The Album Review Club - Week #138 - (page 1790) - 1956 - Soul-Junk

Deeeeeeeeeeeep breaths . . . here we go:

  1. Nothing I learned re-listening has changed my view that this is – hands down – the most overrated record in pop music history.
  2. I’ve also said over and over that I don’t hate everything this band has done. And I derived some pleasure from this, more than I recall deriving before.
  3. I do inherently hate the tempos. Slow BPMs aren’t me. I’ve talked a lot about “sit and listen” records vs. “get up and move” records and this is one of THE poster children for the former outside of “Dark Side Of The Moon” (a record I very much like) and which I and others think this record tries to resemble (fairly unsuccessfully).
  4. I dislike the lack of balance, optimism, humo(u)r and tone in this record. I am not one for mopery. I'm too busy. I have too many things in my life I either enjoy, or tasks to complete which I will enjoy when done. Wallowing has never been me.
  5. The comments on production leave me conflicted. It is well-produced. But as I wrote about The Waterboys record, production is sometimes a way to cover up thin melody, and that is absolutely the case here, regularly. It’s not going to fool me. I know a hook when I hear one. There aren’t many (though there ARE more than I remember), and feedback, overdubs and the periodic use of a glockenspiel or some such other instrument isn’t going to trick me into thinking the sonics are a substitute.
  6. I can’t divorce what I know about the artist from the record. It’s meta – I get it. My comments about Thom Yorke wanting to be a rock star, not a musician, apply equally to Bono and U2 IMO, and for me it’s a major strike against them as artists. RH’s sound was 50,000-person arena suited from the beginning. They were offered a record contract early. Imagine them trying to grind their way through the bar band/club circuit. That’s where frustration and humility are born and worked through, where nearly all (not all but nearly all) great bands were once forged before the age of direct-to-audience-via-YouTube. These guys didn’t pay those kind of dues. Even the greatest arena rock band I’ve ever seen – Van Halen – did. How am I supposed to believe Thom’s tales of alienation knowing this? Worse, after he got famous, he moaned incessantly about how tough his life as a rock star is. The brothers Gallagher are often wrong about things, sometimes spectacularly, but when Noel said, “They’re stuck in the back of limousines telling you how bored they are being in a group. If you don’t enjoy it, retire. Do us all a favour. Or move to a mansion in Oxford so we don’t have to listen to you bleeding on about how shit your life is”, he’s right. You can’t get away from this when trying to contextualiz(s)e the misery Yorke sings about. If you can, you’re in denial. If he was singing about his own specific miseries without the ellipses, then okay. But he isn’t – which is why I think this becomes largely inauthentic. Even if I knew nothing about him – and I didn’t when I first heard this – I’d say (and did say) “What in the actual fuck is this guy talking about? WHO is he talking about? This is misery for misery’s sake.”
  7. I’ve already addressed this but I’ll repeat it: This is overrated because it’s NOT about a dsytopian now or future. It's about that only in RETROSPECT. Ask the band: "Radiohead have said they do not consider OK Computer a concept album and did not intend to link the songs through a narrative or unifying concept while it was being written." This creates a problem for some of those who love it because the intent they ascribe is and was not there - a classic consumer vs. creator issue in art generally. When I bring this up I get the take of “you just don’t understand” or “you need to listen to it more” or “you had to be there”. This is the crux of why I think it's overrated. @threespires noted this too.
  8. Now to the tunes. The most moving, and best, song on the record is “Fitter Happier.” It’s the one realized vision, the one universal. All of us have been force-fed a goal set and rules to live by that seem crushing and overwhelming, and by computerizing the vocals, the prescriptive directives take on a different, chilling, hopeless air. And because they are specific (and direct, unlike so much of the rest of the record), they have power. And because they aren’t “emoted” by Thom, they are authentic. And by the way – he wrote the lyrics in ten minutes. There’s a lesson there.
  9. I will say that I actually came away liking “Airbag” quite a bit more than I remembered. The echoey carry still irritates me, but the backbeat and chord changes hit me harder than I recall. I wish the band had carried that Soundgarden-y tempo along into other songs.
