![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I laid down to go to sleep last night and instead ended up listening to Regina Spektor's new album for the second time. (I'm a bit behind. I heard it first yesterday, at work of all places, because one of the new(ish) clerks had it on his mp3 player. I'm... not even going to get into how bizarre that sort of thing is, compared to the state of my office this time last year.) I really enjoyed it, and attempted to lay there and write about it on my iPod, but the nonsense the auto-correct turned everything into made the whole thing a losing battle. And so I got up this morning, listened to it again (because I'm really enjoying it), and read some reviews.
Now, I'll admit to feeling very superior when Pitchfork blasts something that I like and feel I can defend. But it turns out that just about everyone else dislikes this album too (from a critical perspective, which I understand, as someone who sat through classes in which "critic" had about sixteen differently-shaded meanings we were expected to be able to "deconstruct" and apply and practice, is completely different from any sort of logic or appreciation). However, most of those reasons have something to do with over-production, which I'll concede is true (vey true), and not the fact that Regina Spektor basically needs to "grow up." (Dear Pitchfork: This entry wasn't supposed to be about how much I hate you sometimes, but man, you know, keep up these nonsense vitriolic reviews that you're known and loved for, and I'll egg your offices someday. I know where you live. Also you still haven't hired me.)
That paragraph got away from me.
The point I'm attempting to get to here is the way Far resonated with something at least ten years old in the back of my mind. A lot of otherwise-indie bands have put out really good (in a "Holy crap, this is really accessible and easy to listen to, yet still rewarding" way) albums this year. I'll admit I completely don't understand why some of these suddenly-accessible albums are out to rave reviews (Merriweather Post Pavilion and Veckatimest, for example), while others are getting slammed for being too pretty or over-produced. (Kudos to the Decemberists for being the only band this year to completely break that debate by releasing a concept album.) On one level, yes, Far sounds more like 90s girl rock and Lilith Fair (I'm pretty sure I've referenced Lilith Fair at least four times this year, and that's four times more than I have at all in the past decade, I think...) than it does garden-variety Regina Spektor. But what's really wrong with that? Listening to it last night, I pictured myself back in high school with Stunt. And I stared thinking, you know... I think these are the gateway albums. Someone somewhere is hearing Regina (or Animal Collective or Grizzly Bear) for the first time with this and will one day work their way backwards to things like Oedipus and Reading Time With Pickle (or Bees or Knife or you know, I could just capitalize about anything here, considering these bands' catalogs), just like I started with One Week ten years ago and worked out and around from there (to much better music). I like the idea of a cycle like that, that just kind of renews itself going on and on, bringing more and more people into the fold. (This says nothing of the "decline" afterwards, when no one is happy because the old fans miss the old stuff and the new fans don't like the old stuff and there aren't enough middle-of-the-road "I like everything!" people to keep things going...) For one it helps devalue stupid indie/hipster pretension that says you need to be with bands from the beginning. If anything, I sometimes miss finding a glossy, pretty band that's being played on the radio and then working back to the rough gem earlier stuff.
I'm not sure I've made my point here, but what I want to say is this: There is nothing wrong with making an accessible album. I remember all the old fans (who I was very afraid of at the time) being confused at why the Barenaked Ladies would put out something like One Week. I remember Moxy Früvous being interviewed about it for whatever reason, and saying something like "Sometimes, you just have to get some radio play." I don't think that's necessarily the point, but there's nothing wrong with giving people a door. Most people are used to things that are tailored to sound pretty and kind of homogeneous. I will raise my tiny useless hipster-rock fist and shout "You haven't sold out until you're on a major label! Release whatever the heck you want with as many producers as you want! Just don't let anyone else make you do it! Also while I'm shouting at all of you, if some of you are going to record lo-fi things as a genre stop making an effort to make it sound worse because I don't have the patience to try to enjoy it!"
In conclusion: Good albums this year are good. QED.
P.S. Yes, I can sit here and go "Actually, Stunt is an awful comparison to Far because One Week was like almost nothing else on the album and there isn't really a stand-out single on Far, which is probably why all the critics are being teeth-gnashy. But whatever, Far doesn't have the same sort of throwaway tracks Stunt did, either." But music is complicated anyway, and that's why no one writes anything about it that makes sense. Also I have a sense that, in the last few years, Regina's popularity has kind of snuck past me and I don't really know how or why or how many other people have heard of her now, so what I'm basing this all on is probably wrong anyway because I'm assuming she's still the semi-obscure indie darling I think of her of and not, say, the person who was randomly playing over the credits in one of the Narnia movies.
