Hot Space - a little gem

[QUOTE] [b]Togg wrote:[/b]

But at the time it was what was happening so... plus 4 creative people will never want to do the same thing for 10 years...[/QUOTE]

Yeah but they weren't doing the same thing for 10 years anyway... 'News' is completely different to 'Races', which is completely different to 'Opera', which is completely different to 'Heart Attack', and so on.

While the 'Hot Space' songs themselves weren't great, live performances proved they could be done far better than on the record, so that's not really an excuse IMO.

At the end of the day, these are the most usual pro-HS arguments, all of which are rubbish IMO:

- 'They did something different': They always did, the only exception was that, this time, they did it wrong.

- 'It inspired "Thriller"': No, it didn't.

- 'That's what people were doing at the time': Not really an excuse. Should 'A Night at the Opera' have been a carbon copy of The Osmonds or whoever was popular back then?

- 'They were ahead of their time': No, they weren't, and this point contradicts the previous one.

- 'Poor Brian and Roger were forced to do what John and Freddie wanted': False again. John hated the album, and Brian and Roger were guiltier for it than John was (they wrote far more songs than he did).

- 'More of the same would've been worse': Yeah, but no Queen album was 'more of the same' to begin with. The difference is, when they dared try something different (''39' and 'Good Company', for instance), they routinely did it far better.

I'd also challenge the view that 'Hot Space' was *that* original. Other than having brass instruments played by guest musicians and those horrible drum-machines (which isn't precisely what people praise about this album), most of its elements had been done before:

- Synths: Already introduced two albums earlier.
- R&B, soul, etc.: Already introduced two albums earlier.
- Mixing rock and something else: That's what they were from day one.
- Minimalistic or sparser arrangements: They'd also been doing it for a while, averagely once per album ('Dear Friends', 'Sidewalk', 'Drowse').
- Doing other styles, not just rock: Again, they always had those elements (''39', 'Lazing on a Sunday Afternoon', 'Procession').

Hot Space might be crap compared to their other records and they were lazy big time here but I don't get how people always say Dancer sucks and is one of the worst songs they did ever. CAG, CC, LIR, boring as shit compared to Dancer. Dancer has good beat and tempo with with rock in it. I'm sorry about FU to all the Dancer haters.

It smacks of we can make a lot of money doing this stuff after the success of bites the dust.

[QUOTE] [b]Bo Alex wrote:[/b]But other great acts from the 60s or 70s were much worse than Queen: Rolling Stones, the Zeppelin and Who reunions for Live Aid, Bowie, etc etc. At least, Queen continued to release great songs (not albums) once in a while: It's A Hard Life, Hammer To Fall, Princes Of The Universe, etc.[/QUOTE]

ouch! - Zep were not an 80s band! JB died and the band ceased to exist - except for charity appearances. so that's not even a comparison to queen.
the who were good at Live Aid - and their (early) 80s output - esp PT's solo stuff - is superior to HS, AKOM and Works.

Bowie is a terrible comparison - i don't know how you conceived this perception...immediately either side of HS Bowie produced excellent albums; "Scary Monsters" and "Let's Dance" - and his Serious Moonlight tour was brilliant and refreshing

Actually nothing wrong with Dancer but I prefer CAG and LIR and would've LPdA more if it had been produced better. And I actually, gasp, like BL.

I subscribe to the theory they had to HS to be able to do TW and later albums. Subscribe but can't substantiate.

It´s really a matter of personal taste and what one expected from them.

Having said this, i love "Hot Space" and i always did. "Body Language" was never a favorite but grew on me over time. It´s still my second favorite Queen´s 80´s record after "A Kind of Magic" which i think it´s brilliant.

Hot Space does make me wonder: is this where they started getting bored with each other and the whole writing songs - producing an album - going on tour - writing more songs - etc. cycle was becoming a bit of a drag? We know they weren't exactly enjoying themselves by the time of The Works. Is the time of The Game/Flash Gordon/Hot Space a transitional period where they gradually lost their motivation and focus and began looking eslewhere to occupy themselves (Fun In Space for Roger, partying for Freddie, Star Fleet Project by Brian*, god knows what for John)? Like I said, Hot Space does make me wonder.

* maybe that one is a bit late, being from april 1983...

..............it's just about evens it seems.

Being firmly in the 70s Queen camp (no pun intended) I'm surprised that I like Hot Space as much as I do, but only the first side. The R&B/Dance numbers are fun dance numbers (except for Body Language). With the exception of Under Pressure, which is actually a stand alone piece, the second, rock side is thin and lifeless and doesn't do it for me.

I like the live versions of the songs if it counts. If not, I think the album sucks.

I always liked Hot Space when I was in my teens when A kind of magic was the latest release. When I was discovering the history of Queen it was interesting as it added to their diversity and every album was totally new to me. I still like Dancer, Life is Real. Las Palabras. Life is Real is pretty unusual deep lyrically be Queen standards. Put out the Fire also attempts to make a point. I dont see how this is lazy in that sense. The fact that the songs are underexposed , apart from Pressure, keeps it a bit alive. Of course its their weakest to date at that point but to me its their last attempt to be creative before self awareness set in. They realised what Queen meant after that, a major rock (pop) band, and made sure they sounded like it in a more contrived way. The distinction between the singles and "album" tracks stand out a mile on the following albums. Not sure if there was a genuine expectation of hit singles from this, or were they really deluded.

/\
Top post!

I can't help but love it , like the other albums it was part of my youth. As Freddie said " It's only a bloody record". ;)

Perhaps they were just tired of churning rock and decided to go with the times, transitioning to what eventually became pop. It seems Hot Space was the shock treatment that shook fans' confidence. Pure rock following departed and younger audiences flooded in.

And once again, I don't get what people like about STAYING POWER; it's a terrible cluttered cocaine nightmare of screaming dry crap.

The only thing giving it any merit is the brass recorded (written as well?) By Arif Mardin.

What a horrible song. It's down there with their worst.