  10. The tune the band thought sounded least like Radiohead isn't THE best but it's the one I LIKE best – the closer “The Tourist.” Here the rather lovely chorus provides the melodic hook. It’s pointless, like nearly all the rest of these songs, but at least vaguely pretty.
  11. The most actual “song-form” song is “Karma Police”, which whilst I don’t love it, is good enough - better conceptually and aurally than their pre-OKC hits “High And Dry” and “Creep”, which I find pretty unbearable. Whilst I am unclear on what the Karma Police would be arresting anyone for (as usual, Thom’s idea trails off into nothingness), the idea that a Karma Police exists is pleasant to contemplate.
  12. “Subterranean Homesick Alien” is the greatest U2 imitation ever crafted. As such, it’s both imminently listenable and vomit-inducing in equal degrees.
  13. “Paranoid Android” - save the power-chord guitar-bridge - is infuriating. I’ll never get it. Of all the songs I've heard in my life, very few more than this tune do I have such a love/hate relationship with. I love parts of it. Then I hate it. Then I like it for 17.5 seconds. Then hate it for 31.9 seconds. Arrrrrrrgggggghhhhhh, make up your mind, you bastards.
  14. There are two awful, awful, AWFUL songs on this record. I absolutely cannot stand “Climbing The Walls” and “Exit Music (For A Film)”. The first is a horror film – I am actually physically revolted by the lyrics, and the tune is the usual slow march into tuneless blackness – and the second is so abstract I was actually floored when I read it was inspired by an image of Clare Danes with a gun to her head in “Romeo + Juliet”. In fact, I can find so little trace of all the influences Yorke et al said they had on this record (Miles Davis in particular), it’s almost as if he made all that shit up after the fact to give the record more heft. It drives me batty.
  15. Though I have spilled a lot of blood-words decrying the rampant cynicism I felt coursed through this record, now that I'm calmer, I’ve since softened my view and attribute at least some of what I thought was cynicism to Thom Yorke’s fundamental inability to write very well. He described these songs as “Polaroids” he took while passing through life. He is a misery voyeur, which annoys me, but there’s something else. In my mind, great art takes small things and spins them into big themes. This is precisely the opposite of that – an attempt to cram every negative observed into the world and force them into a 53-minute box. He also offers no hope for escape. No doubt as an inveterate optimist, which I am, neither the effort nor the outcome are going to resonate with me. But then I find this quote on Wikipedia: "Yorke said he did not want to do 'another miserable, morbid and negative record' " after "The Bends". Once again, this man's lack of self-knowledge is so low it can barely be charted, low even for a rock star.
  16. One theory I’ll float is that pasty-faced young adults who didn’t cotton to Nirvana’s sonics but needed an anthem to underscore their biological age-based malaise were ripe for oppositional music like this – slow, doleful, dark (albeit with bursts of guitar like on “Airbag”, “PA” or “Electioneering”). What irony that both Kurt and Thom claimed influence by The Pixies. Even more ironic that so many of you didn’t like “Doolittle”.
  17. The earlier point that there wasn’t a lot of good music released in 1997 and therefore this punches above its weight is interesting. I don’t think naught-else released in 1997 was good (and I know that wasn’t implied), and I will offer up my favo(u)rite 1997 record in future. But was 1997 thin compared to lots of other periods (1980-83, 1991-94)? Absolutely IMO.
  18. Here’s my blind spot, and it took some study and comments by some of you to get me to see this: I don’t have the appreciation Brits do for how this stomped on Britpop at the time, similar to how Nirvana stomped on hair metal. That’s because whilst Oasis, Blur, etc. were a thing over here, they weren’t THE thing they were over there. Whatever I think, Radiohead clearly tapped into something that struck a whale of a transformational chord musically, and I think this was part of the rapturous reception, and a part I didn’t appreciate. Whether accidental or intentional, cynical or heartfelt, none of us can deny its influence. And that is special.
  19. So if we put ALL of this in a blender, how do I score it? I’m not going to take the @threespires approach. I like it less musically than he does. But there are moments I’ve come to enjoy, and even feel. I’m not going to penali(z)e it for being so clinically overrated – that’s on all of you.
  20. I think for such a record, a special score is needed: Pi/10.​
Excellent stuff Fog. Whether I agree with everything you said or not I have pegged you as THE best music reviewer on here.



