Music Banter - View Single Post - Is the Number of the Beast Up: Iron Maiden 1986

Trollheart · 05-03-2021, 12:03 PM

Chapter II: Strangers in a Strange Land: Writing the Future

So where to begin our exploration (deconstruction?) of Iron Maiden? Well, as I already mentioned, there's no need to involve the first five albums, so here is, for me, the jumping-off point, the album on which the smallest cracks, which would later develop into wide fissures and threaten to ruin this band for me, began to show.

Somewhere in Time (1986)

This album has quite a few firsts. It's the first to feature Eddie, the band's ubiquitous mascot, who has been on every album sleeve bar three since the debut, in a futuristic setting. Looking quickly back, you had a contemporary, almost punk Eddie on the debut, a maniacal, homicidal but still modern times Eddie on Killers, a scene out of some horror movie but set in current times or thereabouts on The Number of the Beast (though I guess you could argue that was the future, perhaps depicting Judgement Day) and then Eddie in an asylum of the sort we (apparently) don't see these days on the cover of Piece of Mind. Powerslave of course went all the way back to the ancient past, depicting him as an Egyptian god. So this is the first time we see, if you will, future Eddie. It will also be the last, so far, as even though 2010's The Final Frontier is a futuristic painting, it's not Eddie who graces the cover.

It's also the first time since he joined that we hear of tensions within the group between Bruce and the other guys, notably Steve. After a gruelling tour to support Powerslave, which lasted almost a full year, Bruce was exhausted and his ideas for songs, mostly based around acoustic styles, were rejected by the band. Bruce, however, felt there was a definite need for change, as it could be said that the band had reached their commercial and creative peak on the last album, and if they didn't do something to change things the only way was down.

Somewhere in Time was also the first instance of the use of synthesisers by Iron Maiden. Although they were only guitar synths (keytars) it was still a major departure from the pure guitar sound and something of a mockery of the legend printed proudly on the back of The Number of the Beast: “No synthesisers or ulterior motives.” Were there ulterior motives in bringing keys into a band who had thrived and made their name on a twin guitar attack? Was there concern over either the prowess (surely not) of the two axemen or their dedication to the band? Adrian Smith would in fact be the first to leave, and he may have been influenced by Bruce Dickinson's dissatisfaction with the direction of the band, I don't know. Maybe they just wanted a fuller sound, or maybe they felt the album, loosely based on science fiction, needed a more futuristic sound? Either way, it was the beginning, but certainly not the end, of Maiden's flirtations with the ivories, and it did change their sound somewhat.

The album was also their first to have more than a year between it and the previous outing (Iron Maiden – 1980 – Killers 1981 – The Number of the Beast – 1982 – Piece of Mind – 1983 – Powerslave – 1984) and in that context should have stood as one of their best, considering how long they took to get it right – twice as long as the other five. But that's not how it has ever sounded to me. Finally, it was also the first Maiden album to feature songs written solo by Adrian Smith, three in all, something that would never happen again. While he would co-write songs on the next album (after which he would depart till 2000) and again on later albums, for whatever reason he would always collaborate with usually Harris or Dickinson. Given the songs he wrote solo here, I'm not quite sure why, but again we'll get into that. One more point to note: this is the first album of Iron Maiden's to feature – if we accept any song seven minutes or over as being “long” - three long tracks, with one of them coming in at eight and a half, making it – after “Rime of the Ancient Mariner”, of course – Iron Maiden's longest song to date.

Spoiler for Somewhere n Time:

So, the album then. We have a total of eight tracks, leading to a playtime of just over fifty-one minutes. Of those, three, as already mentioned, are penned solo by Adrian Smith, four by Steve Harris and one a collaboration between Harris and Dave Murray, only his second foray into songwriting, unless you count the two bonus tracks “Eclipse” and “Twilight Zone”. It's clear that even though the songwriting is shared a little more evenly here, Harris is still in control. No writing credits appear for Dickinson for the first time since he joined the band, as already explained above.

