Aaron Neville: Nature Boy: The Standards Album

Jason MacNeil

Aaron Neville

Nature Boy: the Standards Album

Label: Verve
US Release Date: 2003-08-26
UK Release Date: 2003-08-25

Aaron Neville has a voice that you just know instantly. It's not one that can be duplicated nor likely will never be seen again. As a member of the Neville Brothers when not venturing out into solo territory, he worked with the group to mix a variety of styles to create an essential American sound. Neville's solo work has also brought him some deserved accolades, whether it was the song "Bird on a Wire" or his hit single duet with Linda Ronstadt. To say he is an original is an understatement.

But like most artists today, especially Rod Stewart and others who seem to have fallen into a malaise of putting out sub-par material to keep themselves going or to appease label contracts, Neville has opted for the easier path taken. And despite a few songs that will jump out at the listener, for the most part this is the sort of album that drives people crazy. "Standards" albums are far too many now and are a given for basically any artist that is still a label staple yet not going gold or platinum anytime soon. Leave the standards to those who are known for standards such as the great Tony Bennett! Like Christmas albums, these records too often are done solely to appease suits at record corporations.

The record, consisting of standards recorded and written by everyone from the Gershwin's to Nat King Cole, begins with "Summertime", a tune penned by Gershwin brothers George and Ira. Neville gives the song a slight jazz style that tends to work for the most part, but there seems to be some intangible that doesn't quite put the song over the top. "To be singing these chestnuts … brings me back to my parents," Neville says in the press kit. "These were the songs they danced to. These were the songs of my youth." But unfortunately this song sets the, er, standard for the rest of this standards album. While some interesting touches are blended into the songs, for the most part it's an exact duplication of the original, meaning Neville's strong presence and vocal prowess is left on the sidelines.

There are a few great songs here that work to Neville's strong suit, especially "The Shadow of Your Smile". Spiced up with some Latin jazz color incorporated into the track, Neville nails the composition and, for the first time, makes one realize how good this album could've been. The duet with Linda Ronstadt on "The Very Thought of You" starts off strong, but wanes thanks to a larger orchestrated sound. Neville should be applauded for at least trying to push his own boundaries musically, but the Bennett-like or Sinatra-like overtones to this effort diminish it greatly.

"Cry Me A River" is one of the better efforts as well, which seems to work for the basic fact that Neville isn't forcing the issue. This song is a laid back and enjoyable tune steeped in jazz. The conclusion, which features tenor saxophone great Michael Brecker working off Neville's vocal, is stellar. But it's a fleeting moment unfortunately. "Blame It on My Youth" as well as the title track doesn't do much for the listener's pleasure. The bouncy and energetic "Who Will Buy" should have most tapping toes or doing some movement to keep the beat, but it's the only digression from the orchestrated, classic style used throughout. The title of the track is also somewhat ironic, as few buyers might be asking themselves a similar question regarding the album's merit.

The album concludes with "Danny Boy", a track which Neville, well, Neville-izes to a tee. But it comes off as too little too late. Aaron Neville would have just as much if not more appeal had he reworked these songs to suit his strengths. The voice is classic Neville, the arrangements are just too classic sounding though to make it work. It's a promising idea, but an idea that probably would have been best left as much.

So far J. J. Abrams and Rian Johnson resemble children at play, remaking the films they fell in love with. As an audience, however, we desire a fuller experience.

As recently as the lackluster episodes I-III of the Star Wars saga, the embossed gold logo followed by scrolling prologue text was cause for excitement. In the approach to the release of any of the then new prequel installments, the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare, followed by the Lucas Film logo, teased one's impulsive excitement at a glimpse into the next installment's narrative. Then sat in the movie theatre on the anticipated day of release, the sight and sound of the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare signalled the end of fevered anticipation. Whatever happened to those times? For some of us, is it a product of youth in which age now denies us the ability to lose ourselves within such adolescent pleasure? There's no answer to this question -- only the realisation that this sensation is missing and it has been since the summer of 2005. Star Wars is now a movie to tick off your to-watch list, no longer a spark in the dreary reality of the everyday. The magic has disappeared… Star Wars is spiritually dead.

Keep reading... Show less

This has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it.

It hardly needs to be said that the last 12 months haven't been everyone's favorite, but it does deserve to be noted that 2017 has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it. Other longtime dreamers either reappeared or kept up their recent hot streaks, and a number of relative newcomers established their place in what has become one of the more robust rock subgenre subcultures out there.

Keep reading... Show less

​'The Ferryman': Ephemeral Ideas, Eternal Tragedies

The current cast of The Ferryman in London's West End. Photo by Johan Persson. (Courtesy of The Corner Shop)

Staggeringly multi-layered, dangerously fast-paced and rich in characterizations, dialogue and context, Jez Butterworth's new hit about a family during the time of Ireland's the Troubles leaves the audience breathless, sweaty and tearful, in a nightmarish, dry-heaving haze.

"Vanishing. It's a powerful word, that"

Northern Ireland, Rural Derry, 1981, nighttime. The local ringleader of the Irish Republican Army gun-toting comrades ambushes a priest and tells him that the body of one Seamus Carney has been recovered. It is said that the man had spent a full ten years rotting in a bog. The IRA gunslinger, Muldoon, orders the priest to arrange for the Carney family not to utter a word of what had happened to the wretched man.

Keep reading... Show less

Aaron Sorkin's real-life twister about Molly Bloom, an Olympic skier turned high-stakes poker wrangler, is scorchingly fun but never takes its heroine as seriously as the men.

Chances are, we will never see a heartwarming Aaron Sorkin movie about somebody with a learning disability or severe handicap they had to overcome. This is for the best. The most caffeinated major American screenwriter, Sorkin only seems to find his voice when inhabiting a frantically energetic persona whose thoughts outrun their ability to verbalize and emote them. The start of his latest movie, Molly's Game, is so resolutely Sorkin-esque that it's almost a self-parody. Only this time, like most of his better work, it's based on a true story.

Keep reading... Show less

There's something characteristically English about the Royal Society, whereby strangers gather under the aegis of some shared interest to read, study, and form friendships and in which they are implicitly agreed to exist insulated and apart from political differences.

There is an amusing detail in The Curious World of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn that is emblematic of the kind of intellectual passions that animated the educated elite of late 17th-century England. We learn that Henry Oldenburg, the first secretary of the Royal Society, had for many years carried on a bitter dispute with Robert Hooke, one of the great polymaths of the era whose name still appears to students of physics and biology. Was the root of their quarrel a personality clash, was it over money or property, over love, ego, values? Something simple and recognizable? The precise source of their conflict was none of the above exactly but is nevertheless revealing of a specific early modern English context: They were in dispute, Margaret Willes writes, "over the development of the balance-spring regulator watch mechanism."

Keep reading... Show less
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.