Tony Jackson: Love Potion No. 9

mdenger · Post by **mdenger** » Wed Aug 24, 2005 5:31 am

now at:

http://home.rhein-zeitung.de/~mdenger/

Michael

admin · Post by **admin** » Tue Aug 30, 2005 9:58 am

Nice article Michael. With your indulgence, this address will open faster for viewers.

It is interesting that The Searchers and Jackson, for the sake of their own success, pretended that the split was amicable.

While both camps wanted "bygones to be bygones" they seemed to have kept the reason for Jackson's departure quite a secret.

sowhat · Post by **sowhat** » Tue Aug 30, 2005 11:56 pm

You might be right, Peter, but let me suggest they just didn't realize at the time that the scandal could have done a 'better job' — to attract more attention to both. Mean, if it's an 'amicable split', some will regret it, but okay, it happens from time to time. If there's a scandal, people will inevitably want to learn more and more details. Or maybe not — who can say now?

admin · Post by **admin** » Wed Aug 31, 2005 12:58 am

Good point Sheena. More controversy was created, but probably more locally in Liverpool than globally.

The split was seamless to those in North America it would seem. Much like the departure of Pete Best, the leaving occurring before the group became a household word, so to speak.

jjr · Post by **jjr** » Wed Aug 31, 2005 4:57 pm

Peter,

That's probably because the SEARCHERS had the worst agents/publicity/promo people I never heard from. If you didn't read the LP liner notes, you didn't know who the band members were.The cover on their "THIS IS US" LP had Tony Jackson on it.Jackson's split with the band was never announced on any New York Radio station. I remember STEVE ALLEN introducing the band [with FRANK] on his show, and using that same LP cover saying Tony was still in the band [They did "When You Walk in the Room" that night]. On every other show I saw from Sullivan on, they were never IDed individually. First time I knew Tony was gone was when I DIDN'T see him at the Brooklyn Fox in Sept. '64. But then the first time I knew Mike was out was a poster for the '85 [or was it '86?] British Invasion Tour when I noticed he wasn't in the band's photo. Some things NEVER change

admin · Post by **admin** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 1:02 pm

Interesting points John. Thanks for sharing these memories. I guess for those of use who in North America we only really knew what we were fed. Those in the UK had local papers and concerts to give them the rest of the story.

mdenger · Post by **mdenger** » Tue Sep 13, 2005 11:06 pm

I believe that the Searchers weren`t big enough in most countries that it matttered very much who is in the band. Tony hadn`t sung lead on their 1964 hits so the sound didn`t change too much after his leaving. For example covers in Holland used Tony until 1965 (Goodby My Love).

admin · Post by **admin** » Wed Sep 14, 2005 5:45 am

You may be right Michael, but Needles and Pins was surely big enough to have fans wonder who was in the group.

They also appeared on Ed Sullivan which should have given them a kick start, at least from my way of thinking.

I think that it was a lack of publicity, in large part, that kept us from knowing who was in the group.

I would really like to learn more about their management in the early days.

sowhat · Post by **sowhat** » Wed Sep 14, 2005 6:58 am

...well, they could've at least made good use of their "anonymity"... like, "we're a band and we don't care if people know our names or not, we're an 'organic whole', not a bunch of individuals". Or even more, "nobody will know our names". Use nicknames, like, Tony Jackson was "Black Jake", same kind of stuff could've been invented for three others...
...anyway, i cannot really understand why people didn't know "who is who". The sleeve notes for their early albums had all band members' photos, ALL SIGNED, even with some short biographies. Or maybe they were added later on?..

admin · Post by **admin** » Wed Sep 14, 2005 7:25 am

Most may have purchased singles in the beginning, Sheena. At least that is what I did, and learned the names from music magazines.

Your are right, of course, the albums typically have the names of the band members.

But was there enough hype surrounding The Searchers to stimulate buying? In the case of North America, I would argue not.

jjr · Post by **jjr** » Wed Sep 14, 2005 8:24 am

Yeah, but Tony Jackson was on an LP cover here at the same time Frank was on tour. In the US, there wasn't much, even in the music magazines, on the band, and even then, it was the corporate "Searchers", not the members. I can't recall a quote attributed to any band member in any of them.

As for TV, they only did Sullivan once, and the intros were perfunctory at best. Unlike the Beatles, Stones and DC 5, Ed didn't call them over, or go over to them. Don't recall him talking to them. The Steve Allen miscue on the LP cover took place while they were promoting "When You Walk in the Room" Except for "Shindig", I can't remember a TV show they did more than once, and I think they taped all their "Shindig" bits at one time, and the show parceled them out.

sowhat · Post by **sowhat** » Wed Sep 14, 2005 11:01 am

Oh well... that's it, Peter. I was born and grew up in the world of albums, not singles, and of course didn't take it into account. Like, 'why should i buy a record of two songs only while i can purchase one with eleven songs on it'.
Anyway... as for the 'hype'... what on earth could it be based on? They weren't known for heavy drinking, smoking p.o.t., scandalizing, swearing or having 'love children' etc. No kind of stuff that usually attracts public interest. Like, 'nice guys finish last'. On the other hand, they always DO finish anyway...