SHAKE that fat fanny!
Fat Fanny Stomp - Jim Clarke, 1930
http://cocoringo.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/02-fat-fanny-stomp.mp3
or
http://www.juneberry78s.com/sounds/ojl15-02.mp3
[right-click "save target as"]
---
discographical info:
JIM CLARKE, piano solo with talking. Chicago, Dec 8, 1929
C4915-A Fat Fanny stomp Vo rejected
C4916-A Fat Fanny stomp Vo rejected
C4922-A Fat Fanny stomp Vo rejected
C4923-A Fat Fanny stomp Vo rejected
Chicago, Jan , 1930
C5079- Fat Fanny stomp Vo 1536
vo = Vocalion record label (and company)
source: Laird, Ross. "Tantalizing Tingles" pg. 28.
Westport, Connecticut. Greenwood Press, 1995.
---
[theme 1]
Now everybody,
get up offa that thing, and shake your fat fanny!
When I say hold it, I mean shake yo’ fat fanny!
[break]
HOLD it!
[theme 2]
Shake yo’ fat fanny!
Shake that thing, gal, Shake it!
Do it miss mama, DO it!
[theme 1]
When I say hold it this time,
I want everybody to walk into it!
Walk into it like it’s yours!
[break]
HOLD it!
[theme 2]
Walk into it!
Walk into it, you bought it!
That’s what I’m talkin’ ’bout!
good gal,
[theme 1]
When I say hold it this time,
I want everybody to snatch it on back!
Bring it forward,
snatch it on back!
[break]
HOLD it!
[theme 2]
Smack it back!
Smack it on back! Bring it forward, smack it back again!!!
[theme 1]
When I say hold it this time,
I want everybody to gut it!
Gut that thing, I mean, GUT IT!
[break]
HOLD it!
[theme 2]
Aw, gut it!
Gut it gully low!
gut it like it live!
Sister Fullperson, you sho”’* guttin’ that thing!
[theme 1]
When I say “hold it” this time,
‘ want everybody to get up off it once mo’ and shake your fat fanny!
[break]
HOLD it!
[theme 2]
Aw, SHAKE yo’ fat fanny!
I mean SHAKE yo’ fanny!
Twirl that thing, gal, twirl it…
…’n wring it, ‘n twist it a little bit.
ONE MO’RE TIME!
[theme 1]
When I say “hold it” this time,
I want everybody to Sally Long!
[break]
HOLD it!
aw, SALLY LONG!
Sally Long your fanny, gal!, Sally that thing!
[commanding] SALLY IT. [gaily] Shake yo’ fat fanny!
That’s JUST what I’m talkin’ ’bout!
[end]
*[sho''' = "sure are" enthusiastically run together]
---
Notes:
It is possible that he substitutes the word “smack” for “snatch” in “snatch it on back”, sometimes, but it is hard to tell due to the fidelity of the recording. Certainly, “smack it on back” seems to make more sense than “snatch it on back”.
When he says “Walk into it, you bought it!”, he is quite possibly referring to prostitution (or at least dancing for money, but probably prostitution). Again, his encouraging tone makes this a refreshing record.
“Sister Fullperson” is quite probably an in-joke referring to a “well-endowed” lady. (get it?) One book I have seen transcribes this as “Sister Fulbosom” which he might well actually be saying, it is hard to hear. However, I cannot think of another instance of the word “bosom” being used on any of the other “race records” of the era that I have heard. Then again, this is Jim Clarke’s only solo side, so perhaps he was indeed familiar with the word.
“Sally Long” (1901-1987) was a dancer and movie actress, who was famous from the mid-1920s to the early 1930s, which fits in perfectly with the date of this tune (1930). It is quite possible that Jim Clarke is referring to some dance routine that she did in one of her movies. A dance called the "Sally Long" is indeed referenced in several other blues recordings from about the same time, so it must have once been a fad in the Afro-American community.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sally_Long
---
my remarks:
[regarding the piano playing]
First of all, in my opinion, "Fat Fanny Stomp" is a MASTERPIECE. I have listened to it DOZENS of times, including one session where I was driving for an hour or so on the car, cranked up the iPod, and let it play on repeat nonstop until I got there. It never got old, and even the last time before I turned it off (when I arrived), I was still hearing new things in the recording, in Jim Clarke's playing, and talking. Sure, he has a one-chorus piano idea, which he basically repeats over and over again with no variation (that I can hear), but so what? Many of Jimmy Blythe's piano masterpieces such as "Armour Ave. Struggle" and "Society Blues" are the same way, except they have three themes which are repeated without variation, rather than just one.
