Jump to content

controversial opinions on music


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, englishbob said:

Funnily enough, Coldplay don't bother me, at all. I don't like them, but I don't dislike them either. They exist in a parallel universe that doesn't in anyway border my own.

 

All the time U2, Foo Fighters and Bon Jovi keep going, they are a-way down my hit-list yet. 

 

Reading between the lines, I'm guessing you're a huge Nickelback fan.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Would you concede it's front loaded? I enjoy Beastie Boys most as a party rap group personally. Tracks like 'Shake Your Rump' and 'Johnny Ryall' excel because they meld the kaleidoscope sample work into something that grooves, something catchy you can yell along to. By the time of the medley at the end the music remains very clever indeed but the hooks are long gone. You left with three guys endlessly shouting at you with that tinny sound effect they always use, it almost grates. 

 

Not to say I dislike it though. It's a legendary LP. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

For me it's the last time their raps were still fun, funny and inventive.  But what makes the album for me is the work of the Dust Brothers.  It's a masterclass in sampling, from the laid back Funk Factory-sampled Car Thief to the bonkers mish mash of Shake Your Rump (and even more so, 33% God) and the medley at the end rounds the album off perfectly.  The hooks are the least interesting parts.  There's not a bad track on there and I've loved it since the day it came out.  Everything since, not so much really.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 years later...

Been thinking this for a while now. It's not specifically a music opinion. I think Ian Curtis's bandmates and management were complicit in his death. Everything changes knowing he attempted suicide before. So Tony Wilson and bandmates can say 'oh we didn't know he meant it...he fucking meant it' or 'we never looked at his lyrics' or 'he was looking forward to the American tour' 'and we know now that the amount of pills he was taking would have plunged him into a deep depression'. They knew he attempted suicide, they knew his epilepsy was a big deal, they knew a big American tour is an awful lot of stress for someone young with epilepsy still trying to deal with.

 

In documentaries, the suicide attempt is glossed over, the suggestion Curtis did not want to tour never brought up. There's been misinformation, pushed by his bandmates and management (and the film Control) that Curtis was racked by guilt with his apparent affair even though the woman who he was having a relationship with always -until she died- said that it was never sexual. That angle was pushed to deflect from their negligence to force ahead a big tour where most of the pressure falls on a vulnerable young man who won't be able to deal with it. They knew this at the time, they know this now, they won't ever admit they put their own ambition before the care of their bandmate. 

 

Of course I'm only saying this because Joy Division were so good and i wish i could have heard more albums. But there's suggestions (from the women in his life, not his bandmates) that he only wanted to make one album, and didn't want to tour ever again. So there might not have been album 3 anyway. He wanted to be a novelist. 

 

I think if there is no American tour Ian Curtis would still be alive now. I think if he never had epilepsy he would still be alive now. Remove them and there is still the pressure to front the band after their success which Curtis would feel obliged by, but his epilepsy changed everything. I wasn't there, they obviously were but i don't think in any of the documentaries or interviews since they've been honest. I've seen Peter Hook repeatedly lean on new information that the amount of medication Ian was taking was obscene but he mentions it as though to absolve himself of guilt. 

 

Maybe his suicidal tendencies would re emerge even if he quit the band, who knows. 

 

The last 3 tracks on Closer are so extraordinary. I can't grasp how a band can make such emotionally raw music without there being any

sense of forcing it. For a band of 20 year olds, in the late 70s in that harsh brutal pretense free down to earth post industrial environment, managed by a genuine crazy eccentric to express music that deep. I can't imagine those tracks being recorded. Maybe there never was going to be any more, maybe brilliance like that wasn't meant to be replicated by them over and over again, maybe the quality is in the finality. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't really agree on the definitions of pop music earlier in the thread in terms of it being about popularity and sales. I thought that you have avant garde, the purest sound, lets say Merzbow, then anything that veers into being melodic, kind of upbeat, bouncy, is pop. So feed1 by Autechre, not pop. It's noise. Cichli, pop. It varies by track. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

People who say pop is just short for popular like it's this massive revelation and no-one realised before is annoying. Anything can become popular, but pop music is songs created for commercial appeal to please a general audience. As such Autechre could never be pop as it pleases no-one.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Art Vandelay said:

People who say pop is just short for popular like it's this massive revelation and no-one realised before is annoying. Anything can become popular, but pop music is songs created for commercial appeal to please a general audience. As such Autechre could never be pop as it pleases no-one.

