She came, she swore, she conquered. Well, technically, it was more of a victory on points after some early ring-rustiness, but given the widely reported problems in Birmingham two nights before and the gleeful desire for schadenfreude in certain parts of the media before tonight's gig, a victory it certainly was.
There was no booing, no walkouts, no forgotten lyrics, no walking off in the middle of songs. "This is the second night of the tour," Amy Winehouse reminded a sold-out, supportive, even solicitous audience in the Barrowland on Friday night. "It feels like the first night of the tour."
It also felt like a reminder of first principles. A reminder that the reason we first took an interest in this beehived Jewish princess was not the drama, the drinking, the drug-taking, the fighting, the family squabbles, the tabloid-friendliness of her messy life, but the music: the rightness of her influences - ska, soul, sixties girl groups - and the way she refreshes and renews them in songs that never feel ersatz. And then there's that voice.
If anything, there was too much voice to start with. Too high in the mix, timing slightly off, her singing was smeared messily over the opening numbers, without ever feeling part of them. Rigged out in a red party dress that showed off her scrawny chicken legs, Winehouse spent the first 10 minutes of the gig scratching around, wiping her mouth, pulling on the hem of her dress, trying to find a way into the moment. But buoyed by a crowd clearly willing her on, she was smiling by the time she finished Tears Dry on Their Own. By the time she covered Cupid she'd remembered how to dance. By the time she started losing control of her bobby helmet of a hairdo halfway through Back to Black she was in control of everything else.
Amy Winehouse has played better gigs. All being well, she will play better in future. But this was a night to remember what matters. Hopefully Winehouse realises that, too.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article