Somewhere in Time (7:22)

The first thing that impresses me is that the guitars in the opening riff have a very distinct Egyptian sound, perhaps a holdover – conscious or otherwise – from the previous album. Since the main culprit I see of Maiden's shall we say staggering onto the wrong path or taking the wrong fork in the road is the increasing length of their songs, I want to examine the longer songs on every album with a view to deciding if they need to be that long. Is every minute used, or is the song padded out unnecessarily? Could it be shorter and still work, or does it need its full length in order to achieve its objective and get its message across? How much, in other words, if any, of the song is wasted or not needed? The opener and title track (a Harris tune) kicks off with about one minute of instrumental intro, but that's fine: Maiden songs don't usually punch right in with the vocal straight away, and there's a need and an expectation of setting the scene musically as it were. I do note, for future reference, a very similar melody here to a song which will surface on the next album, and I wonder if this song was on the mind of Steve when he co-wrote “The Evil That Men Do”?

It's a powerful punchy start, and certainly gives you the idea that this album will be a worthy successor to Powerslave. I wouldn't say it's one of my favourites on the album, but neither is it one of the ones with which I have a problem. There's the obligatory solo about halfway through, and there's a decent hook in the chorus. It takes up about two minutes of the song, but again that's all right: we're used to Dave and Adrian bossing the show; they don't do short solos, and unlike some guitarists theirs never seem boring or overstretched, and they never seem to be showing off how good they are. Both have always given me the impression that they play purely for the joy of it, and seem to have a great time doing it. So as we head into the sixth minute Bruce is back, and the song of itself seems pretty well structured and balanced, so in answer to my own question as to whether or not this song is too long, in this case I would say no, it isn't. I can see a few seconds here or there being snipped off and the song being no worse for it, but I don't see that its length detracts from the song itself. It ends well, it's a good opener and it gets things going. For such a relatively long song, it goes by quickly and there's no sense of when is this going to end?

Wasted Years (5:03)

Next up is Adrian's first attempt at a solo composition, and overall I'd have to say it's pretty damn good. Perhaps because it's his first try, it's a decent length, as you can see, and in fact none of the songs he writes here even reach the six-minute mark, though this is the shortest of them. Not surprisingly, there's plenty of work for the guitars to do, but then you could say that about any Maiden song really. It's also gone on to be one of the few tracks to survive the album into live concerts, which might kind of prove my point, but more of that later. To give Smith credit, there's much less of a guitar intro to this one that the opener, and it rocks away really well, with a fine hook in the chorus, leaving scope for vocal harmonies, unlike the one that preceded it. It's fairly typical of the Maiden songs of old – short, to the point, memorable, simple.

It of course features a guitar solo halfway but again it's nowhere near as indulgent as it could have been. It really only has the one verse with the chorus repeated to the end, finishing on the same guitar riff that opened it, and that's perfectly understandable for a first effort. No point in trying to run before you can walk.

Sea of Madness (5:42)

The next one is his, too, and in fact one of my favourites on the album. A very chaotic opening quickly settles down on a thick chunky bass line from Harris and the guitars more buzz than scream on this one. The hook here is probably the best on any song on this album so far; it's right through the bridge and chorus and it's hard not to sing it. Is the title related to their epic? Maybe, I don't know: the Ancient Mariner would certainly have felt he was on a sea of madness, but song lyrics can be so esoteric, it could be about a state of mind or politics or anything really. In the end, that's probably not as important as how the song sounds, and halfway through I find the solo very Thin Lizzyesque, which is not a criticism.

I like the thinning out of the sound then, in what I can only characterise as a sort of Police “Walking on the Moon” style, where the guitar is stripped back down, and then the song gains power and volume on the back of Dickinson's voice before crashing back into the opening riffs and into another verse (the same as the first? I think so; I'll have to check back) and to the chorus which then takes us to the end on Bruce's scream. That's how to write a song!