 

Yeah i agree with that. If Merzbow brought out a new album of harsh uncompromising noise but it tops the charts that isn't making it pop music. 

 

But this to me is pop

 

 

What if Autechre did intend to appeal to a general audience with some of their tracks or albums but we wouldn't realise it. Oversteps' softer, quiet melodic approach might have been a deliberate attempt by them to bring people who left them back.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s an interesting hypothesis @Loik V credernand whilst Ian was very young, the rest of the band were too, and Wilson relatively speaking. I’m sure they have blamed themselves as I’m sure would lots of people in similar circumstances when it comes to suicide - there’s always going to be the question of whether you could have done more, or whether you were responsible for putting them under too much pressure. I mean there are plenty of reasons why he might have acted as he did, but I think it’s unfair to say any one of those was the main reason or that the band and their management tried to cover things up. Ian took his own life and ultimately he was responsible for that no matter how harsh or insensitive that sounds. 
 

It’s a tragic story and one which as I’ve got older makes it more & more difficult for me to listen the music of Joy Division. I mean I used to worship them and I think it’s fair to say that Ian became a cult figure because of his suicide. He’s become this strange almost mythical figure when really he was a just a young lad who was very, very ill. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's still very inaccessible music though with only an appeal to a very small audience. For me you could drop a pop song at a wedding disco and have a broad spectrum of people enjoy it. I'm not sure you could even play that on 6 Music during the day and hold the listeners. Even if you took a weird electronic song like Windowlicker, which actually made the chart and had a video and everything, I'm not sure you could make an argument for it being pop. It's just palatable for more people.

 

Anyway, white people make bad music. If they do make good music it's because they've managed to make it sound enough like black music for us not to notice. Prove me wrong kids.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Fierce Poodle said:

Jamiroquai or Stevie Wonder. That’s the real question here.

I mean Stevie, obviously, although I do like a bit of Jamiroquai. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Stanley said:

It’s an interesting hypothesis @Loik V credernand whilst Ian was very young, the rest of the band were too, and Wilson relatively speaking. I’m sure they have blamed themselves as I’m sure would lots of people in similar circumstances when it comes to suicide - there’s always going to be the question of whether you could have done more, or whether you were responsible for putting them under too much pressure. I mean there are plenty of reasons why he might have acted as he did, but I think it’s unfair to say any one of those was the main reason or that the band and their management tried to cover things up. Ian took his own life and ultimately he was responsible for that no matter how harsh or insensitive that sounds. 
 

It’s a tragic story and one which as I’ve got older makes it more & more difficult for me to listen the music of Joy Division. I mean I used to worship them and I think it’s fair to say that Ian became a cult figure because of his suicide. He’s become this strange almost mythical figure when really he was a just a young lad who was very, very ill. 

 

Yeah Deborah Curtis has said she resents that given she feels angry at him choosing to not be there for their daughter. If his self worth is so low he's not thinking he needs to be there for her, but that she's better off without him. He's fronting a band, he's got a daughter, he's getting divorced, there's a lot of pressure on him. He can't just de attach himself from any of that. I think pressure is the biggest reason for suicide, whether financial or in terms of what people expect of you. 

 

The more i read, the more to me it seems crazy there was ever a big American tour scheduled. His epilepsy being severe, twice weekly, that he was worried how American audiences would react, maybe laugh at him. 

 

I guess the day to day is more mundane than how we might think of it coming from the outside of viewing Ian through his lyrics and voice and performances rather than just a Manchester lad. 

 

It's not that i think the band members and management covered anything up, just weren't and aren't honest. The film Control and the impression you get from other documentaries and their viewpoint is that he was torn between his marriage and his affair. Maybe he was, but i think the tour is clearly the biggest thing and they had control of that. I'd give them leeway if there was no suicide attempt before, but i think after that they needed to be serious and not just be hopeful he could cope with it. 

