From Genesis to Revelation is an enjoyable listen for a fan of pop or easy-listening music. Genesis fans of classic albums like Foxtrot or Selling England by the Pound will most likely find the album a bore, despite having some good melodies, and go into a frenzying rage because it has the name Genesis" on it. Those same fans would probably go into an equally manic rage after hearing Genesis 80s albums. And Genesis themselves werent pleased with this album at all, furious at Jonathan King for adding various orchestral arrangements to the songs. He was sacked for this, his desire wanting to make this album sound like a Bee Gees pastiche. Well, Mr. King, you did a good job at that. You also did a good job at not making the band show any talent. How you did in terms of making a good album? I think we all know the answer to that.
GEORGE STRATOSIN REVIEW - FROM GENESIS TO REVELATION
Their only album for Decca - their early manager Jonathan King managed to procure them this little contract when they were still schoolboys, but it's no wonder that after the record's release Decca as only too happy to severe all contacts. It sold less copies than Santa Claus' recent autobiography and not only made them lose the contract, but also made them the laughing stock of every critic alive (among those who actually managed to hear the record, that is). What's even more pathetic, even now it is usually still looked on as something to be really ashamed of - like some silly childhood scribblings of a notorious poet that he'd forgotten to send down the drain and then they had suddenly been unearthed and made public. Even the band's fans usually shake their heads and say: 'Well, man, they were young. Even the gods make mistakes sometimes'.
Well, sure enough that they do. It's easy to see what this album suffers from. The music is highly derivative - there's not even a single truly creative, original idea to be found when it comes to actual genre innovation. The orchestration that runs wild and free through most of the tracks had already been pioneered and patented by the Moody Blues and Procol Harum and suchlike. The balladeering style had already been refined by the Bee Gees and, well, er, the Beatles, for that matter. The sound effects are generic: reverb, fuzz, phasing - by 1969, that was your usual kit. And, finally, the concept, suggested to the band by King, is certainly overblown to such an extent that it makes the album look grotesque: what, do you really expect a bunch of eighteen-year old kids to put the description of God's creation of the world to rock music with enough authenticity? (Not to mention that the odd title of the record made many record stores place it into the 'gospel' bin, which was yet another heavy blow to sales).
But hey! This is exactly where all the fun starts! For once, I feel no bad feelings towards Gabriel and company for the puffed-up subject matter. See, the subject matter is so pretentious, pompous and totally deprived of any sense of humour that it's... an awful lot of fun - just an awful lot of fun! Yes, they were young and naive, but that's just the thing that redeems them; it's nothing but a charming piece of youthful romanticism. Not to mention that this isn't really prog rock: the subject matter is totally transparent, and Gabriel's lyrics can be called all but nonsensical: naive, yes, cliched, yes, but already betraying signs of deep talent.
Now when we start speaking about the tunes themselves, this is where a big smile comes to rest on my face. Call me crazy, but I love most of these ditties - and there's quite a few of them. Whatever you say, they are pretty, funny and catchy. They might be derivative for all I care, but they're good. 'Where The Sour Turns To Sweet' sets the pace with its moody keyboards and Gabriel's inviting singing, then 'In The Beginning' really recreates the atmosphere of 'the beginning', with Peter croaning his 'you're in the hands of destiny' line to a steady, solemn beat, and from then on, almost every tune has at least something to offer in the line of hooks. Most often, it's the pretty pop refrains ('Fireside Song'; 'In The Wilderness'; 'One Day'), but sometimes it's the whole song that's intriguing ('The Serpent'). There are brilliant melodic resolutions all over the place - the vocal melodies of 'Am I Very Wrong' and 'Fireside Song' are among the most grappling, perfectly constructed ones I've ever heard. Pure pop perfection. Yes, the weak production and the conventional instrumentation do show that this is a naive, clumsy effort - the tunes don't vary too much and aren't that memorable. But the talent is there, man. You can't deny it's there. Too bad the world didn't accept this album back then and won't accept it now. Too bad.
I'm not sure whether anybody would be in agreement with me over this one. But what I'll say is this: this isn't really a pretentious album. This is just a bunch of clean-cut, intelligent, artsy kids having some restricted fun in the studio. Unexperienced, but highly talented kids. It's not a cash-in, and it's not a crass product of some marketing scheme. It's an innocent, fresh and funny piece of music. Bear that in mind and put that record on with a smile.