Heaven Can Wait (7:24)

Having ceded the floor to Smith for the last two tracks, Harris is back with another seven-minute-plus composition which, despite its length, is another of my favourites. You can hear the guitar synths this time as the actual guitars bite into the melody and slowly bring up the atmosphere, another long intro as you might expect in a song of this length. Faster than really anything that has gone before, it retains a slight edge of Killers-era Di'Anno I feel, though the hook is beautiful and perfect and very commercial. It's even possible this could have been a single had it been shorter, but I'm not sure it could have been cut down from its present form and not lost something. The solo comes in earlier this time, and if I remember there may be a second one.

After the solo the rhythm turns into a sort of slower march, leading to the familiar cries of “Woh-oh-oh!” which, let's be honest, are put in for audience participation purposes but show either laziness or the lack of need for this section of the song. It's fun to sing along to and throw your fists in the air, sure, but it takes up about a minute of the song and it could probably have survived just as well without it and yes, as I thought, there's the second solo. I've no problem with multiple solos, but take out that second one and the “Woh-oh-oh”s and this song could have been stripped down to a lean six minutes or so. But on we go. There is another verse, and at least it's not just a repeat of the first one, back to the chorus and, rather like Smith's “Wasted Years” it ends on the guitar riff that opened it.

The Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner (6:31)

This is where the album began to take something of a nosedive for me. I've pretty much always hated this track. It's not that long, as you can see, but I feel little happens in it. There's a powerful guitar intro which then almost seems to get elbowed aside, dashing the hopes that this was going to be something decent. Reminds me very much in ways of “Gangland” off The Number of the Beast, or maybe “Invaders” from the same album; either way, two tracks agreed to be the weakest on the album. There's an attempt to insert a hook in the chorus but for me it just does not work. I guess I'm biased against it and am looking for negative things to say about it, but I'm trying to see it with new eyes – or, I should say, hear it with new ears – and give it a chance, but there's no getting away from the very clear fact that everything – everything – that has gone before it has been superior, and it really isn't going to get a lot better. The quintessential album of two halves, I personally feel there's not much to recommend side two of Somewhere in Time.

Even the guitar solos sound forced; I don't get the impression of anyone enjoying participating in this song, and I kind of wish they had even tried one of Bruce's acoustic songs instead of this. After the power punch of “Heaven Can Wait” following “Sea of Madness”, it might have been a nice change of pace. I've never been able to remember this song, and even now I know that as soon as the next track starts I'll have all but forgotten it, whereas the other four are still clearly and loudly playing in my mind. Yeah, it just sort of fades out and away – not musically; few if any Maiden songs actually fade, but in terms of remaining in the memory, already forgotten.

Stranger in a Strange Land (5:43)

The last Smith effort on the album, it swaggers in on a punching guitar riff that makes you sit up and take notice, and whether the lads got permission for Heinlein for this or not I don't know, but it's interesting to hear the title of a future album in the lyric, and in fact the album that would see Smith return to the fold as Bruce sings “No brave new world, no brave new world.” The hook in the chorus is okay, but it doesn't quite grip in the same way as the first four songs did. I'm impressed too that Smith resists throwing in the guitar solo until nearly the fourth minute, and when it does come in it's quite restrained, almost you could say acoustic in nature, until it then picks up in intensity and power, and seems to fit just perfectly.

There's no doubt it's a huge improvement on “The Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner”, and probably the best on side two, as it were, but “Stranger in a Strange Land” still doesn't come close to the quality of any of the four on side one. And what I said about songs fading? This one does. It must be one of the only Maiden songs to do so.

Deja Vu (4:45)

The shortest song on the album opens a little like “Revelations” on Piece of Mind I feel, with a haunting, wailing guitar before thundering up into a breakneck guitar intro that flies along nicely but is rather basic and sounds like something they might have saved for Fear of the Dark. This is the one song on which Steve Harris pairs up with Dave Murray, and again I think I can hear those keytars; they don't make a huge difference here, and I'd have to say they don't have a massive impact on the album in general: had I not read they were there I probably would not have noticed them. There's a pretty long instrumental section in this song, but given its short length I don't have an issue with that. If anything, it's probably more a standard Maiden song than the last two; I'm not convinced by Bruce's raspy, supposedly threatening vocal delivery though. Not sure what that's about.

The hook is okay but nothing special, and even the guitar solos seem a little tacked-on and copy and pasted from the Great Iron Maiden Songbook. You'd have to wonder when Bruce sings “Feels like I've been here before” is he unintentionally delivering a message to the band?

Alexander the Great (8:35)

Harris's love of history comes through in the lyrical matter of the closer, but it also comes across as highly indulgent of him. The song is, as already mentioned, the longest on the album and indeed to this point the second-longest recorded by the band. Taking that into account, its lengthy instrumental intro (preceded by a spoken passage where Alexander's father mourns his failure to provide a better legacy for his son) is understandable and acceptable. Once it gets going it gallops along nicely in a sort of mid-paced way, but you do get the feeling (well I do anyway) that the rest of the band realise they're servicing Harris's personal vision here and that it's his project; they're playing his song, which of course you can say about any of his solo penned tracks, but here it just seems... different somehow.

I feel the attempted hook in the chorus fails miserably, and so I don't see any hook in it, no memorable chorus you can sing. The again almost acoustic solo in the middle is interesting, building up on Nicko McBrain's staggered drum patterns, then it smashes into a very slow, graceful section, beginning a gradual march to the denouement of the song. It's epic, certainly, though not, I feel, in the same way “Rime of the Ancient Mariner” is epic, and considering its length, I think even “Phantom of the Opera” is better constructed. Another, more standard guitar solo now as we head into the sixth minute, and at least Harris resisted the urge to throw in some “Woah-oh-oh”s as there is a place in the song where you could definitely hear that, and perhaps onstage they do that, but they kept it out of the studio version, which I think is just as well.

I feel the ending is a bit of a damp squib, and as a closer to the album I don't think it really works that well at all.

What is significant is that as I mentioned, none of these songs, bar “Wasted Years” and “Heaven Can Wait” were added to the live setlist, proving perhaps that the boys realised many of them were too long to keep fans' attention in a live setting. I'm not going to put the album down too much, as it does have some great tracks, and even the weaker ones are not terrible (with one exception) but I do remember being all excited having bought the album, still riding on a Maiden high from Powerslave even two years later, and being underwhelmed by this one. That is, generally, still the feeling I get from it, playing it now for this review. It's almost like the comedown, or the return after a great holiday to normality, rain and wind and work. The idea, the feeling that something wonderful has taken place and will never be so again permeates this album for me; the idea of a band desperately trying to equal or (impossibly) surpass their greatest achievement, and probably quite aware they had fallen far short. I wouldn't call it a failure, and in terms of sales and charts it was definitely a hit, but I wouldn't call it an unqualified success either.

Is this, then, where the rot began to set in? Not quite, you'd have to say. Maiden were able to bash out a pretty awesome album two years later, and while the ones following that certainly had their flaws, they managed to maintain a pretty high standard overall, even gaining their first ever number one. But the days of Powerslave and Piece of Mind were, if not gone, receding in the rear-view mirror, and as Maiden knew, and we all knew, when the past is gone, it's impossible to get back to it. Maybe that's why they tried looking to the future, but in that future they may have seen some warning signs, leading to their looking to the past again for their next album, unsure where they were going for the one after that, till eventually they ended up a tree, clutching frantically at shadows in the night, still trying to claw back the creativity and spontaneity they had enjoyed on three Dickinson-era albums, surely fearing the future and unsure how to get their feet back on the ground.

Trouble was, by then even that ground was beginning to crumble beneath their feet...