 

on wikipedia:

 

Quote

Following Curtis's first definite suicide attempt on 6 April 1980, Tony Wilson and his partner, Lindsay—expressing deep concerns as to Joy Division's intense touring schedule being detrimental to Curtis's physical and mental well-being—invited him to recuperate at their cottage in Charlesworth in Derbyshire

 

So they knew. They can't claim to be niave afterwards with; well it was only afterwards we listened to Ian's lyrics and realised his inner torment. 

 

It's the same with Amy Winehouse. The people around her failed her. She's still the one who was addicted and drank all the alcohol but still. It's complicated if someone lives to perform but Ian Curtis didn't. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's dodgy with someone like Amy Winehouse as her image of being the junkie queen of Camden was being carefully cultivated as part of her brand. They'd tried with a more clean cut image the first time around and it was a moderate success, but I think people around her were more willing to let her life go to pot as the public seemed to prefer that slightly more tabloid friendly version of her. I think that's maybe a bit reductive, but it's a tale as old as time in the music industry. Provide just enough buffers for these self destructive people to get them onto the next thing and take it from there.

 

Even dodgier were people like Sean Combes who were more than happy to stoke up actual street level lunatics because it was a pretty good way of selling records. That behaviour ultimately got his mate killed, but he image controlled it afterwards by knocking out a tune and chucking his kids a bit of cash. Again, a bit simplified, but there's always plenty of people around when harnessing the talent and very few who'll be about to pick up the pieces after.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Loik V credern said:

 

Yeah Deborah Curtis has said she resents that given she feels angry at him choosing to not be there for their daughter. If his self worth is so low he's not thinking he needs to be there for her, but that she's better off without him. He's fronting a band, he's got a daughter, he's getting divorced, there's a lot of pressure on him. He can't just de attach himself from any of that. I think pressure is the biggest reason for suicide, whether financial or in terms of what people expect of you. 

 

The more i read, the more to me it seems crazy there was ever a big American tour scheduled. His epilepsy being severe, twice weekly, that he was worried how American audiences would react, maybe laugh at him. 

 

I guess the day to day is more mundane than how we might think of it coming from the outside of viewing Ian through his lyrics and voice and performances rather than just a Manchester lad. 

 

It's not that i think the band members and management covered anything up, just weren't and aren't honest. The film Control and the impression you get from other documentaries and their viewpoint is that he was torn between his marriage and his affair. Maybe he was, but i think the tour is clearly the biggest thing and they had control of that. I'd give them leeway if there was no suicide attempt before, but i think after that they needed to be serious and not just be hopeful he could cope with it. 

 

on wikipedia:

 

 

So they knew. They can't claim to be niave afterwards with; well it was only afterwards we listened to Ian's lyrics and realised his inner torment. 

 

It's the same with Amy Winehouse. The people around her failed her. She's still the one who was addicted and drank all the alcohol but still. It's complicated if someone lives to perform but Ian Curtis didn't. 


I’m a JD/NO junkie and I think the surviving members accept some level of complicity in Ian Curtis’s death. That’s what I have taken away from reading their books and their interviews over the years. Not sure how controversial it is. 
 

Curtis also clearly had his own demons though and it cannot be laid solely at the door of his band mates, Tony Wilson and Rob Gretton. They were all very young. 1980 was a totally different place when it came to things like mental health.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

22 hours ago, Art Vandelay said:

Anyway, white people make bad music. If they do make good music it's because they've managed to make it sound enough like black music for us not to notice. Prove me wrong kids.

 

Neil Young?

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, The Hierophant said:

Neil Young?

 

Yep, Art's rule holds: he confessed to Borrowing a Tune from the Rolling Stones, who as we all know took their music from black musicians, meaning Neil Young's music sounds like black music by proxy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, The Hierophant said:

I’m a JD/NO junkie and I think the surviving members accept some level of complicity in Ian Curtis’s death. That’s what I have taken away from reading their books and their interviews over the years. Not sure how controversial it is. 
 

