one of whom is Judy Garland.
Sometimes, there is a certain sugar coating to many musicals that make them
almost too American. The Harvey Girls
could be said to be an example of this: a lot of Americana, but not a great
film. Even The Wizard of Oz is
admired for JudyÕs performance and its technical wizardry, but is hardly
considered a great movie. This is not snobbishness, but an appreciation of
filmmaking that places a filmÕs artistic clout ahead of its entertainment
value. Obviously, many of JudyÕs movies are more entertainment than art, and
might seem a bit too cotton candy for the French. I remember I was once in a
Paris theater watching Summer Stock,
the audience was half asleep, but when Judy went into Get Happy everyone woke up, and broke into applause after the
number. The same thing happened at a screening of The Wizard of Oz: people broke into applause after Over the Rainbow. So, they Òget it.Ó Sid
Luft told me that that first performance at the Palais
de Chaillot in 1960 was far from sold out. After she
got superlative reviews, her shows at the Olympia were. So, the French did and do
appreciate Judy Garland because, once they got over the image of Judy Garland,
they could see there was an immense artist there. They already saw it in A Star is Born, they confirmed their
respect at her Olympia shows, and this has continued to this day. Her major
films are constantly shown in Paris, and a Judy Garland festival, for which I
hope to contribute, is planned for later this year at one of the Action movie
theaters. The Clock should soon be
released in a new copy, too. I think the FrŽmeaux box set is also a reminder of
the continuing, and growing, affection the French have for Judy Garland.
What, if I may ask, do you like
most about this new set? And also, what - if anything - do you least
like about the set?
There are a few things on the
new set I am not happy about, but will not say more. I am proud of releasing
so many titles that are new on CD. The Vitaphones will
be a shock to the general public, as will all the radio tunes. I hope too
that my liner notes are enlightening for one and all.
The late Robert Parker re-masterings
of the Columbia recordings are a joy to hear. Can you give us a bit
of history about these particular tracks?
I worked with Robert Parker in
the early 1990s on the Child of Hollywood CD.
He was an Australian-born radio broadcaster and sound engineer, who hosted
programs on the BBC and produced his own CDs. He was living in London and
Devon when I got to know him, and I went to Devon to do the transfers. He
had a studio apart from the main house, and used it to store his vast record
collection and house his engineering equipment. He was a very gentle man,
and felt very strongly that his work in getting more sound out of old 78s
was a mission. He did not at all believe that he was Òstereo enhancingÓ or
ÒcolorizingÓ the sides he was working on. In fact, he turned red at the idea.
Instead, he passionately felt that what he was trying to do was restore the
sound as if it had been recorded today. In his view, recording an artist
or a group was a musical event, and old records are an imprecise reflection
of that original event. His goal was to eliminate the distortions of time.
He was not playing God in his work, but restoring GodÕs original work, like
one would restore an old painting or fresco. Some like what he did; some
donÕt. His adding some reverb was only part of his stereo impressions, as
he called them. In any case, we remained friends after this project, and
stayed in touch. In 2002, he sent me, among other things, the four Columbia
sides in the form of professional studio original masters. He had remixed
them into surround sound – that
can also be heard in stereo or mono-, and it is these that were used in the
FrŽmeaux anthology. Might I add that Parker offered me these remixes as a
gift?
Lawrence, thank you so much
for agreeing to be interviewed, and for this wonderful new CD set. One last
question: Judy Garland means so many things to so many people - that's
one of the reasons why her legend endures - can you share with us what she
means to you?
Thank you again Larry! I've already heard an advance
copy of this set, and it's fantastic. Congratulations on a job well done,
and my congratulations to everyone at FremŽaux & AssociŽs. I'm sure this
will be a welcome addition to every Garland fan's collection. We look forward
to (hopefully) a second volume in the next year or so!
Scott Brogan
The Judy Room