The important thing here is, folks, as great as improvisation is and all (and Jimmy Blythe could DEFINITELY improvise very well, and I'll bet Jim Clarke could too), and speaking for all piano players here (myself included): sometimes we are at the piano and come up with something that is SO GOOD, SO TASTY, that it simply doesn't NEED to be elaborated upon, developed, or taken in a different direction. Sometimes, the thing itself is so beautiful that you don't dare screw around with it, since you just might screw it up. Some classical music is predicated upon this theory (which works very nicely provided that the musician is actually PLAYING the music and not just going through the motions). These pieces hang together so well because they are played with great drive and vigor and so unless you are really paying attention, you just might not notice that they are actually playing the same thing over again.
Folks, also speaking as a piano player here, I have to say that it's pretty damn HARD to talk and play at the same time, much less talk in a natural-sounding rhythm which sounds (to me) like it has nothing whatsoever to do with the rhythm of the tune! Singing is one thing, since that almost always rhythmically relates to what you are doing at the piano (and thus is easier to sync up and also find the right notes). However, talking is quite another. This is kind of analogous to playing the piano versus playing a theatre organ; the organ has twice as much stuff going on at once, and so you are not only using two hands, but also two feet, and changing stops, playing percussion, etc. at the same time.
http://weeniecampbell.com/mambo/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=67&Itemid=42
What Jim Clarke says, and the ecstatic tone-color of his voice, is part of what makes this recording very special to me. Although it is true he does bring "shake that fat fanny" back again near the end, it sounds to me like he could have gone on all night like that making up lines, with the girls shaking their booty near the piano. Just the image alone is enticing enough!
Jim Clarke sounds so incredibly enthusiastic and buoyant (I am hesitant to carelessly use the word "joyous") that it is inspiring and a wonder to behold to me. Comparing him with Pine Top on the former record is like night and day. Pine Top (to me) sounds kind of bitter, and a bit commanding, and generally old and crusty and battle-scarred etc. etc. He doesn't sound like he has a natural curiousity that Jim Clarke seems to have. But of course this is just the sound-color of their voice. Jim Clarke was probably just in a good mood and talking in (more or less) his natural voice, whereas it is plausible that Pine Top (who was only about 24 when he made his famous record) affected the gruff seen-it-all voice to seem much older and possibly thus impress the old-timers of the Chicago blues world, who might have rejected the young whippersnapper had they been able to see him first. [it is also possible that "Pine Top"'s voice was gravelly due to drinking various sorts of illegal alcohol]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZgS03Md3mQ
Although I know "Fat Fanny Stomp" is based upon the recording "Pine Top's Boogie Woogie", what Jim Clarke does with this same idea (calling out to "dancers" and having a fancy stop-time break, with the shout of "hold it!" followed by a dance chorus) is very different, both in music and in lyrics. I actually prefer Jim Clarke's tune to Pine Top's, although I agree that the latter still has a very high mainstream charm and appeal.
Part of what makes Clarke's recording so special isn't just his suggestive speech nor the fact that he's talking and playing at the same time (other people did that too). What makes it special is the amazing things he plays on the piano. I firmly believe that Jim Clarke was forty or fifty years ahead of his time, musically, in terms of his rhythmic conception, and most especially, his harmonic conception. He is using chord progressions and voicings for which I can find no counterpart, except in funk and jazz music of the 1960's and '70s. Certainly, SOME of the progressions and SOME of the voicings were already creeping into the jazz and cutting-edge classical music by 1929, but I can not think of anything else from this general period (or even a decade later or more) that sounds anything like "Fat Fanny Stomp". It is not just the pieces themselves, but how he puts them together to create a fresh and very different whole, which is what makes his piano part so special. His time is also very solid and his touch is light and bell-like. (except for the more forceful accented parts in the lower register of the piano)
I also firmly believe that you could take "Fat Fanny Stomp" and put it into a contemporary hip-hop or R & B record and it would sound like it had been created for it all along.
That's how far ahead of his time I think Jim Clarke was! [P.S. I have first dibs on this idea]
[regarding the talking]
I have had a copy of this recording for years and it is one of my all-time favorites.
In my opinion, it IS quite a bit more racy than the usual “hokum” record of the time, especially with Clarke’s [not "Clark"] fast, practically orgasmic exhortations of “bring it forward, smack it on back! bring it forward, smack it back again!”.
The absolute joy and pride in what he is saying, and total lack of any shame (in my opinion) makes this record very modern in my eyes, certainly an easy (and not archaic) listen for those more free-spirited people who are products of the sexual revolution.
