I think that's a fair complaint. I also didn't mention The King of Limbs, and although my description of Thom's SNL flailing was on-point, I could have spent a few more sentences considering Thom's, um, significantcontributions to the world of dance.
I'm fully aware Thom wrote the bassline and played it in the studio, but Colin handled bass duties on SNL as he is wont to do. Watch the video; even the shitty skippy version we linked to (only one I could find online) is well worth your time!
Oh man... That was before I was swept up in Radiohead hysteria, but I do remember seeing some clips from this performance years later and being blown away. I can totally see that being monumental for someone who fell in love with the band during the OKC era.
I love that stretch, but the opening trio and the "Weird Fishes" > "All I Need" > "Faust Arp" rise and fall are just as marvelous. You're making me think I might be an In Rainbows over Bends guy after all.
Exactly, Jim. Never understood why people overlooked that song when In Rainbows came out; it's every bit as masterful as "Reckoner" or "Weird Fishes" in my book.
No flames here. I think there's a strong case for In Rainbows as their best from a pure enjoyment perspective, though I still rank OKC and Kid A above it and maybe even The Bends depending how 1995 I'm feeling on a given day. Certainly would rejigger Doug's list from last year.
I think you're well spoken, and you're bringing a lot of interesting ideas into the conversation, though I definitely disagree with a lot of your assertions. You're telling me nobody wants to be Biggie or Kanye? Or Don Draper? Or Scarface (the Pacino character)? Or, to veer back into real life, Freeway Ricky Ross? I don't buy that. "Breaking Bad" is cited here as the exception, the show that points out the fallacy of romanticizing these people. But I think it's just as much a fallacy to assume they are 100 percent pure assholes until we can dredge up evidence to the contrary. It doesn't seem like a leap to suggest that people like Keef and Chris Brown contain a glimmer of redeeming humanity underneath all the darkness. Isn't it kind of a given that people are complex?
As for your initial point, I do understand why love songs by Chris Brown would be difficult to stomach. If hearing some dude who beat up his girlfriend sing about romance and sex is a turnoff, people have every right to not listen. I just think there's a lot of hypocrisy, self-protection and posturing involved when people decide where to take a stand. I don't think it's possible to be consistent in your moral position on this stuff without acknowledging a moral authority outside yourself and, unless you are a flawless beacon of purity, admitting your own infractions against that same moral authority. We all approach these conversations very differently from a humble perspective than we do from a position of moral superiority.
I agree with Gmarley about the difference between outright judging a person and opting to withdraw your support. That's a good point. It's fair for you guys to take a pass on supporting artists that breach your conscience. Everybody has to live by their own conviction. What I take greater issue with is using certain human beings as avatars for evil so that we can feel like the good guys or designating people who have failed in extreme ways as "those people" whose presence would "repulse" us -- particularly when M. Hanna admits outright that he can't live by his values consistently.
It's not a punt. What makes you qualified to pronounce judgment on Chris Brown or to draw the line on what constitutes objective morality? Your own views are inherently subjective because you are finite, flawed and biased. When he broke the laws of the land, he had his day in court; that's really as far as human judgment can rightfully go. Now, if there were some omniscient being whose very essence personified the standards of right and wrong... perhaps that being could rightly judge Chris Brown.
I'm guessing Kendrick wins Best Rap Album next year; he has an outside shot at an Album of the Year nomination if his people campaign right. Zero chance at winning, of course.
Speaking of amazing records that will have to settle for "It's an honor just to be nominated" status: My "Kaleidoscope Dream" 2014 Album of the Year campaign begins now.
Not sure I would choose any of Steely Dan's modern-day indie disciples over Radiohead, Outkast or Eminem, but that's kind of a tangent anyway. The point was not to smear Steely Dan specifically, but rather that the Grammys honored this legacy artist whose best days were long past at the expense of three of the best albums of my lifetime, records that (a) defined that year, (b) exerted huge influence in the ensuing years and (c) still hold up as masterpieces 12-13 years later. Nobody remembers that Steely Dan record. I might feel differently if the award had gone to Steely Dan when they were at the peak of their powers.
Gotta rep for Midnite Vultures as well, especially "Mixed Bizness" or "Nicotine & Gravy" or, yeah, "Debra." But it speaks to Beck's consistent quality that I didn't even mind this list completely overlooking that record.
Man, if they had put out a record this year I would have totally included them. Hard to figure out a rubric for what to include here, but you're right that the Whigs were back in a big way.
You know, Kevin, I honestly do listen to that exact Mannheim album when decorating the Christmas tree. And it's probably better than "Player Piano." I can't front. We are corny together, you and I.
"Who Gon Stop Me": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2mBK9LsKf4
Which is built on a sample from dubstep dude Flux Pavilion: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzExWz7KP5M
Graduation was my favorite for a long time, but it just stopped clicking for me at a certain point. From my vantage point the consensus online (at least among the online landscape Stereogum inhabits) is that Graduation has not aged well, which I agree with. The songs are still quality, but not necessarily classic Kanye quality; outside the singles it feels a little like a B-sides collection to me. Definitely wouldn't ask somebody to turn it off, though!
It's true that a misguided demographic SHOULDN'T get to steal away a word's meaning, but when they do, I find it's better to abandon that word and find a new one with less nauseating connotation. I don't know if I realized "evangelical" automatically meant "right-wing fundamentalist," but if it does, I will stop using it to describe myself.
Just to clarify, I wouldn't consider myself a former evangelical, though if by "evangelical" you mean the entrenched culture of the religious right, then yeah, I no longer associate myself with that. I think most of the American church has lost the plot with its dogmatic conservatism and its insistence, but I also don't subscribe to a postmodern or so-called "emergent" position on Christianity that says we can take what we like from the Bible and discard the rest. The Christianity of the New Testament (which is what Christians should be looking to as their model) doesn't reflect either of those extremes. It does consistently call Christians to spread the message about what Jesus accomplished at the cross, which I would certainly describe as "evangelical." I still believe in that.
Anyhow, I agree with you that Jars of Clay has a lot of good songs.
Agreed about Sophtware Slump. Don't know if it counts as a rock opera, but I would see it on stage despite the potential for it to play like bad sketch comedy. It actually might be better suited for an animated feature.
Comments