05-03-2021, 12:03 PM	#12 (permalink)
Trollheart Born to be mild Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: 404 Not Found Posts: 26,971	Chapter II: Strangers in a Strange Land: Writing the Future So where to begin our exploration (deconstruction?) of Iron Maiden? Well, as I already mentioned, there's no need to involve the first five albums, so here is, for me, the jumping-off point, the album on which the smallest cracks, which would later develop into wide fissures and threaten to ruin this band for me, began to show. Somewhere in Time (1986) This album has quite a few firsts. It's the first to feature Eddie, the band's ubiquitous mascot, who has been on every album sleeve bar three since the debut, in a futuristic setting. Looking quickly back, you had a contemporary, almost punk Eddie on the debut, a maniacal, homicidal but still modern times Eddie on Killers, a scene out of some horror movie but set in current times or thereabouts on The Number of the Beast (though I guess you could argue that was the future, perhaps depicting Judgement Day) and then Eddie in an asylum of the sort we (apparently) don't see these days on the cover of Piece of Mind. Powerslave of course went all the way back to the ancient past, depicting him as an Egyptian god. So this is the first time we see, if you will, future Eddie. It will also be the last, so far, as even though 2010's The Final Frontier is a futuristic painting, it's not Eddie who graces the cover. It's also the first time since he joined that we hear of tensions within the group between Bruce and the other guys, notably Steve. After a gruelling tour to support Powerslave, which lasted almost a full year, Bruce was exhausted and his ideas for songs, mostly based around acoustic styles, were rejected by the band. Bruce, however, felt there was a definite need for change, as it could be said that the band had reached their commercial and creative peak on the last album, and if they didn't do something to change things the only way was down. Somewhere in Time was also the first instance of the use of synthesisers by Iron Maiden. Although they were only guitar synths (keytars) it was still a major departure from the pure guitar sound and something of a mockery of the legend printed proudly on the back of The Number of the Beast: “No synthesisers or ulterior motives.” Were there ulterior motives in bringing keys into a band who had thrived and made their name on a twin guitar attack? Was there concern over either the prowess (surely not) of the two axemen or their dedication to the band? Adrian Smith would in fact be the first to leave, and he may have been influenced by Bruce Dickinson's dissatisfaction with the direction of the band, I don't know. Maybe they just wanted a fuller sound, or maybe they felt the album, loosely based on science fiction, needed a more futuristic sound? Either way, it was the beginning, but certainly not the end, of Maiden's flirtations with the ivories, and it did change their sound somewhat. The album was also their first to have more than a year between it and the previous outing (Iron Maiden – 1980 – Killers 1981 – The Number of the Beast – 1982 – Piece of Mind – 1983 – Powerslave – 1984) and in that context should have stood as one of their best, considering how long they took to get it right – twice as long as the other five. But that's not how it has ever sounded to me. Finally, it was also the first Maiden album to feature songs written solo by Adrian Smith, three in all, something that would never happen again. While he would co-write songs on the next album (after which he would depart till 2000) and again on later albums, for whatever reason he would always collaborate with usually Harris or Dickinson. Given the songs he wrote solo here, I'm not quite sure why, but again we'll get into that. One more point to note: this is the first album of Iron Maiden's to feature – if we accept any song seven minutes or over as being “long” - three long tracks, with one of them coming in at eight and a half, making it – after “Rime of the Ancient Mariner”, of course – Iron Maiden's longest song to date. Spoiler for Somewhere n Time: So, the album then. We have a total of eight tracks, leading to a playtime of just over fifty-one minutes. Of those, three, as already mentioned, are penned solo by Adrian Smith, four by Steve Harris and one a collaboration between Harris and Dave Murray, only his second foray into songwriting, unless you count the two bonus tracks “Eclipse” and “Twilight Zone”. It's clear that even though the songwriting is shared a little more evenly here, Harris is still in control. No writing credits appear for Dickinson for the first time since he joined the band, as already explained above. Somewhere in Time (7:22) The first thing that impresses me is that the guitars in the opening riff have a very distinct Egyptian