Note....still haven't forgiven you for giving Leanard Cohen a zero ;-)
 
Excellent stuff Fog. Whether I agree with everything you said or not I have pegged you as THE best music reviewer on here.



Note....still haven't forgiven you for giving Leanard Cohen a zero ;-)
Now now — I raised it to a positive number. :)

Thanks mate — this was a good one; maybe only two or three other records I have such a strong opinion of to be fair (good or bad). Ol’ @RobMCFC played a blinder here. Lots of great posts about this one, for and against.
 
Last edited:
Whilst Rob lobbed this grenade in to the mix get it "over and done with" and it certainly has brought an awful lot more folk in to comment, I am amazed that it has caused such polarising opinion.
I do get the feeling that so many hold this album so close to their heart that they cannot bear to see anyone questioning its worth (or grandeur).

.......And had I been scoring at the time then Doolittle would have got a 10 from me.

As work will be quiet in a little while I shall turn the lights off in the office and immerse myself in the cozy embrace of those lovely Radiohead boys
 
I think a couple of people thought I was just being obstreperous with my score so I'll try and elucidate. Bearing in mind Rob's comment about rowing back I'm adopting a points mean prizes approach. So if anyone can put me right about some specific things I can't abide with this album I'll add a point to my score each time.

I'm going to start with the supposed lyrical / thematic content. On paper me and Thom should be like two peas in a pod because two of the stated influences for Yorke are also two authors/thinkers that I have great affection for.
I did a Computing Science degree in the 80s and one of the important theorists on things such as formal language and computational linguistics was Noam Chomsky. He was mandated reading. Because I'm a bit crass at first I just liked the sound of his name but his work was challenging enough that I ended up reading some of his books not on the syllabus and beyond his work in language and I ended up thinking this is a very interesting bloke. So I've followed his writings and career over the decades and though I haven't always agreed with him it's hard to suggest he's anything other than one of the great thinkers of the 20th century. Fast forward a few years and on this side of the water having liked Will Hutton's journalism for a while, I bought The State We're In when it was published. I've still got that book today, nearly 30 years on. It resonated with me when a lot of the people I'd been hanging out with politically to that point decried it. So it was like a bit of a milestone that said to me my views were evolving beyond the probably unhealthy ones I'd held, into broadly speaking the views I still hold today.

So an album with elements apparently inspired by the likes of Chomsky and Hutton is going to be right up my street surely? Except what is offered up is an inane word soup with the superficial lobbing in of the occasional phrase. I'm not expecting a musical précis of their entire works but there is nothing there to me to suggest any meaningful connection to these supposed sources.

Now I don't have a problem with word soup lyrics, one of my favourite bands New Order have regularly written lyrics that made little to no sense but sonically fitted beautifully with the music. I've no problem either with someone superficially dipping into something for a bit of inspiration as Black Francis is sometimes wont to do.

But in both those cases there's no pretence that anything else is going on. That's not the case here, Yorke actively plied this particular line of snake oil and lazy numpty journalists have actively lapped it up since.

But the real crime here is that even if you buy there is some clear connection between the words/themes and those sources it's a complete betrayal of its supposed inspiration. Chomsky has spent his life as an activist, Hutton has never stopped promoting ideas to address the woes he highlights in his writing. There's always a prescription, always a way out of the mess we've made. He remains to this day someone seeking to make the world a better place. Given this, where's the call to arms in this record? Where's the light to lead us out of the darkness? As far as I can tell it's not there: it just wallows in it's own dirt, at best passively at worst voyeuristically.

