Talk:Roger Hodgson

Untitled

• I'll give you guys a week to respond to this. Gm1121983 13:30, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

It probably is him who sings, "Goodbye stranger, it's been nice, hope you find your paradise." Like you said, he has a high-pitched voice. I thought it was a female voice at first. Mr. Conrad 12:55, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Rick did all the backing vocals on "Goodbye Stranger." redlake6

So who did the lead vocals? —Mr. Conrad 20:12, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

I thought Rick Davies was the lead singer. Roger Hodgson is the one with the high-pitched voice. —Gm1121983 12:14, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Wait, I've got it. Roger sings the lyrics to the chorus, so in this case, Rick is doing the backup. —Mr. Conrad 12:06, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Good point. Roger does the backing vocals at the end of "Hide in Your Shell". He says, "So what's he gonna make her do, etc." —Gm1121983 12:09, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

And Rick Davies sings the ooh's in the outro to "Goodbye Stranger". —Mr. Conrad 23:44, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, add some ooh's just for the fun of it. —Mariusz Zielinski 23:45, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Rick sings all the lead and background vocals on Goodbye Stranger, and I believe John Helliwell does the whistling before the second chorus. Usually, Roger or Rick would overdub their own backing vocals on their own songs, while the other singer (or John) would sing parts where the different voice will stick out (i.e. Rick's "If I could see something" on Dreamer, or John's "what she got? Not a lot" on Breakfast.) They would all play active roles in live background vocals, especially John even though he never sings lead.

I disagree with Cedric about who sings backup on "Hide in Your Shell". Roger sings the lead vocals on that song. I believe Rick or another singer sings the background chorus. —Flatts 22:31, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Actually, Scott Gorham was one of the backup singers on "Hide in Your Shell". —68.45.188.45 11:18, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

I think he does the chanting.

Roger Hodgson: You got demons in your closet.

Scott Gorham: You got demons in your closet.

But I think Roger does sing the background chorus at the end as well as the whining. As King Tarkus said above, Roger and Rick overdub their background vocals on their own songs. —69.136.244.218 15:31, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Christine Helliwell and Vicky Siebenberg sing the "So what's he gonna make her do" chorus at the end. --Gm1121983 14:23, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

John Helliwell

I think John sings the oohs during the outro, or he plays the saxophone. —Brian Michael Barbera 22:31, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

He could be doing both. —Gm1121983 18:59, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

John doesn't play the sax on "Goodbye Stranger". In the video, you can see his sax in the background, but he sings instead. —Flatts 22:31, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

"A Soapbox Opera" Meaning if anyone is questioning...

I was listening to Supertramp's "A Soapbox Opera" one night and I was questioning the song if he was from the Catholic faith. Well, I was wrong. HE WAS QUESTIONING IT. I just looked at it the wrong way.

The line in the song that goes: "Mary, oh, tell me what I'm living for. Because I feel like I'm tossed in a river. Oh, have you a son to deliver." got me in thought, because Catholics trust salvation in Mary, and that is the wrong doctrine.

Then their is the line: "Well, hey there, you tell me you're a holy man. Although I am just a beginner, ooh, I don't see you as the winner." Kind of reminds me of someone judging or questioning the Catholic faith. So I look at it that way anyways. Can anybody add to this, please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Benjamin908 (talk • contribs) 20:37, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Off-topic, but "Catholics trust salvation in Mary" is an anti-Catholic stereotype with no basis in reality. One of my college professors made this claim, and was promptly corrected by the four Catholic students in the class.

But as to the subject, yeah, I read the lyrics to the song a while back and found them to be a rather obvious and heavy-handed anti-Church diatribe. It's possible that we're misinterpreting, but the song doesn't strike me as at all subtle about its message. On a personal note, I was very disappointed by the lyrics; the music is so stunningly beautiful, and Hodgson had to pair it with such a tired progressive rock cliche as Catholicism-bashing. Still, you have to give him credit for being honest about how heavy-handed the lyrics are (re: the song's title).

Anyway, if you're suggesting we put this interpretation in one of the relevant articles, I think we should hold off until we get a reference where Hodgson himself confirms the meaning of the song. The obvious interpretation isn't always the correct one; after all, it certainly seems obvious that "Shout" is about primal scream therapy, but it's not.--Martin IIIa (talk) 01:00, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Public Relations

This article sounds like it was written by his publicist.

• "But more importantly, this success has been not simply been commercial, but something far more lasting and meaningful. These songs endure and today Hodgson sings them with the same passion and artistry that has marked his entire life as a musician and a man."
• "The recording remains rare and sought after."
• "Roger’s song “Dreamer” became the group’s first hit song and drove the album to the top of the charts. Roger's dreams were now beginning to come true."
• "...“Breakfast in America,” one of the most successful and beloved albums in all of rock history."
• "During this Golden and Platinum Age, as a key figure in Supertramp, Roger Hodgson experienced professional success beyond anything that he had ever dreamed."
• "Following his heart, ..."
• "Yet with faith, a long period of self-healing and physical therapy, Roger proved the naysayers wrong."
• "...he has been surprised and moved that the songs that he has written continue to resonate even more powerfully for fans old and young."
• "Remarkably, the humble musical legend is back and his signature voice sounds stronger than ever."

None of this ridiculous, bubbly language is backed up by citations. It really has no place on Wikipedia. I'm tempted to go through and clean this up to make it more factual based than something that sounds like he came in and wrote it himself.

69.244.56.132 (talk) 14:10, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Whenever you see an article that is in bad shape, always check the article history. What you saw was the result of recent edits by Manwiththechildinhiseyes, a WP: Single-purpose account who periodically removes reliable sources, adds purple prose, and generally reworks the articles Roger Hodgson, Supertramp, and Rick Davies into advertisements for Roger Hodgson. Had you actually gone through and cleaned the article up, as you suggested, you would have wasted a good hour of time to get the article to a state that is still worse than it was a week ago. By checking the history, I was able to fix the whole thing up in under a minute.--Martin IIIa (talk) 14:52, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Additional Picture

Hi there, I've uploaded another picture of him. While it is not as good as the current one (what-da-ya-say, point and shoot camera in dark back stage...), it is not bad. You folks use it in the article as you find appropriate. Cheers! --Wingtipvorte^X PTT ∅ 18:11, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, it's always good to have a picture of two to add color to the article body. Added it!--Martin IIIa (talk) 18:14, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Rv vandalism, unexplained removal of cited information

A statement was made by NukeofEarl in the history and I would like to come to an amicable resolution as to why information is being removed even with several citation sources. The same has been done on the Supertramp wiki page - similar, cited information from that page was provided on this one and is being removed without reason.

Rv vandalism claim without reasoning or explanation is rather redundant and unjustified. Also, Wikipedia is not meant for music criticism or review with editorial POV, rather an encyclopedic source of factual information.

All points which need explanation of removal:

• Instruments - It should be clarified that Roger played twelve-string & electric guitars specifically in addition to bass, as well as Grand Piano and Percussion.

• Associated acts - Elton John served as a session musician during Roger's time in Argosy.

• "Hodgson returned to doing solo tours, and as of 2014 is still touring worldwide."

(Incorrect - Hodgson has been touring non-stop since 2001, also cited information says Roger left the band in 1983 to live a simpler life with family, not to pursue a solo career. Why is this being rv'd?)

• Argosy - "It sold poorly and consequently has become rare and sought after." (Incorrect, cit. states otherwise)

• The songs on Supertramp's self-titled first album, released in 1970, were composed by Roger Hodgson, Rick Davies, and Richard Palmer; however, since both Hodgson and Davies were unwilling to write lyrics, Palmer wrote all the album's lyrics.

(This is not a solid statement, nowhere was it mentioned that Hodgson/Davies were "unwilling" to write lyrics. Information was re-written from factual source.)

• From their second album Indelibly Stamped forward, Hodgson and Davies wrote separately with each singing lead vocals on their own compositions.

(Cit. was provided - why removed?)

• Hodgson wrote "Breakfast in America," "The Logical Song," and parts of "Fool's Overture" at home with a harmonium he had bought from a neighbor when he was 17 years old (this instrument is used in the background of "Breakfast in America," and prominently appears on "Two of Us" and his solo track "The Garden")

(Citation was provided, why rv'd as "citation needed"?)

• This second effort, In the Eye of The Storm, was released in 1984. Despite being heavily publicised as the solo album of a former member of Supertramp, it failed to break the top 40 in either the US or UK. The single "Had a Dream (Sleeping With the Enemy)" was able to reach no higher than number 48 in the US, while the follow-up single, "In Jeopardy", failed to chart at all.