Oh, and by the way: the original album is usually available under at least a couple thousand titles, because the band's original manager Jonathan King is still trying to make as much money out of it as possible. So he comes up with a new title and a new album cover (and, probably, a new track running order) each year. I, for one, have the album under the title Where The Sour Turns To Sweet. It's good in that it also includes two of their earlier flop singles. The A-sides are rather generic, although listenable and even enjoyable, flower power ditties ('The Silent Sun'; 'A Winter's Tale'). The B-sides are incredible, though, probably being the best tracks on the whole album: 'That's Me' is a terrific misanthropic/egotistic anthem, punctuated by Gabriel's alternating between low grumbling vocals and an almost falsetto shrieking, while 'One-Eyed Hound' is, I think, a gothic horror tale set to an appropriate melody. My advice is: if you've decided to get the album, wait until you've found the version with these bonuses.
JOHN MCFERRIN'S REVIEW - FROM GENESIS TO REVELATION
Rarely has the debut album of a major group received this much of a slagging from both fans and critics alike. And on the surface, the flaws of the album are huge and very numerous, seemingly leaving criticism fully justified. In case you're unware, here's the general rundown: first, the band was in its formative stages, without either of its instrumental virtuosos (Hackett and Collins, both of whom would join in '71). Hence, the playing on this album is a bit unimpressive - put another way, Tony Banks was by far the most skilled instrumentalist in the band at this point, and that should tell you something. Next, the band had not yet found its own distinct style, choosing to emulate the Beatles, Bee Gees and Zombies. And worst of all, producer Jonathan King, in an attempt to make the band seem 'sophisticated', forced the band to write around the concept of the creation of the world through the death of Adam (yes, I know the title implies the whole Bible, but trust me, it's fairly apparent that the story is all told from the point of view of God or Adam, and no other characters). Oh, and when they were done, he threw a lot of orchestration over the songs, except that King seemingly had no idea how to properly use string and brass arrangements in rock (unlike, say, George Martin).
So the obvious question comes to mind - WHY am I giving this album an A??!!! Because beneath all of the superficial weaknesses lie two of Genesis' strengths, in just as full of force now as they would be later - incredible songwriting and incredible vocals from Peter. I don't know if I'm just listening to different songs than the rest of y'all, but almost a dozen of the songs on here (and yes, I'm counting the singles on the reissue, more on those later) are, at least in one aspect in each of them, absolute pop perfection. Am I Very Wrong?, for instance, may have a slightly awkward and Disney-sounding chorus, but how about that vocal melody in the verses?! And the rest ... man. Man. Where The Sour Turns To Sweet is beautiful, In The Beginning has one of the most awesome vocal hooks I've ever heard, and Fireside Song is EVEN BETTER. Are you going to tell me that the chorus of that song isn't one of the most perfectly constructed tunes you've ever heard??!! And don't forget In Hiding or Window, no sirree, the former with another perfect sing-songey melody and the latter yet another beautiful ballad.
And that sure as heck isn't all. Did you notice I put THREE songs from this album as my 'favorite'? In The Wilderness is a whee bit flacid in the verses, but that chorus ... "Music, all I hear is music, guaranteed to please ...". Guaranteed to please is right, dang it. And neither The Conqueror nor One Day fall short of the standard, the former a great energetic rocker and the latter one of the most perfect love songs I've ever heard.
Oh, and don't forget the bonus tracks. The single version of The Silent Sun is only slightly better than the album one (and that one's really dull, actually), but the other three are all highly recommendable. That's Me is, as usual, catchy as all get out, a great anthem of misogyny, while A Winter's Tale has yet another incredible chorus melody, while One Eyed Hound has great interaction between the piano melody and Peter's vocals.
Oh, I was going to tell you about Peter's vocals on this album, wasn't I. Now, at first glance, it would seem that Peter fails miserably in trying to vocalize the early chapters of Genesis, the logic being that since he's singing about such a profound part of Christianity, he should sound booming and authoritative to match the profundity. Well, quite honestly, I think that's bunk. How do you really think Adam would have been upon his placement on the earth - authoritative and patriarchal (how on earth do I spell that?), ready to assume his place as the biological father of all of Man? Bull. He would have been filled with wide-eyed awe at all of the creations around him - his own body, the animals in the garden, not to mention Eve and this new, strange emotion called 'love'. And in THAT way, Peter pulls off the album to an absolute tee. The lyrics (which, btw, are NOT bad - they are youthful and naive in their feel, but naive does not necessarily mean bad or sloppy) and vocals on this album combine in such a way as to perfectly convey the 'story behind the story' with Adam.
In case you haven't been able to tell, I really like this album. If you dislike it, well, it's your own choice, but dismissing it so easily just based on the lack of competent instrumentation and stupid orchestration seems no less than a fatal mistake to me.