So this leads me to one of two conclusions, either Yorke is as thick as mince and the point of the works he claims inspired this album went completely over his head or this was all just some utterly cynical bullshit to attempt to legitimise a load of old guff he tossed off. I think Foggy is possibly of the former view but I'm more swayed to the latter.

All that said, I recognise I was in my 30's when this came out and was a bit of a saddo because I'd been invested in various forms of politics for over half my life already. It might concievably be that if I was 18 years old or something that this album would have made me think and even better, act. Which would be a good thing irrespective of how cynical Yorke may or may not have been.

So if one person on this thread can honestly say they went and read some of Chomsky or even just found out a bit more about the IMF or something similar as a result of listening to this album then I'll be chuffed and add an extra point to my score. But if not it will just reinforce my feelings that this is nothing more than cynical psuedo politicised misery porn that parasitically and incoherently leeches off and then pisses on the work of the very people it claims to take inspiration from.

So in case there's any doubt, where I am with this record is that in it's legitimising of superficiality, passivity and near nihilism it's not even a neutral piece of entertainment it's actively detrimental to society. To me it's the musical equivalent of heroin chic; it makes me think how the fuck did we get here folks.

I'll be back to discuss the guitars later :-)
 
So, nothing to do with the album then?

Oh yeah that's lots about the album I hate as well; but I'm not going to apologise for letting the fact that the way it's generally viewed does my head in and I find it completely lunatic.

I think some people are a bit confused by the fact I can acknowledge its got some things going for it (I agree with @Coatigan about the production) and then score it as I did.

Perhaps the best way I can describe it is imagine you meet a girl who has pretty nice breasts and maybe shiny hair or something else fairly pleasing; however it turns out she's a really nasty piece of work, pretty toxic and her mates are even worse and she's also a rag who never stops going on about how the gpc will never be beaten as a manger. So you can recall and fleetingly appreciate that one pleasing aspect of her whilst being absolutely sure you never want to bump into her again in your entire life.
 
I think a couple of people thought I was just being obstreperous with my score so I'll try and elucidate. Bearing in mind Rob's comment about rowing back I'm adopting a points mean prizes approach. So if anyone can put me right about some specific things I can't abide with this album I'll add a point to my score each time.

I'm going to start with the supposed lyrical / thematic content. On paper me and Thom should be like two peas in a pod because two of the stated influences for Yorke are also two authors/thinkers that I have great affection for.
I did a Computing Science degree in the 80s and one of the important theorists on things such as formal language and computational linguistics was Noam Chomsky. He was mandated reading. Because I'm a bit crass at first I just liked the sound of his name but his work was challenging enough that I ended up reading some of his books not on the syllabus and beyond his work in language and I ended up thinking this is a very interesting bloke. So I've followed his writings and career over the decades and though I haven't always agreed with him it's hard to suggest he's anything other than one of the great thinkers of the 20th century. Fast forward a few years and on this side of the water having liked Will Hutton's journalism for a while, I bought The State We're In when it was published. I've still got that book today, nearly 30 years on. It resonated with me when a lot of the people I'd been hanging out with politically to that point decried it. So it was like a bit of a milestone that said to me my views were evolving beyond the probably unhealthy ones I'd held, into broadly speaking the views I still hold today.

So an album with elements apparently inspired by the likes of Chomsky and Hutton is going to be right up my street surely? Except what is offered up is an inane word soup with the superficial lobbing in of the occasional phrase. I'm not expecting a musical précis of their entire works but there is nothing there to me to suggest any meaningful connection to these supposed sources.

Now I don't have a problem with word soup lyrics, one of my favourite bands New Order have regularly written lyrics that made little to no sense but sonically fitted beautifully with the music. I've no problem either with someone superficially dipping into something for a bit of inspiration as Black Francis is sometimes wont to do.