AB
November 2, 2009
http://cocoringo.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/02-fat-fanny-stomp.mp3
or
http://www.juneberry78s.com/sounds/ojl15-02.mp3
[right-click "save target as"]
---
discographical info:
JIM CLARKE, piano solo with talking. Chicago, Dec 8, 1929
C4915-A Fat Fanny stomp Vo rejected
C4916-A Fat Fanny stomp Vo rejected
C4922-A Fat Fanny stomp Vo rejected
C4923-A Fat Fanny stomp Vo rejected
Chicago, Jan , 1930
C5079- Fat Fanny stomp Vo 1536
vo = Vocalion record label (and company)
source: Laird, Ross. "Tantalizing Tingles" pg. 28.
Westport, Connecticut. Greenwood Press, 1995.
---
[theme 1]
Now everybody,
get up offa that thing, and shake your fat fanny!
When I say hold it, I mean shake yo’ fat fanny!
[break]
HOLD it!
[theme 2]
Shake yo’ fat fanny!
Shake that thing, gal, Shake it!
Do it miss mama, DO it!
[theme 1]
When I say hold it this time,
I want everybody to walk into it!
Walk into it like it’s yours!
[break]
HOLD it!
[theme 2]
Walk into it!
Walk into it, you bought it!
That’s what I’m talkin’ ’bout!
good gal,
[theme 1]
When I say hold it this time,
I want everybody to snatch it on back!
Bring it forward,
snatch it on back!
[break]
HOLD it!
[theme 2]
Smack it back!
Smack it on back! Bring it forward, smack it back again!!!
[theme 1]
When I say hold it this time,
I want everybody to gut it!
Gut that thing, I mean, GUT IT!
[break]
HOLD it!
[theme 2]
Aw, gut it!
Gut it gully low!
gut it like it live!
Sister Fullperson, you sho”’* guttin’ that thing!
[theme 1]
When I say “hold it” this time,
‘ want everybody to get up off it once mo’ and shake your fat fanny!
[break]
HOLD it!
[theme 2]
Aw, SHAKE yo’ fat fanny!
I mean SHAKE yo’ fanny!
Twirl that thing, gal, twirl it…
…’n wring it, ‘n twist it a little bit.
ONE MO’RE TIME!
[theme 1]
When I say “hold it” this time,
I want everybody to Sally Long!
[break]
HOLD it!
aw, SALLY LONG!
Sally Long your fanny, gal!, Sally that thing!
[commanding] SALLY IT. [gaily] Shake yo’ fat fanny!
That’s JUST what I’m talkin’ ’bout!
[end]
*[sho''' = "sure are" enthusiastically run together]
---
Notes:
It is possible that he substitutes the word “smack” for “snatch” in “snatch it on back”, sometimes, but it is hard to tell due to the fidelity of the recording. Certainly, “smack it on back” seems to make more sense than “snatch it on back”.
When he says “Walk into it, you bought it!”, he is quite possibly referring to prostitution (or at least dancing for money, but probably prostitution). Again, his encouraging tone makes this a refreshing record.
“Sister Fullperson” is quite probably an in-joke referring to a “well-endowed” lady. (get it?) One book I have seen transcribes this as “Sister Fulbosom” which he might well actually be saying, it is hard to hear. However, I cannot think of another instance of the word “bosom” being used on any of the other “race records” of the era that I have heard. Then again, this is Jim Clarke’s only solo side, so perhaps he was indeed familiar with the word.
“Sally Long” (1901-1987) was a dancer and movie actress, who was famous from the mid-1920s to the early 1930s, which fits in perfectly with the date of this tune (1930). It is quite possible that Jim Clarke is referring to some dance routine that she did in one of her movies. A dance called the "Sally Long" is indeed referenced in several other blues recordings from about the same time, so it must have once been a fad in the Afro-American community.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sally_Long
---
my remarks:
[regarding the piano playing]
First of all, in my opinion, "Fat Fanny Stomp" is a MASTERPIECE. I have listened to it DOZENS of times, including one session where I was driving for an hour or so on the car, cranked up the iPod, and let it play on repeat nonstop until I got there. It never got old, and even the last time before I turned it off (when I arrived), I was still hearing new things in the recording, in Jim Clarke's playing, and talking. Sure, he has a one-chorus piano idea, which he basically repeats over and over again with no variation (that I can hear), but so what? Many of Jimmy Blythe's piano masterpieces such as "Armour Ave. Struggle" and "Society Blues" are the same way, except they have three themes which are repeated without variation, rather than just one.
The important thing here is, folks, as great as improvisation is and all (and Jimmy Blythe could DEFINITELY improvise very well, and I'll bet Jim Clarke could too), and speaking for all piano players here (myself included): sometimes we are at the piano and come up with something that is SO GOOD, SO TASTY, that it simply doesn't NEED to be elaborated upon, developed, or taken in a different direction. Sometimes, the thing itself is so beautiful that you don't dare screw around with it, since you just might screw it up. Some classical music is predicated upon this theory (which works very nicely provided that the musician is actually PLAYING the music and not just going through the motions). These pieces hang together so well because they are played with great drive and vigor and so unless you are really paying attention, you just might not notice that they are actually playing the same thing over again.
Folks, also speaking as a piano player here, I have to say that it's pretty damn HARD to talk and play at the same time, much less talk in a natural-sounding rhythm which sounds (to me) like it has nothing whatsoever to do with the rhythm of the tune! Singing is one thing, since that almost always rhythmically relates to what you are doing at the piano (and thus is easier to sync up and also find the right notes). However, talking is quite another. This is kind of analogous to playing the piano versus playing a theatre organ; the organ has twice as much stuff going on at once, and so you are not only using two hands, but also two feet, and changing stops, playing percussion, etc. at the same time.
http://weeniecampbell.com/mambo/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=67&Itemid=42
What Jim Clarke says, and the ecstatic tone-color of his voice, is part of what makes this recording very special to me. Although it is true he does bring "shake that fat fanny" back again near the end, it sounds to me like he could have gone on all night like that making up lines, with the girls shaking their booty near the piano. Just the image alone is enticing enough!
Jim Clarke sounds so incredibly enthusiastic and buoyant (I am hesitant to carelessly use the word "joyous") that it is inspiring and a wonder to behold to me. Comparing him with Pine Top on the former record is like night and day. Pine Top (to me) sounds kind of bitter, and a bit commanding, and generally old and crusty and battle-scarred etc. etc. He doesn't sound like he has a natural curiousity that Jim Clarke seems to have. But of course this is just the sound-color of their voice. Jim Clarke was probably just in a good mood and talking in (more or less) his natural voice, whereas it is plausible that Pine Top (who was only about 24 when he made his famous record) affected the gruff seen-it-all voice to seem much older and possibly thus impress the old-timers of the Chicago blues world, who might have rejected the young whippersnapper had they been able to see him first. [it is also possible that "Pine Top"'s voice was gravelly due to drinking various sorts of illegal alcohol]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZgS03Md3mQ
Although I know "Fat Fanny Stomp" is based upon the recording "Pine Top's Boogie Woogie", what Jim Clarke does with this same idea (calling out to "dancers" and having a fancy stop-time break, with the shout of "hold it!" followed by a dance chorus) is very different, both in music and in lyrics. I actually prefer Jim Clarke's tune to Pine Top's, although I agree that the latter still has a very high mainstream charm and appeal.
Part of what makes Clarke's recording so special isn't just his suggestive speech nor the fact that he's talking and playing at the same time (other people did that too). What makes it special is the amazing things he plays on the piano. I firmly believe that Jim Clarke was forty or fifty years ahead of his time, musically, in terms of his rhythmic conception, and most especially, his harmonic conception. He is using chord progressions and voicings for which I can find no counterpart, except in funk and jazz music of the 1960's and '70s. Certainly, SOME of the progressions and SOME of the voicings were already creeping into the jazz and cutting-edge classical music by 1929, but I can not think of anything else from this general period (or even a decade later or more) that sounds anything like "Fat Fanny Stomp". It is not just the pieces themselves, but how he puts them together to create a fresh and very different whole, which is what makes his piano part so special. His time is also very solid and his touch is light and bell-like. (except for the more forceful accented parts in the lower register of the piano)
I also firmly believe that you could take "Fat Fanny Stomp" and put it into a contemporary hip-hop or R & B record and it would sound like it had been created for it all along.
That's how far ahead of his time I think Jim Clarke was! [P.S. I have first dibs on this idea]
[regarding the talking]
I have had a copy of this recording for years and it is one of my all-time favorites.
In my opinion, it IS quite a bit more racy than the usual “hokum” record of the time, especially with Clarke’s [not "Clark"] fast, practically orgasmic exhortations of “bring it forward, smack it on back! bring it forward, smack it back again!”.
The absolute joy and pride in what he is saying, and total lack of any shame (in my opinion) makes this record very modern in my eyes, certainly an easy (and not archaic) listen for those more free-spirited people who are products of the sexual revolution.
AB
November 2, 2009