sound, perhaps a holdover – conscious or otherwise – from the previous album. Since the main culprit I see of Maiden's shall we say staggering onto the wrong path or taking the wrong fork in the road is the increasing length of their songs, I want to examine the longer songs on every album with a view to deciding if they need to be that long. Is every minute used, or is the song padded out unnecessarily? Could it be shorter and still work, or does it need its full length in order to achieve its objective and get its message across? How much, in other words, if any, of the song is wasted or not needed? The opener and title track (a Harris tune) kicks off with about one minute of instrumental intro, but that's fine: Maiden songs don't usually punch right in with the vocal straight away, and there's a need and an expectation of setting the scene musically as it were. I do note, for future reference, a very similar melody here to a song which will surface on the next album, and I wonder if this song was on the mind of Steve when he co-wrote “The Evil That Men Do”? It's a powerful punchy start, and certainly gives you the idea that this album will be a worthy successor to Powerslave. I wouldn't say it's one of my favourites on the album, but neither is it one of the ones with which I have a problem. There's the obligatory solo about halfway through, and there's a decent hook in the chorus. It takes up about two minutes of the song, but again that's all right: we're used to Dave and Adrian bossing the show; they don't do short solos, and unlike some guitarists theirs never seem boring or overstretched, and they never seem to be showing off how good they are. Both have always given me the impression that they play purely for the joy of it, and seem to have a great time doing it. So as we head into the sixth minute Bruce is back, and the song of itself seems pretty well structured and balanced, so in answer to my own question as to whether or not this song is too long, in this case I would say no, it isn't. I can see a few seconds here or there being snipped off and the song being no worse for it, but I don't see that its length detracts from the song itself. It ends well, it's a good opener and it gets things going. For such a relatively long song, it goes by quickly and there's no sense of when is this going to end? Wasted Years (5:03) Next up is Adrian's first attempt at a solo composition, and overall I'd have to say it's pretty damn good. Perhaps because it's his first try, it's a decent length, as you can see, and in fact none of the songs he writes here even reach the six-minute mark, though this is the shortest of them. Not surprisingly, there's plenty of work for the guitars to do, but then you could say that about any Maiden song really. It's also gone on to be one of the few tracks to survive the album into live concerts, which might kind of prove my point, but more of that later. To give Smith credit, there's much less of a guitar intro to this one that the opener, and it rocks away really well, with a fine hook in the chorus, leaving scope for vocal harmonies, unlike the one that preceded it. It's fairly typical of the Maiden songs of old – short, to the point, memorable, simple. It of course features a guitar solo halfway but again it's nowhere near as indulgent as it could have been. It really only has the one verse with the chorus repeated to the end, finishing on the same guitar riff that opened it, and that's perfectly understandable for a first effort. No point in trying to run before you can walk. Sea of Madness (5:42) The next one is his, too, and in fact one of my favourites on the album. A very chaotic opening quickly settles down on a thick chunky bass line from Harris and the guitars more buzz than scream on this one. The hook here is probably the best on any song on this album so far; it's right through the bridge and chorus and it's hard not to sing it. Is the title related to their epic? Maybe, I don't know: the Ancient Mariner would certainly have felt he was on a sea of madness, but song lyrics can be so esoteric, it could be about a state of mind or politics or anything really. In the end, that's probably not as important as how the song sounds, and halfway through I find the solo very Thin Lizzyesque, which is not a criticism. I like the thinning out of the sound then, in what I can only characterise as a sort of Police “Walking on the Moon” style, where the guitar is stripped back down, and then the song gains power and volume on the back of Dickinson's voice before crashing back into the opening riffs and into another verse (the same as the first? I think so; I'll have to check back) and to the chorus which then takes us to the end on Bruce's scream. That's how to write a song! Heaven Can Wait (7:24) Having ceded the floor to Smith for the last two tracks, Harris is back with another