Curtis also clearly had his own demons though and it cannot be laid solely at the door of his band mates, Tony Wilson and Rob Gretton. They were all very young. 1980 was a totally different place when it came to tl1hings like mental health.  

 

I don't understand this really, i used complicit to directly blame them because i consider the American tour as the biggest reason for Ian to go through with it. I wouldn't use any form of complicit in someone having a mate who is depressed who they listened to and knew was severely down, say they suggested getting professional help or offered to help with debt but nonetheless will always feel they could have done more. 

 

Was attempted suicide different in the 80s? Well, no, because, again, 'Tony Wilson and his partner, Lindsay—expressing deep concerns as to Joy Division’s intense touring schedule being detrimental to Curtis’s physical and mental well-being—invited him to recuperate at their cottage in Charlesworth'. 

 

I can't find a timeline of events, was the American tour decided before or after Ian's suicide attempt on 6th April? Do you really think the management and other band members didn't discuss it among themselves whether Ian could cope with it? Because in every documentary, interview, book extract l've read, not once is the tour ever brought up. 

 

Peter Hook talking about it here

 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/music/2011/jun/14/joy-division-ian-curtis-suicide

 

Mentions 2 suicide attempts, not one. Also says:

 

Quote

Then our last gig in Birmingham was a grim affair. Ian's illness was dragging the whole thing down, but we'd spent three years going from playing to no people in Oldham to being revered. It was what he'd fought for all his life. None of us wanted to let it go. We all felt that if we stopped we might never get it again.

 

I wasn't alive then. I have no idea how acclaimed they were. They'd been on tv, made 2 albums. Is breaking America essential to a uk band? No. Was it Ian's dream? After developing severe epilepsy? All it is is an immense amount of pressure. 

 

I've seen the proposed schedule of the US tour. Maybe it seems not too bad. Maybe that's what they thought? It wasn't a long tour. 10 shows in 18 days though, in New York, Toronto, Chicago, San Francisco, Los Angeles. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think all three of them have spoken very clearly about the guilt they feel.  In that link you post, Peter Hook says:

 

Quote

We'd ask: "Is everything all right, mate?" and he'd reply: "Yeah, fine, let's carry on." As an adult and a father now, I feel guiltier than I ever did then. If that had been my son, I'd have gone round there and headbutted Rob Gretton, our manager, and taken him home. But there were doctors, consultants, psychiatrists, and not one of them was able to sort it out. Unbelievable.

 

They were incredibly young. Ian Curtis was 23, Bernard Sumner and Peter Hook were 24 and Stephen Morris 22.  

Read their books. They didn’t think Ian Curtis was serious, or really wanted to kill himself. They didn’t understand it. They all look back and say, “we should have known” but they didn’t and it was all swept under the carpet, by Curtis as well. 
 

That doesn’t mean they killed him. 
 

On mental health Morris says:

 

Quote

“Attitudes towards mental health have definitely got better over time in the sense that it’s something you can talk about now and people understand it. But at that time people didn’t understand epilepsy, they thought it was something you could catch and there was a bit of stigma about it so you didn’t really know what to do. Ian would get depressed and you’d be like, ‘Pull yourself together, you’ll be alright’, and you just didn’t want to admit that there was possibly something wrong.

 

“Now it’s a lot better but young people are under a lot more pressure than we were and there’s a lot more going on that can push you into a bad space. Even now admitting to yourself something is wrong is hard because you don’t want to admit it. And you’ve gotta do it because other people have got through it. It’s not gonna kill you to ask for help. The treatment is also a lot more friendly now. The drugs that Ian had to take were evil things. Sometimes they were worse than his symptoms because they did have a real effect on him.”

https://www.nme.com/features/music-interviews/we-felt-like-the-whole-world-was-against-us-new-orders-stephen-morris-reflects-on-joy-divisions-legacy-40-years-on-2486358

 

They didn’t cause Curtis’s suicide but they didn’t help him as they should have done had they known more and they are very open about that and the guilt that goes with it. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 23/03/2010 at 22:16, The Hierophant said:

Abba are massively shit.


Pretty furious about this, I must have missed it in 2010! :quote:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.