Pete Townshend of The Who is considered by many as one of rock and roll’s true auteurs. His approach to the guitar is foundational to any young kid looking to make a racket on the instrument, and his innovative and introspective style of storytelling let the world into his upbringing as a confused and mixed-up kid looking to point the finger back at those “in charge.” Some of the band’s best work, like “Tommy,” “Who’s Next” and “Quadrophenia,” has been regarded as some of the greatest albums of all time, and he and his partner-in-crime, Roger Daltrey, have announced that they are currently working on their first new record since 2006’s “Endless Wire.” I caught up with Townshend over email ahead of the band’s “Moving On” tour that will be stopping at Madison Square Garden on Sunday, Sept. 1.
“I am good at performing, and find touring easy these days, but where I find myself pushing at the very edge of my creative ability is in the recording studio,” – Pete Townshend
Pete Townshend. Getty Images
The Who’s current “Moving On” tour has been getting rave reviews from fans and critics alike. Does touring with an orchestra sharpen your focus on the road? How does it help you shape your setlists?
Pete Townshend: It’s a very different way of performing compared to being in an old school rock band. For me, being in a band that calls itself “The Who”, where I am the only original member who is entitled to go crazy, I always cherished those moments when I could just let rip with guitar solos and make a mess. Some of my best solo work has come from just throwing fate and experience to the wind and letting my fingers and body do whatever they want. I’m not a tightly honed virtuoso, but I do occasionally catch fire and work miracles. I really don’t know how it happens. I thought working with an orchestra would prevent me from taking chances, but when I do let rip it’s wonderful to see the faces of many in the orchestra smiling, urging me on. And yet I am also subject to the disciplines that hold a large orchestra together. Our sound is tighter on stage (and quieter), and the arrangements are absolutely fixed. Roger tends to create the setlists. That’s because his ‘instrument’ is his voice and the journey he takes on the stage has to be one that allows him to sail as close to the wind as he possibly can. (Sorry about all these clichés!).
You are working on the first The Who album since “Endless Wire” from 2006. Roger has recently been quoted as saying the new record you are working on is “the best since Quadrophenia”. What can fans expect from this new record? Does the new record share more in common with the conceptual records the band has released like “Quadrophenia” and “Tommy” or is it more of a collection of songs with self-contained narratives?
Pete Townshend: I am fairly certain I will never top Quadrophenia. In the case of this new album I had to face the fact that touring and performing for me is not the most important part of what I do, or who I am. I am good at performing, and find touring easy these days, but where I find myself pushing at the very edge of my creative ability is in the recording studio. I wanted more than anything to prove that I can still write songs for Roger’s voice the way I used to in the ‘60s and ‘70s, but also that together we could break some new ground. I needed to drop new songs for my own dignity. I gathered about fifteen or sixteen songs to present to Roger, including two that were rescued from 1966 and never recorded by The Who. There is no narrative. Some listeners to the new songs have said that they can sense an underlying story. That was never my intention.
The Who has been recording and touring for over 50 years. When approaching new material, is the decision to write for Roger’s voice, as opposed to your own, as clear as it once was?
Pete Townshend: It is clearer today than ever before. Roger is surprisingly uncertain about what he can tackle these days. His voice is better than ever, but he has really battled to get it that way and had some serious illness. One issue is that he can be wary about his own ability to get inside a song and deliver it. I was very careful to make sure – in as much as I could – that every song, every melody, every lyric, would provide Roger with a way in. It does seem to have worked out. I was worried for a while when it seemed I’d failed. At first Roger didn’t really feel comfortable with what I delivered. But he did work very hard to inhabit the songs, and his approaches in each case are surprising and unique. Not always what I expected. He has done really good work. There are some amazing vocal moments.
As a band, The Who truly laid down the groundwork for what rock and roll bands would consider being “heavy” both on record and in a live setting. I am curious to get your opinion on your own definition of that word when it comes to music. Would you define the power and force of The Who as being “heavy”?
Pete Townshend: Ah, over the years we have delivered both heavy and light, haven’t we? Many long-time Who fans enjoy the lighter side even more than the heavy. One album in particular gave the impression that The Who were part of the heavy metal evolution, and that was “Live At Leeds”. But our shows at that time (1970) featured “Tommy” as a central element, and that was always performed with great care, at lower volume, and with a very real sense of ironic lightness and humour. “Tommy” was not included on “Live At Leeds”, so all you hear is the heavy stuff. Roger is always very keen to play some of the lighter songs from our catalogue and occasionally even sings songs from my solo albums as well – especially when he is on tour solo.
You have been responsible for some of the most timeless and resonant songs about navigating how difficult and confusing being young can be. Do those deep rooted emotions still provide inspiration for you while writing new songs and performing older ones onstage? Is it a feeling you can ever really shake?
Pete Townshend: I am seventy-four. I really do not want to admit that I am still completely f-cked up by sh-t that happened to me, that shaped and formed me, when I was a kid before the age of seven. But that is a fact. The way we handle being a teenager is then driven by our earlier childhood. What makes us vulnerable as adults is what we can’t see, or what we forget. That’s why therapy is useful. A young violent man holding a machete, and chopping away at someone else, might feel he is being crazily brave, wild and strong, but there might be a frightened kid in there somewhere. I can’t speak for women.
What has been different for me is that I am a writer. What appears on the page in front of me is often unintentionally revealing. It can take a long time, but eventually every word I write betrays some aspect of my being that is damaged, hurt, frightened or vengeful. I’m often surprised by this, as I have been with “Tommy” where the little boy in the story, and the man he becomes, turned out to be so autobiographical. It’s not a ‘silly’ story folks, it’s my fucking story. But of course, it is fiction, loosely based on my story. And it’s probably not my best plot. (I want to add an ironic emoji here……).
“Tommy” is just one set of songs, and many of my songs function in a similar way. “Tommy” seems to carry critical elements of a lot of people’s stories. That must be why it works so well. Maybe more of us are f-cked up than we like to admit.
Probably the biggest holy grail for fans of The Who fans is hearing a completed version of your aborted album, “Lifehouse”. Is there any hope that fans will be able to hear the final official version of that project?
Pete Townshend: It’s not going to happen, not as a Who album. It may one day happen as a movie. Music was central to the basic film story I scratched together in 1971. This featured partly electronic music as distraction, entertainment, as a political instrument, a way of worshipping, and a way to help us be part of a human congregation. Music in Lifehouse is also described as a reflection of the higher schemes of physics, and the underlying engines of what makes us human, and at the same time what makes us believe we are also spiritual.
A graphic novel is going to be published in 2020, and that explores and develops all of the themes and variations sparked by the first Lifehouse script. It’s a very dramatic and disturbing project that will undoubtedly trigger new interest in the idea.
I don’t return to “Lifehouse” because I need to complete it. I return to it because it is always evolving. Even if Artificial Intelligence eventually allows us to find music that precisely fits our emotional and spiritual needs (this was just one of the themes in the original story) we have no idea what that will do to us as human beings. A lot of electronic music today is reaching backwards and forwards with equal power and excitement. Electronic producers who are much younger than I am are travelling a very similar path to the one I set out on in 1971 with my “Lifehouse” ideas. Science and spirituality are becoming entwined. It’s an exciting time for electronic music.
It’s an exciting time for me too. I wish I was younger and had more time to play. Even so, I feel lucky to be alive.