seven-minute-plus composition which, despite its length, is another of my favourites. You can hear the guitar synths this time as the actual guitars bite into the melody and slowly bring up the atmosphere, another long intro as you might expect in a song of this length. Faster than really anything that has gone before, it retains a slight edge of Killers-era Di'Anno I feel, though the hook is beautiful and perfect and very commercial. It's even possible this could have been a single had it been shorter, but I'm not sure it could have been cut down from its present form and not lost something. The solo comes in earlier this time, and if I remember there may be a second one. After the solo the rhythm turns into a sort of slower march, leading to the familiar cries of “Woh-oh-oh!” which, let's be honest, are put in for audience participation purposes but show either laziness or the lack of need for this section of the song. It's fun to sing along to and throw your fists in the air, sure, but it takes up about a minute of the song and it could probably have survived just as well without it and yes, as I thought, there's the second solo. I've no problem with multiple solos, but take out that second one and the “Woh-oh-oh”s and this song could have been stripped down to a lean six minutes or so. But on we go. There is another verse, and at least it's not just a repeat of the first one, back to the chorus and, rather like Smith's “Wasted Years” it ends on the guitar riff that opened it. The Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner (6:31) This is where the album began to take something of a nosedive for me. I've pretty much always hated this track. It's not that long, as you can see, but I feel little happens in it. There's a powerful guitar intro which then almost seems to get elbowed aside, dashing the hopes that this was going to be something decent. Reminds me very much in ways of “Gangland” off The Number of the Beast, or maybe “Invaders” from the same album; either way, two tracks agreed to be the weakest on the album. There's an attempt to insert a hook in the chorus but for me it just does not work. I guess I'm biased against it and am looking for negative things to say about it, but I'm trying to see it with new eyes – or, I should say, hear it with new ears – and give it a chance, but there's no getting away from the very clear fact that everything – everything – that has gone before it has been superior, and it really isn't going to get a lot better. The quintessential album of two halves, I personally feel there's not much to recommend side two of Somewhere in Time. Even the guitar solos sound forced; I don't get the impression of anyone enjoying participating in this song, and I kind of wish they had even tried one of Bruce's acoustic songs instead of this. After the power punch of “Heaven Can Wait” following “Sea of Madness”, it might have been a nice change of pace. I've never been able to remember this song, and even now I know that as soon as the next track starts I'll have all but forgotten it, whereas the other four are still clearly and loudly playing in my mind. Yeah, it just sort of fades out and away – not musically; few if any Maiden songs actually fade, but in terms of remaining in the memory, already forgotten. Stranger in a Strange Land (5:43) The last Smith effort on the album, it swaggers in on a punching guitar riff that makes you sit up and take notice, and whether the lads got permission for Heinlein for this or not I don't know, but it's interesting to hear the title of a future album in the lyric, and in fact the album that would see Smith return to the fold as Bruce sings “No brave new world, no brave new world.” The hook in the chorus is okay, but it doesn't quite grip in the same way as the first four songs did. I'm impressed too that Smith resists throwing in the guitar solo until nearly the fourth minute, and when it does come in it's quite restrained, almost you could say acoustic in nature, until it then picks up in intensity and power, and seems to fit just perfectly. There's no doubt it's a huge improvement on “The Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner”, and probably the best on side two, as it were, but “Stranger in a Strange Land” still doesn't come close to the quality of any of the four on side one. And what I said about songs fading? This one does. It must be one of the only Maiden songs to do so. Deja Vu (4:45) The shortest song on the album opens a little like “Revelations” on Piece of Mind I feel, with a haunting, wailing guitar before thundering up into a breakneck guitar intro that flies along nicely but is rather basic and sounds like something they might have saved for Fear of the Dark. This is the one song on which Steve Harris pairs up with Dave Murray, and again I think I can hear those keytars; they don't make a huge difference