"Rising" Is Falling After Fifty Years

When we consider time, and the ways it plays with our memories, the inertia of greatness is one of the more interesting places to go searching for our own version of the truth. When conversation is had and lists are made, we tend to find the same bands and albums always rising to the top, and it seems to me it is done without people putting in the work of seriously sorting through their thoughts to figure out if they mean what they say, or they are repeating the conventional wisdom because that is the only kind of wisdom they will ever encounter.

Among the handful of albums that routinely get counted among the greatest hard rock record of all time is Rainbow's "Rising", which so happens to be celebrating it's fiftieth birthday. For its entire existence, the album has been at the forefront of what was possible for rock bands. That is almost entirely a result of one song, which is great, but I'm not sure deserves so much hype to keep the record as cherished as it has been for all these years.

That song is, of course, "Stargazer". In classic rock, the Mount Rushmore of epic songs is "Stairway To Heaven", "Bohemian Rhapsody", "Hotel California", and "Stargazer". There is something about songs that stretch the time constraints that evoke a feeling in much of the audience, as if they can't comprehend that a song can last longer than three minutes and two riffs. Quite often, the consensus pick for the best song on an album will be the longest, for seemingly no other reason than its length.

I am rather immune from that feeling, so I look at "Rising" as an album that came so close to the greatness people speak of, but slit its own metaphorical wrists before presenting itself to us. What could have been the greatest statement either Ritchie Blackmore or Ronnie James Dio ever put out is instead an album that drives me a bit crazy for being the contrarian.

"Stargazer" is an amazing song, and it ranks among the best either man wrote in their career, but is one song enough to make a classic album?

There is more to "Rising" than just that song, but the shadow it casts is so long I can sometimes forget this. "Tarot Woman" is the band's propulsive statement telling us the debut record was just them warming up, and now they were going to get serious. After that, we are not in classic territory anymore. "Starstruck" is a boogie revved up to sound bigger and harder than it is, with Dio's vocal delivery reduced to a rhythmic bark as he tries to fit the syllables of the chorus into the melodic line. It has charm, but it's an awkward song. "Do You Close Your Eyes" is purely the commercial pop Rainbow would try to write once Dio left the band, and that was never Dio's strength. He would have a few songs that hit that mark, but this is not one of them.

That's a third of the songs being mediocre, and we haven't hit the biggest problem with the album yet. "Stargazer" is everything people say it is (although it does get a bit repetitive and trying by the end), and it is the sort of song that does so much there is no way to follow it. Much like you could ask what Jesus could possibly do to impress after the resurrection, Rainbow put themselves in the position of trying to follow up the more epic song any of them would ever write with... another lesser epic song.

This is where things get uncomfortable. "A Light In The Black" is by no means a bad song, but it is not "Stargazer". After the draining experience of Dio crying out to the rock gods, spending eight minutes listening to Blackmore shred through solos is not the palate-cleanser they think it is. The album needed a short coda to cool us down after they melted out faces, but instead they overstay their welcome, noodling when they could have been writing a tighter song. The sequencing of the record does it no favors, leaving the last eight minutes as a floe cleaving off the back end.

When I listen to "Rising", I rarely make it through the entirety of the album, even though it is barely long enough to be one. Putting the epics back-to-back only underscores how much weaker "A Light In The Black" is, and ending on a sour note is not how I want to remember my time with Rainbow.

And yet... everyone talks about "Rising" as if it is a perfect album, an untouchable memento of the past that is unfathomable for any band today to match. That's quaint, and rather insulting to the fact that Rainbow themselves put out a less flawed album right after this one. "Long Live Rock 'N' Roll" is every bit as good, and far more consistent, with "Gates Of Babylon" being nearly a peer of "Stargazer". So why does it get overlooked?

Inertia.

"Rising" got there first, and people never forget their first time. Fifty years ago, maybe "Rising" was indeed a mind-blowing album that rewrote the rules of what hard rock could be. I'll never know, because I wasn't there. What I can say is that listening to it now, in the context of history, "Rising" is a very good record that has moments we absolutely should treasure. But as a whole, I can't help but feel we would never react the same way if the release date said 2006 and not 1976. Its reputation is a function of time, and I don't happen to think time stands still once it passes. We re-evaluate based on how the world changes, and the world of rock music has changed immensely.

"Rising" is not the be-all and end-all of hard rock. It's not Rainbow's best album, and even that one isn't Dio's best. "Rising" is one legendary song surrounded by some other good music, and we've evolved past when that was enough to blow out minds.

I'm sure I'm the only one who's going to say any of this. Oh well.