But in both those cases there's no pretence that anything else is going on. That's not the case here, Yorke actively plied this particular line of snake oil and lazy numpty journalists have actively lapped it up since.

But the real crime here is that even if you buy there is some clear connection between the words/themes and those sources it's a complete betrayal of its supposed inspiration. Chomsky has spent his life as an activist, Hutton has never stopped promoting ideas to address the woes he highlights in his writing. There's always a prescription, always a way out of the mess we've made. He remains to this day someone seeking to make the world a better place. Given this, where's the call to arms in this record? Where's the light to lead us out of the darkness? As far as I can tell it's not there: it just wallows in it's own dirt, at best passively at worst voyeuristically.

So this leads me to one of two conclusions, either Yorke is as thick as mince and the point of the works he claims inspired this album went completely over his head or this was all just some utterly cynical bullshit to attempt to legitimise a load of old guff he tossed off. I think Foggy is possibly of the former view but I'm more swayed to the latter.

All that said, I recognise I was in my 30's when this came out and was a bit of a saddo because I'd been invested in various forms of politics for over half my life already. It might concievably be that if I was 18 years old or something that this album would have made me think and even better, act. Which would be a good thing irrespective of how cynical Yorke may or may not have been.

So if one person on this thread can honestly say they went and read some of Chomsky or even just found out a bit more about the IMF or something similar as a result of listening to this album then I'll be chuffed and add an extra point to my score. But if not it will just reinforce my feelings that this is nothing more than cynical psuedo politicised misery porn that parasitically and incoherently leeches off and then pisses on the work of the very people it claims to take inspiration from.

So in case there's any doubt, where I am with this record is that in it's legitimising of superficiality, passivity and near nihilism it's not even a neutral piece of entertainment it's actively detrimental to society. To me it's the musical equivalent of heroin chic; it makes me think how the fuck did we get here folks.

I'll be back to discuss the guitars later :-)
Yep, we are getting to the same place using slightly different routes. Your path is 80% cynical, 20% idiot, whereas I am 57% idiot, 43% cynical :). I think the final destination is more-or-less “bullshit artist.” Still convinced his “influences” were mostly made up after the fact.
 
Now now — I raised it to a positive number. :)

Thanks mate — this was a good one; maybe only two or three other records I have such a strong opinion of to be fair (good or bad). Ol’ @RobMCFC played a blinder here. Lots of great posts about this one, for and against.

I still don't get it.

The division, that is.

Almost two listens in, this round, on top of multiple previous attempts at it over the years, and I still don't understand what all the fuss is. One way or the other.


While I may loosely challenge some of your philosophical qualms here, you are at least clear, and consistent, with them. As for example with the the Painting of a Panic Attack album, amongst others. I almost wonder if it would be worthile a quick revisit now, after some time and a few more albums have passed, on the back of this one and while waiting for others to catch up.

Either way, we will almost certainly come back to this, (your idea of 'honesty') in your (re)views of what I have this week firmly decided will be my next nomination. And if it doesn't get the same attention as this one, heads up, I'll be a little bit pissed off ;).

Right. Now I'll have to pay more attention to these lyrics and 'themes' here, which I admit, I haven't really noticed much. I don't consider myself vapid, but for whatever reason any lyrical content, cleverly concealed or obvious, seems to have washed over me.
 
Last edited:
Based on what you've nominated in the past and talk about generally in terms of likes, I'll be very interested in what you make of it relative to this one.

Hmm. I was going to give it a passing spin for context, but maybe might save it for when I have more time.
 
Critics are snidey little gobshites, picking apart other peoples work when they wouldn't know one end of a guitar, camera or paintbrush from the other.

But a big part of society and always have been. Some have swayed societies, some pissed into the winds.

People talk about shit mate, that's just the way of it. Some more, some less.

Would be quite interesting to know how many people here have had the experience of someone else, preferably that they have never met, 'critiquing' their work.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.