So it gets a 5 musically but then you've paid attention to all the detritus surrounding the album/ band and given it a 1/10.
Not at all surprised. I know I’m an outlier. I am heartened to see a compatriot in @threespires agree with me — company is always better when you’re on an island, and it’s even more encouraging that his musical knowledge base is high. I think mine is too — not as high as his nor as recent — but I find it interesting no one seems to think that this matters though our visceral reactions are so negative.I think fog is on a one way street to a cruising for a hiding here.
If I score an 83/100 on a test, that’s a low B, not a low A. Like saying “Yeah it was a five star trip even though we had food poisoning for two of twelve days.” Mind, this isn’t “songs were okay” this is “they are so bad I don’t listen to them.” A 9 for that in the context of the 120-odd records we’ve scored? Sorry I just can’t accept it, especially here with a record that needs no help score-wise.I disagree. On the scoring, not on the album (at this point in time). One man's 7 is another man's 9 and all that. We never really defined how we score, but albums aren't maths, and one amazing song amongst a bunch of skippable ones can outweigh 10 ok to listen to without skipping songs, that don't shake you to the core.
Because you've actually listened to it and given it a musical score of around 6, or maybe 5. And then because other people have claimed it to be one of the greatest albums ever and an important cultural artifact you've decided to disagree and mark your score down accordingly.
Why not just listen to the album, decide with your own ears if you like it, and then score it without prejudice?
But does a wide base of knowledge of music make the judgement of what is good or bad art better than someone who has, let’s say a less jaded palette?not as high as his nor as recent — but I find it interesting no one seems to think that this matters though our visceral reactions are so negative.
Yes. Otherwise there would be no marketplace for literary, art, film, theatre, dance or music criticism. But there are marketplaces for such things.But does a wide base of knowledge of music make the judgement of what is good or bad art better than someone who has, let’s say a less jaded palette?
Then maybe we should listen to the broad base of critical musical opinion that considers OK Computer a worthwhile album.Yes. Otherwise there would be no marketplace for literary, art, film, theatre, dance or music criticism. But there are marketplaces for such things.
No sir — I don’t think art can be invalidated. It can be contextualiz(s)ed though which adds to understanding.Does not liking the artist or what they stand for necessarily invalidate their art?
And I have done so. And those who think it is shite. And agreed with . . . well, you’ll see.Then maybe we should listen to the broad base of critical musical opinion that considers OK Computer a worthwhile album.
See I don’t care if he or anyone else wanted to be a rock star at eight (although I suspect he is far from being the only one). For the most part I stick music on and judge it on what I listen to. If I really like it I might trouble myself with the lyrics. In a small number of instances I will go deeper. I liked the sound of OK computer and the Bends. I thought they were ok rock songs and believe it or not liked Yorke’s voice as it went perfectly with the music. That’s all I judged it on and all I judged their subsequent music on.No sir — I don’t think art can be invalidated. It can be contextualiz(s)ed though which adds to understanding.
For example, understanding Thom Yorke had a driving ambition to be a rock star from age 8 — a rock star, not a musician — contextualiz(s)es what we’re listening to.
And I hear almost no melody in any of these songs, with some specific exceptions . . . but, again, I'll get to that.See I don’t care if he or anyone else wanted to be a rock star at eight (although I suspect he is far from being the only one). For the most part I stick music on and judge it on what I listen to. If I really like it I might trouble myself with the lyrics. In a small number of instances I will go deeper. I liked the sound of OK computer and the Bends. I thought they were ok rock songs and believe it or not liked Yorke’s voice as it went perfectly with the music. That’s all I judged it on and all I judged their subsequent music on.
But then I am as deep as a puddle.
1 day in and 10 pages later and lots of new non-regulars joining in on the discussion.The other big question I have is how much will this selection attract non-regular comments/ratings (positive or negative) to weigh in? I'm a bit intrigued on that too.
I'd rather focus on Sunday myself too. I know how I feel about this album, and that won't be changing after another "3 listens".I think Rob has been very clever here. He’s thrown in the R bomb in a week when football wise we could (arguably should) go on to create more history. We beat spurs on Tuesday so everyone (with at least a couple of notable exceptions) is on a high and in a jolly mood. We can chat about Radiohead with all jocularity and no fighting. If (god forbid) things turn sour on Sunday I predict this thread to get toxic very quickly!! :)
As I said, and I also have my my hunch on this, but I'm still interested all the same.The unwritten rule that almost all UK indie is so far below US/Australian rock in terms of quality and execution is also a major factor.
Not at all surprised. I know I’m an outlier. I am heartened to see a compatriot in @threespires agree with me — company is always better when you’re on an island, and it’s even more encouraging that his musical knowledge base is high. I think mine is too — not as high as his nor as recent — but I find it interesting no one seems to think that this matters though our visceral reactions are so negative.
I think Brits and American white men ten years younger than I have had a blind spot for this thick-headed mopery forever. There are social reasons for this. But knowing I’m right (I note a few have implied they’ve outgrown this record, which is telling) is what allows me to pretend I possess intellectual superiority as I age. :)
And my problem is that I find scant evidence in many of the songs (save one) to support this conclusion, and yet the world has spun this unfocused lack of specificity into some universal narrative. This is the Great Mistake About OK Computer. “It doesn’t appear to be about any one person, so it must be about all of us!” as opposed to MY conclusion “It’s not about any specific one person because the artist either doesn’t really feel these things or isn’t very good at expressing them.”It is about the despair suffered by all of us rather than one of us.
Be interesting to hear your thoughts. I’ve never really got the Muse comparisons, although there clearly are for me.The thing is. I love 'mopery'. I really do. I'm a right dour bastard at times. I'm a brit white man, possibly ten years younger, and all that. I absolutely loved the late 90s musically, the year this album came out in particular, some of my favourite albums are from around then. I love rock, I love melancholic sounding shit, I love people trying things and being bold (whether 'new' or not is neither here nor there), and doing what they want to. Radiohead falls among a group or loosely related bands I really like. All my good friends back then loved it. Lots of my good friends now still love it. It is, or should be, the perfect album/band for me.
Yet, I have just never been able to fall in love with it, or them. No idea why. Never particularly disliked them, but just wasn't fussed.
Everything tells me it is for me, all my friends tell me it is great, all the critics and general accepted praise for it says it is for me. Yet, I can't seem to get there. I have no philosophical qualms with it whatsoever, no principles or irritations getting in the way. It just never captured me, and that's that.
For decades, I thought it was a lack of effort on my part. That is not unique to me. A lot of bands I love did take me time to come round to, and that has always been the case. In recent times for exmple it took me some time to really accept Idles into my loved circle, and just this year, after years of friends pushing me, something finally clicked with the Twilight Sad. So a part of me is hoping this week might shed some light on why radiohead has never been for me. Or maybe after decades of loosely trying periodically, lead me to finally realising I had been missing out on something all along.
So far, one listen in, no eureka moments. If at the end of this week nothing changes, I think I should draw the line and just accept it is never meant to be.
If I score an 83/100 on a test, that’s a low B, not a low A. Like saying “Yeah it was a five star trip even though we had food poisoning for two of twelve days.” Mind, this isn’t “songs were okay” this is “they are so bad I don’t listen to them.” A 9 for that in the context of the 120-odd records we’ve scored? Sorry I just can’t accept it, especially here with a record that needs no help score-wise.
Is this what the French call a Touché?Then maybe we should listen to the broad base of critical musical opinion that considers OK Computer a worthwhile album.