Apologies for the late posting. Please remember that I write this as someone who likes the artist; I have to dispute that Sting has ever recorded anything 'epic', save for his public admissions about tantric sex with Trudie. Of course, if he ever decides to stick that on sides two to seventeen of an album you'd have something maybe. But until then...
I've been having a bit more of a think about what makes particular music 'epic' - I think one of the difficulties, for me at least, is that individual tracks can be long in length but not neccesarily 'epic' as such, whereas shorter tracks can sometimes be classed 'epic' because of other influences that can not be measured in specifics. My thinking is influenced by talking about The Beatles to a friend last night at Cargo. Each relatively short in length, 'I Am The Walrus', 'A Day In The Life' and 'Tomorrow Never Knows' (as examples) could all be judged perhaps as 'epics' because they were clearly tracks that changed the direction of popular music from this soft, fluffy, throwaway thing to something more serious that deserved more attention, be it because of the writing, utilising new recording techniques (some early sampling on 'Walrus') through to making direct social comment in songs. At the other end of the scale, there is the beautiful second side of the 'Abbey Road' album, specifically the trilogy of 'Golden Slumbers/Carry That Weight/The End' - epic in length, but also because those tracks were by a band who knew the game was up and that now represent the last songs the band would ever record together while they were all still alive. Forty years on from when it was recorded, I still find that sequence and the history surrounding that period of the band incredibly moving, 'epic' even.
An interesting thread - a good diverse selection from everyone.
EG