Anyway! Guys! Bad albums reviews/ratings are for bad albums! Not for albums that throw you off because they don't sound like the old stuff! Tell me that dolphin imitation didn't make you smile! (Pitchfork, you are exempt from that statement because I know it didn't make you smile, and I know you don't have a real heart. Also, the highest track rating you've given lately is to a song that is basically ALL AUTOTUNED. What the crap?)
Now, I'll admit to feeling very superior when Pitchfork blasts something that I like and feel I can defend. But it turns out that just about everyone else dislikes this album too (from a critical perspective, which I understand, as someone who sat through classes in which "critic" had about sixteen differently-shaded meanings we were expected to be able to "deconstruct" and apply and practice, is completely different from any sort of logic or appreciation). However, most of those reasons have something to do with over-production, which I'll concede is true (vey true), and not the fact that Regina Spektor basically needs to "grow up." (Dear Pitchfork: This entry wasn't supposed to be about how much I hate you sometimes, but man, you know, keep up these nonsense vitriolic reviews that you're known and loved for, and I'll egg your offices someday. I know where you live. Also you still haven't hired me.)
That paragraph got away from me.
The point I'm attempting to get to here is the way Far resonated with something at least ten years old in the back of my mind. A lot of otherwise-indie bands have put out really good (in a "Holy crap, this is really accessible and easy to listen to, yet still rewarding" way) albums this year. I'll admit I completely don't understand why some of these suddenly-accessible albums are out to rave reviews (Merriweather Post Pavilion and Veckatimest, for example), while others are getting slammed for being too pretty or over-produced. (Kudos to the Decemberists for being the only band this year to completely break that debate by releasing a concept album.) On one level, yes, Far sounds more like 90s girl rock and Lilith Fair (I'm pretty sure I've referenced Lilith Fair at least four times this year, and that's four times more than I have at all in the past decade, I think...) than it does garden-variety Regina Spektor. But what's really wrong with that? Listening to it last night, I pictured myself back in high school with Stunt. And I stared thinking, you know... I think these are the gateway albums. Someone somewhere is hearing Regina (or Animal Collective or Grizzly Bear) for the first time with this and will one day work their way backwards to things like Oedipus and Reading Time With Pickle (or Bees or Knife or you know, I could just capitalize about anything here, considering these bands' catalogs), just like I started with One Week ten years ago and worked out and around from there (to much better music). I like the idea of a cycle like that, that just kind of renews itself going on and on, bringing more and more people into the fold. (This says nothing of the "decline" afterwards, when no one is happy because the old fans miss the old stuff and the new fans don't like the old stuff and there aren't enough middle-of-the-road "I like everything!" people to keep things going...) For one it helps devalue stupid indie/hipster pretension that says you need to be with bands from the beginning. If anything, I sometimes miss finding a glossy, pretty band that's being played on the radio and then working back to the rough gem earlier stuff.
I'm not sure I've made my point here, but what I want to say is this: There is nothing wrong with making an accessible album. I remember all the old fans (who I was very afraid of at the time) being confused at why the Barenaked Ladies would put out something like One Week. I remember Moxy Früvous being interviewed about it for whatever reason, and saying something like "Sometimes, you just have to get some radio play." I don't think that's necessarily the point, but there's nothing wrong with giving people a door. Most people are used to things that are tailored to sound pretty and kind of homogeneous. I will raise my tiny useless hipster-rock fist and shout "You haven't sold out until you're on a major label! Release whatever the heck you want with as many producers as you want! Just don't let anyone else make you do it! Also while I'm shouting at all of you, if some of you are going to record lo-fi things as a genre stop making an effort to make it sound worse because I don't have the patience to try to enjoy it!"
In conclusion: Good albums this year are good. QED.
P.S. Yes, I can sit here and go "Actually, Stunt is an awful comparison to Far because One Week was like almost nothing else on the album and there isn't really a stand-out single on Far, which is probably why all the critics are being teeth-gnashy. But whatever, Far doesn't have the same sort of throwaway tracks Stunt did, either." But music is complicated anyway, and that's why no one writes anything about it that makes sense. Also I have a sense that, in the last few years, Regina's popularity has kind of snuck past me and I don't really know how or why or how many other people have heard of her now, so what I'm basing this all on is probably wrong anyway because I'm assuming she's still the semi-obscure indie darling I think of her of and not, say, the person who was randomly playing over the credits in one of the Narnia movies.
Anyway! Guys! Bad albums reviews/ratings are for bad albums! Not for albums that throw you off because they don't sound like the old stuff! Tell me that dolphin imitation didn't make you smile! (Pitchfork, you are exempt from that statement because I know it didn't make you smile, and I know you don't have a real heart. Also, the highest track rating you've given lately is to a song that is basically ALL AUTOTUNED. What the crap?)
Tags: