Lack Of Original Compostions Held Them Back

sowhat · Post by **sowhat** » Wed Dec 01, 2004 6:51 am

Of course i did, Roy. I've just re-read it in fact, but somehow it didn't help. I mean, i didn't find the answer there. But since you've mentioned this subject... tastes differ, that's right, and i might be wrong, but to tell you the truth, i'd never include "Changing" (because imho it doesn't have a "bite" to it) and "Don't hide it away" (i must not be rude. I must be "politically correct". So i'd put it like this: the song is not that good imho). Anyway, the "credits problem" is kinda solved now, anyone can check "who wrote what" and decide for themselves whose songs they like more. Yes there's maybe very very few "crazy" people like me who'd "dig that deep" but why not?
Still very curious Sheena.

royclough · Post by **royclough** » Wed Dec 01, 2004 1:52 pm

To answer your query is not that easy, Curtis was influential up to the time he left in 66, from then on I believe Pender and McNally were probably on a par and in the later years you would have to say John probably.

tim · Post by **tim** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 8:29 am

I have no doubt that it is John who has developed into the best songwriter in The Searchers: "Till I Met You", "Come On Back To Me", "Love Lies Bleeding", etc.

sowhat · Post by **sowhat** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 9:52 am

Timothy: don't blame if i'm wrong but as far as i remember, Michael Denger's website states "Come on back to me" was actually written by Mike Pender...

jjr · Post by **jjr** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 7:30 pm

I think the Searchers' failure to record self penned tunes had less to do with their skill as writers, and more to do with a lack of confidence on the part of band members, and,I suspect, Tony Hatch and the folks at Pye.

Chris Curtis' contributions to albums and "B" sides while not staggering was prodigious, and several would have made "A" sides on a par with many of their compatriots. John developed into a very skilled song writer, and Pender/ Allen's "Second Hand Dealer" showed good composition.

But Pye was not intent on nuturing their song writing skills, nor did they view the Searchers as a long term project. They saw the band as a cash cow, and it was easier (and quicker)to have them arrange a song than write one. What was it, three albums in eighteen months-while touring? That attitude, plus the band's lack of confidence was the reason they failed to develop their writing, not a lack of talent.

tim · Post by **tim** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 11:31 pm

The first two PYE albums came within the space of three months with the third album following within a further six months. Like most compositions of the time, "Come On Back To Me" is credited to "Pender-McNally-Allen". Had they been encouraged, I believe The Searchers would have become very good songwriters.

sowhat · Post by **sowhat** » Fri Dec 03, 2004 7:07 am

No offence was intended, really. It might just be a case of my misunderstanding. I thought "Come on back to me" was a song from RCA period, a flipside to "Sing singer sing" which is said to have been actually written by Pender...
And of course i agree, they desperately needed a slap on the below the back accompanied by saying "write, write, write", McNally in particular i guess.

tim · Post by **tim** » Fri Dec 03, 2004 7:28 am

Sheena, yes you're right, it was a RCA track. All self-penned tracks at that time were credited to the three front-men. I always took it to be a McNally composition because of the guitar work. I'll ask John and Frank when I see them at the Beck Theatre, Hayes on Saturday night.

tim · Post by **tim** » Sat Dec 04, 2004 9:36 pm

Sheena, you were right all along. I spoke to Frank Allen last night at the Beck Theatre in Hayes. He confirmed that "Come On Back To Me" was a Mike Pender composition.

royclough · Post by **royclough** » Sat Dec 04, 2004 11:54 pm

Tim

In my article Searchers Sing Searchers the clue was there, particularly on that song!

sowhat · Post by **sowhat** » Sun May 08, 2005 11:14 am

Following the 'crazy' topic...
Maybe it would sound a bit pathetic or something. Perhaps it's not a very serious kind of an overview. Still, i think it could be funny to 'analyze' the Searchers' 'in-house' songwriters and try to find out what's common between them and what's different. So it goes (Note: very subjective).
Chris Curtis
Tunes: Simple and catchy, bright but kinda monotonous, no unexpected 'turns'.
Lyrics: Very simple, at times very nice.
Overall mood: Unstable. Sometimes happy, sometimes sad, sometimes truly sarcastic.
Best songs: 'I pretend I'm with you', 'I'm your loving man'.
Mike Pender
Tunes: Quite sophisticated, nice but repetitive. Sometimes even boring.
Lyrics: Simple but pathetic.
Overall mood: Sad but optimistic, touchy and vulnerable.
Best songs: 'Broken hearts', 'The world is waitin' for tomorrow'.
Frank Allen
Tunes: Melodic and catchy
Lyrics: Simple but quite proficient
Overall mood: "Desperately optimistic". Cute
Best songs: 'Don't hang on'
John McNally
Tunes: At times sophisticated, at times very simple. Sometimes brilliant, sometimes ****. Very unstable
Lyrics: Overall quite proficient, sometimes even close to what they call 'poetry', sometimes far from that. Pathetic most of the time
Overall mood: Romantic, moving, vulnerable. A kind that makes you smile a bit. Strange
Best songs: 'Push push' etc.

admin · Post by **admin** » Tue May 10, 2005 2:42 am

Sheena: This is an interesting topic, however, based on the very limited number of compositions it is a rather short story in my view.

The early work of Chris Curtis showed some flair but even the compositions of Curtis eventually stymied. Chris wrote upbeat music that was very melodic such as "I Pretend I'm With You" but he was unable to sustain this activity along with a number of others which cost him his job as The Searchers' drummer.

The Searchers did not appear to be a team but a group of individual talents that I consider did not begin to become a cohesive unit until the arrival of Frank Allen.

An interesting composition "Till I Met You" was masterfully written by John McNally, but I have not been swept away by any of his other material.

Late in the game was the work of Allen, McNally and Pender which was not as moving to me as the early works introduced by Curtis.

There is little doubt, at least to my way of thinking, that the group's inability to come up with big hits after 1965 stemmed from their lack of original material.

They were and are a fine group. But you can give what you don't have. Politics aside, in the music business, originality and fresh material is the name of the game, at least if you are trying to place in the charts.

sowhat · Post by **sowhat** » Tue May 10, 2005 8:25 pm

You might be right all along, but still i think if Frank Allen wasn't so lazy he could've developed into a 'hit machine'. He had everything needed: simple catchy tunes, lyrics that never were dumb enough to become annoying. Okay, that's another example of 'what-could-have-been' game... As for John, i'm not sure. To me, he had done lots of truly charming tunes&lyrics, but my 'intuition' tells me they couldn't have become hits. Maybe they're all too personal or something, i dunno. Still, who knows?..
Chris? Yes, perhaps. He wrote nice tunes, right. That's just they don't 'touch' me as much as Frank and John's job. Tastes differ, you see...

sowhat · Post by **sowhat** » Wed May 11, 2005 5:55 am

ps: of course i wanted to say "Frank and Jonh's WORKS"!
pps: "Till I met you"? I still cannot understand why people like it... No offence meant.

admin · Post by **admin** » Wed May 11, 2005 6:57 am

Sheena: For me, "Til I Met You" is a nice melody and the harmony lines really add to this love song. Sometime less is more, and I consider that this is the case here.