HAPPY RHODES

HAPPY RHODES (Official Web Site)
HAPPY RHODES (MySpace Page)

Wretches Gone Awry--A sublime example of Happy's melodic mastery. Starts like medieval Kate Bush (or "Fotheringay" by Fairport Convention), drops for a nearly-imperceptible second into a mode that comes close to almost suggesting country, and then back again to the gothic finger-picking and melancholy. (from Rhodes I, 1984, when Happy was around 19).

Asylum Master--A good example of Happy's lower (if not lowest) register and high register within the same song. (from Rhodes II, 1984)

Feed the Fire--Nice alternate version with Happy gracefully quoting Yes, Kate Bush, and Bowie in the coda. (from Rhodesongs, 1993. Original version on Warpaint, 1991)

To Be E. Mortal--One of Happy's more challenging pieces, and brilliantly so. She repeats the title in variations, accompanied by synths. Mesmerizing and infinite. (from Ecto, 1987)


It's amazing to read the range of people who state their admiration (if not infatuation) with Kate Bush. I've read comments from Steve Walsh, the vocalist of Kansas, to Kendall Jones and John Norwood Fisher, guitar and bass of Fishbone, to Quorthon, of Bathory. What any of these guys got from Kate's work or how her work influenced their work is unclear, but such is art.

I wonder what they'd think of Happy Rhodes. Unless you have never heard Kate Bush's work before, it is impossible to hear Happy Rhodes and not have her conjured. Of course, there are twists. Firstly, Happy recorded her entire output with a fraction of the monetary resources of Ms. Bush, giving the semi-ironically named Happy a more austere, but no less soulfull, sound. Also, Happy played most every instrument on most of her albums. Often, this means that she is simply accompanying herself on an acoustic guitar, lending her art-pop a less baroque and more distinctly "singer-songwriter" feeling than Ms. Bush. Ms. Rhodes also utilizes several synthesizers, sometimes subtly, sometimes more overtly. They used to bug me, and sometimes still do, sounding cheaper and cheesier than the artist playing them. Over time, I've come to increasingly, but not always, embrace their organic "imperfections" as a symbol of the human/machine or reality/dream essences of Happy Rhodes' music.

The greatest difference between the two artists ironically stems from the source of their greatest similarity: their voices. Clearly, Happy made a concerted and magically successful effort to channel the faerie-high aspects of Kate Bush. While doing so, Happy somehow also developed the ability to summon a strikingly resonant low-end. Some have compared it to Annie Lennox, though Happy's voice feels more brooding and imperious while eschewing Ms. Lennox' r&b influences. Ms. Bush has an underrated low-end, as well, but it's not the equal of Ms. Rhodes', who also wields her low-end more frequently and with greater confidence.

Bush revels more in the sensual world while Rhodes feels more personal and introspective, like she was the only girl in school listening to Yes and Kate Bush--and listened to them alone. Perhaps like Happy was the only person in school who knew Happy existed. Rhodes is limited in her presentation and arrangements, lacking some of the leaps of evolution and experimentation that Bush consistently displayed, resulting in a relative sameness that would not stand up to Bush's song book over a few hours. But Happy more than makes up for this with a melodic sense that can be, at times, beyond words. Her acoustic guitar and multi-tracked vocals are often sufficent to stop a given breath. Not always, but far more frequently than most. But there is no shame in coming second to one of your idols.

As it stands, with Lilith Fair perennials on one side and debauched wastoids and hipsters on the other, Happy Rhodes has stood pretty much alone with her art rock and prog rock-informed style. Blessedly, she has endured as one of the most enchanting underground songwriters of the 80s/90s. We are expecting a new album from her in the not-too-distant future.