(Rv uses negative POV words vs. neutral, factual description - "failed", "was able to reach no higher" are not encyclopedic statements, should be stated as-is - WP:STICKTOSOURCE, WP:NPOV)

• Doctors told him he would never play music again. Yet with faith and a long period of self-healing and physical therapy, within a year and a half Hodgson was playing again.

(This turning point in Hodgson's career should be documented as such, why was it removed despite citations?)

• The album did badly in both the UK and US, though it did reach number 34 in Germany.

("did badly" is negative vs. neutral statement "The album did not chart in the UK or US, though it did reach number 34 in Germany.)

• On 18 September 2007, the DVD Take the Long Way Home - Live in Montreal was released worldwide, achieving Platinum status in just seven weeks, hitting #1 in all of Canada, and now multi-Platinum and Gold in France and Germany.

(Cit. was provided - why rv'd as "citation needed"?)

• In May 2012, Roger was honored by France with a Knight of the Order of Arts and Letters. This prestigious decoration was established in 1957 by the French Minister of Culture to recognize significant contributions to the arts.

(Again - cit provided, no reason for removal)

• Hodgson's latest release, Classics Live, is a collection of recordings taken from solo, band, and orchestra shows from his 2010 world tour. Hodgson continued to tour worldwide from 2011-2014, including two concerts at the Royal Albert Hall. He will soon again embark upon his 2015 Breakfast in America World Tour with shows in Germany, the U.K., Switzerland, Austria, Hungary, Norway, France, Spain, Belgium, Holland, the U.S. and Canada.

(Hodgson has announced he is touring in 2015, why does rv state 2014, even with sources provided? ) -Quietest Moments

NukeofEarl's use of the term "vandalism" was misplaced. However, your edits do contain a lot of falsification and other problems, so I understand why he lacked the patience to wade through them all. You haven't numbered your points, but I'll try to address them in order:

• 1.Per the infobox documentation, only general classes of instruments are to be listed, and they should not be capitalized.
• 2.Also per infobox documentation: "This field is for professional relationships with other musicians or bands that are significant and notable to this artist's career." It specifically lists under uses that should be avoided "One-time collaboration for a single, or on a single song".
• 3.I don't see how the current version contradicts either of your statements. Hodgson did indeed pursue a solo career after leaving the group.
• 4.Actually, the Argosy single sold very poorly. The source you provided is just an interview with Hodgson, so I don't know where you got the idea that it "received frequent airplay and almost charted."
• 5."Nowhere"? How about in the very first sentence? "I started to write lyrics when I joined Supertramp in 1969, because nobody else in the band wanted to do it."
• 6.I suspect it was removed because it has been well-documented that Davies and Hodgson didn't start writing separately until Crime of the Century. A brief bio from Hodgson's record label doesn't change that.
• 7.This edit looks good to me. I'm guessing that reverting it was a simple oversight on NukeofEarl's part.
• 8.Your statement "The album became an international hit, selling over two million copies." is unsourced, and "the follow-up single "In Jeopardy" peaked at number 30." is simply false. You've it sourced with a site which only lists "In Jeopardy" as charting in the Mainstream Rock charts.
• 9.This needs a source before it can be added; see WP:BLP.
• 10."did badly" isn't any less neutral than "did not chart", just less precise. I see nothing wrong with changing it to "did not chart", though.
• 11.Same comment as no. 7.
• 12.The citation provided is to the official website for Hodgson's record label. For information like that, we need an unbiased source.
• 13.I'm guessing this was another oversight on NukeofEarl's part. Nuke, you want to speak up here?--Martin IIIa (talk) 17:18, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

My apologies if my response here is belated; as you can see from my WP contributions, I haven't been on the site for the past five days. Yes, points 7, 11, and 13 were all oversights of mine. I'll go restore those three edits right now. I think Martin has covered the remaining points pretty well, but as far as "did not chart", I think that phrasing is very dry and dull compared to "did badly", and doesn't say anything fundamentally different. If you guys want to restore that edit too, though, I'll yield to consensus as I don't think it's a very important issue. Incidentally, Martin, concerning your recent removal of the Argosy single's performance, I thought the Tapestry of Delights article covered that?--NukeofEarl (talk) 15:46, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Not really. The Tapestry of Delights always lists the peak chart position for singles which charted, but the absence of such a listing is not quite the same as an explicit statement that the single didn't chart. The Tapestry of Delights doesn't provide such a statement, or anything about rarity. The guide has rarity ratings, but they're only applied to albums and EPs, not singles.--Martin IIIa (talk) 21:55, 9 March 2015 (UTC)