Friends groaned when it came time for me to move and they had to hoist those boxes of old Trouser Press magazines I’d saved: Was I really moving them again?
Well, yes. From the late ’70s until 1984, the plucky magazine was an invaluable guide to not only the best of classic British rock, but a window to the emerging bands in punk, new wave, and the American indie music scene. Sharper, more thoughtful and centered exclusively on music, even the title of Trouser Press was a wink to Anglophile rock fans—it was lifted from the name of a Bonzo Dog Band song. The magazine ceased publication in 1984 after 96 issues, but remained a vital source through a series of Trouser Press Record Guides.
Now on the 50th anniversary of its first mimeographed issue, sold for a quarter outside a Rory Gallagher concert in New York, there’s a big new book collecting its most choice selections, Zip It Up! The Best of Trouser Press Magazine 1974–1984, edited and annotated by its co-founder Ira A. Robbins, who spoke to The Vinyl District in a recent Zoom call.
Why this book now?
With the impending 50th anniversary of the magazine in March 2024, it felt like I needed to do something. It would not do just to let the day pass. And because I’ve got a book publishing company that I’m running now, it seemed like a doable thing, which it hadn’t always seemed before, because I’d always imagined it as something I’d have to sell a publisher, which I felt would never happen.
It makes for a definitive look at the era, with interviews that can’t be found elsewhere.
I would hasten to point out that all of these articles have been available on the Trouser Press website for years, for free, for anybody to read. There was a bit of concern on my part that I was just packaging stuff that was already out there. But I didn’t really want to do a history of the magazine. I’d been over that a bit.
I wanted to pull together what I thought best represents the magazine and put it out there. I’ll agree that a lot of the stuff we did back then, in retrospect, seems kind of bizarre and amazing—that we were able to confront artists on a level that I don’t think gets done very much any more in terms of interviews.
And maybe the artists trusted the magazine enough to provide access?
Well, we had an advantage at the beginning, that when British bands came to New York, we were interested in talking to them, whereas a lot of the music press didn’t care about the bands that weren’t going to matter to a lot of people. Like when the Troggs came to New York, we were like, “Wow, we’re going to meet the Troggs!” Whereas for most other people, they were an oldies band that had “Wild Thing” once upon a time. Why would we be interested in them?
We were very historically geared in our minds, so if a band had a long and interesting story, it didn’t concern us one way or another if they weren’t of current value to a commercial audience. So like Status Quo came through, and we were like “My god, we get to meet Status Quo!” And those kinds of bands. And some of the prog rock bands like Camel. How many people were interested in what Camel was doing?
Remember, in the ’70s there was very little in the way of reference materials about bands like that. Dave Schulps and I—he was one of the three co-founders of the magazine—we had this project that we did which was his idea where we looked at microfiche copies of [the British weekly] Melody Maker going back to the ‘50s, and just started writing down all the musicians that we could find mentioned in the paper, and what bands they had been in and when, and what records they made and stuff.
It was just kind of an obsession of ours. And it gave us a real advantage when we interviewed some of those artists, because we knew who they were. It wasn’t like, “Oh I read the press release and you were in this band.” It was like, “When you played with Johnny Kidd, what was that like?” And they were impressed. So it was a good tool for us.