here, and I'd have to say they don't have a massive impact on the album in general: had I not read they were there I probably would not have noticed them. There's a pretty long instrumental section in this song, but given its short length I don't have an issue with that. If anything, it's probably more a standard Maiden song than the last two; I'm not convinced by Bruce's raspy, supposedly threatening vocal delivery though. Not sure what that's about. The hook is okay but nothing special, and even the guitar solos seem a little tacked-on and copy and pasted from the Great Iron Maiden Songbook. You'd have to wonder when Bruce sings “Feels like I've been here before” is he unintentionally delivering a message to the band? Alexander the Great (8:35) Harris's love of history comes through in the lyrical matter of the closer, but it also comes across as highly indulgent of him. The song is, as already mentioned, the longest on the album and indeed to this point the second-longest recorded by the band. Taking that into account, its lengthy instrumental intro (preceded by a spoken passage where Alexander's father mourns his failure to provide a better legacy for his son) is understandable and acceptable. Once it gets going it gallops along nicely in a sort of mid-paced way, but you do get the feeling (well I do anyway) that the rest of the band realise they're servicing Harris's personal vision here and that it's his project; they're playing his song, which of course you can say about any of his solo penned tracks, but here it just seems... different somehow. I feel the attempted hook in the chorus fails miserably, and so I don't see any hook in it, no memorable chorus you can sing. The again almost acoustic solo in the middle is interesting, building up on Nicko McBrain's staggered drum patterns, then it smashes into a very slow, graceful section, beginning a gradual march to the denouement of the song. It's epic, certainly, though not, I feel, in the same way “Rime of the Ancient Mariner” is epic, and considering its length, I think even “Phantom of the Opera” is better constructed. Another, more standard guitar solo now as we head into the sixth minute, and at least Harris resisted the urge to throw in some “Woah-oh-oh”s as there is a place in the song where you could definitely hear that, and perhaps onstage they do that, but they kept it out of the studio version, which I think is just as well. I feel the ending is a bit of a damp squib, and as a closer to the album I don't think it really works that well at all. What is significant is that as I mentioned, none of these songs, bar “Wasted Years” and “Heaven Can Wait” were added to the live setlist, proving perhaps that the boys realised many of them were too long to keep fans' attention in a live setting. I'm not going to put the album down too much, as it does have some great tracks, and even the weaker ones are not terrible (with one exception) but I do remember being all excited having bought the album, still riding on a Maiden high from Powerslave even two years later, and being underwhelmed by this one. That is, generally, still the feeling I get from it, playing it now for this review. It's almost like the comedown, or the return after a great holiday to normality, rain and wind and work. The idea, the feeling that something wonderful has taken place and will never be so again permeates this album for me; the idea of a band desperately trying to equal or (impossibly) surpass their greatest achievement, and probably quite aware they had fallen far short. I wouldn't call it a failure, and in terms of sales and charts it was definitely a hit, but I wouldn't call it an unqualified success either. Is this, then, where the rot began to set in? Not quite, you'd have to say. Maiden were able to bash out a pretty awesome album two years later, and while the ones following that certainly had their flaws, they managed to maintain a pretty high standard overall, even gaining their first ever number one. But the days of Powerslave and Piece of Mind were, if not gone, receding in the rear-view mirror, and as Maiden knew, and we all knew, when the past is gone, it's impossible to get back to it. Maybe that's why they tried looking to the future, but in that future they may have seen some warning signs, leading to their looking to the past again for their next album, unsure where they were going for the one after that, till eventually they ended up a tree, clutching frantically at shadows in the night, still trying to claw back the creativity and spontaneity they had enjoyed on three Dickinson-era albums, surely fearing the future and unsure how to get their feet back on the ground. Trouble was, by then even that ground was beginning to crumble beneath their feet... __________________ Trollheart: Signature-free since April 2018 Last edited by Trollheart; 09-09-2021 at 04:58 PM.