In the Court of the Crimson King by King Crimson (1969)
In the Court of the Crimson King is an album of opposites. Well I suppose, to be fair, King Crimson are a band of opposites, but that doesn’t really matter now. On one hand it’s quite easy to see where the band draws its influence: Velvet Underground, Pink Floyd, Frank Zappa, Jimi Hendrix. On the other hand, you can see where the band’s influence would later spread: Roxy Music, Black Sabbath, Yes, ABBA (well, no, I guess not). The easiest statement to make is that this is the record which ended the 1960s and started the 1970s
King Crimson would later be known for playing art rock, progressive rock, alternative rock, jazz fusion, avante garde, heavy metal, psychedelia and more and more and more, depending on your particular perspective. After all, this was the period when bands couldn’t be classified like they can now. The corollary, of course, is that they don’t specifically fit into any of these.
They certainly qualify for heavy metal on this, which means this could possibly be the first ever heavy metal record. They have what they need: blaring ultra distorted guitars, a demonic rhythm section, solos where there probably should not be solos, and lyrics about fantasy worlds which don’t really have any deeper meaning at all. Of course there’s more to it than that.
For starters, the only really heavy song is 21st Century Schizoid Man (and boy is it heavy). The only reason you’d think the others were is the Greg Lake, Michael Giles rhythm combination (which isn’t bad, but it’s a far cry from John Entwistle, Keith Moon), gives out deep, dark, heavy vibes, despite a lovely flute melody playing in the background. The bass and drums don’t really ever change if you notice, but it leads to the album having a consistant mood.
On that note, if you remove the bass, drums and ultra distorted guitar, the instrumentation (which does still exist) doesn’t sound like it belongs in heavy metal at all. Ian McDonald (the guy from Foreigner, not the Beatle’s biographer) plays flutes, saxaphones and synthesisers (mellotrons, in true summer of love fashion), giving a really wide range of styles to the different songs. Well sort of. If you’re into jazz fusion heavy metal ballads, stop reading this review and buy the record right away!
As I said before, the lyrics do rather firmly belong in the heavy metal category, but in their defence there’s a certain John Lennon element to them. They don’t sound stupid at all on casual listening, in fact Peter Sinfeld (the guy who wrote all the words) imbues a certain element of mystery which raises their quality substantially. The only reason I’d make a statement like that is by pouring over the lyrics personally. I’m sure fans would like to prove me wrong, but then, if you’re a fan, of course you’ll consider the lyrics highly; normal people don’t though.
As for the solos: each song has more solo than it does actual song. What’s more, these aren’t nice short solos breaking up the verses. After all, these guys are as much jazz as they are rock and roll. But then the instruments are widespread, leading to none of them being very similar at all. Moonchild in particular is noteworthy here, as its “solo” is ten minutes of experimentation on a synthesiser. This is really quite relaxing (perhaps the first ever example of ambient music) but ultimately quite boring. This contrasts strongly with the psychosis of 21st Century Schizoid Man.
I wouldn’t recommend buying any album simply because of its historical importance. That said, there’s a lot to like and a lot to dislike about In the Court of the Crimson King which makes it somewhat difficult to judge whether it is a worthwhile purchase. Ultimately, there’s a lot of preference to it, however given the variance in each song, I’m sure everyone would find something to like about it (and something to hate too by extension.
Jesus that’s a lot of text. Throw in some pictures man, cover art!
Man this is such a fuckin great album. Although it’s not your new style a little bit of track mentioning would help. Not song by song reviewing like the old shit but just something that makes the reader know whether there is 3 or 25 tracks on the album.
Good review, I’m getting this album soon. Refreshing style, I’ve noticed lately that all the reviews I’ve read in the recent past (Progarchives mostly) describe things about each individual track that only helps if you already have the album.
Hmm, it seems Hosford and cars are opposed in their criticism of this criticism. Well, I’ll just say that I’ll stick to my style because my style is good. Generally reviews are meant to tell people whether or not it’s worth spending money to get the item in question. So this is why I stick to my style.