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

Coatigan said:
Interestingly, those discussions in that bonus week were decisive in tipping me over to nominate this album.

I had wanted to, for ages, because I love it. But avoided it because I knew many here wouldn't. Those chats then meant there was plenty there to get into even if not liked. Which is partly why I was eagerly anticipating hearing @FogBlueInSanFran 's take here, having already laid the groundwork.

Fyi, he really did lose his daughter June. And his mother did have a stroke, and he did have a car crash etc. It is not 'marketing'.

I believe they use it, or at least have, for the best part of their existsnce as a band, as their own form of therapy through expression.

It happens to sell though, as you note. Doubt anywhere near as much as Radiohead, but enough to get noticed.

Partly, because the music is good (it is btw, polarising or not, the quality is undeniable and that is why it is rated). Partly as you said before, because it is 'different'. Although, you will know from some of the stuff I put on the playlist threads, different is not something I lack or crave, and is the least of my considerations here.

But mostly, I think it has found an audience because it resonates with a lot of people. Particularly dare I say it, middle aged and over men.

NOT in the sense they relate to their experiences as such. But more that they relate to the process. The 'healing' process that is, accepthing things, talking openly about them, displaying their vulnerability and wearing their heart on their sleeves.

That is what I think people aim for when they get past the singing style or noise of it. And the younger audiences are in it for the style, the intensity and the raw power of it, perhaps. It is clever in that way, you are right there. How deliberately intentional or consequently resultant that is, possibly too early to say.

Edit, will add, there are big parallels for me between them and Frightened Rabbit. Not musically as such, other than in the fact they both turned their back on convention and used music as a vehicle in their own way that suited them.

But in the relatability and resonating, they both hit the same nerves, strike the same chords (mentally and emotionally). The big difference is, FR tap into quite broad experiences in a looser way where audiences genuinely connect with their own experiences. Whereas Idles do the opposite, their themes are very specific and individual. Yet they connect in a similar way, through second or third hand understanding or appreciation of the effort.
Click to expand...
One thing which I think explains some of their popularity (but didn't include in my review cos it was already long enough) is that they sound big and violent so red faced old men in over tight shirts can sing about stomping someone's head on the kerb. But they are also pretty progressive so red faced old men in hemp shirts can virtue signal by liking them. But they make a lot of noise and are danceable enough to not appear preachy.
 
mrbelfry said:
One thing which I think explains some of their popularity (but didn't include in my review cos it was already long enough) is that they sound big and violent so red faced old men in over tight shirts can sing about stomping someone's head on the kerb. But they are also pretty progressive so red faced old men in hemp shirts can virtue signal by liking them. But they make a lot of noise and are danceable enough to not appear preachy.
Click to expand...

Trying to figure out where I fit on that scale now.
 
Saddleworth2 said:
I’ve seen Michael Bubble. (There, I’ve finally confessed).
Click to expand...

I’ve seen all sorts of acts that I wouldn’t have chosen to see for myself, mainly for my daughters; although I did go to see the Osmonds with my wife but there’s always been plenty of crossover on my wife and my musical tastes. You wouldn’t approve but The Who are er all-time favourite band. Mind you, my wife has stopped going to gigs.

I’ve taken the twins to see acts ranging from Miley Cyrus to One Direction and 5SoS; I also took them to see acts like AC/DC and Paul McCartney alongside the teeny stuff. They are 23 now so their tastes have changed somewhat and they can go see Harry Styles on their own. One of them did come to see Bruce on Thursday.
 
mrbelfry said:
One thing which I think explains some of their popularity (but didn't include in my review cos it was already long enough) is that they sound big and violent so red faced old men in over tight shirts can sing about stomping someone's head on the kerb. But they are also pretty progressive so red faced old men in hemp shirts can virtue signal by liking them. But they make a lot of noise and are danceable enough to not appear preachy.
Click to expand...

I can neither deny or confirm my t-shirt material or level of fit but I'm pretty sure it's a 60/40 split between danceability and lyrics for me.

Btw I prefer Coatigan's characterisation of 'middle aged men' rather than your somewhat harsher one!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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.