| Author |
 Topic  |
|
billgoodman
>> Denizen of the Citizens Band <<
Netherlands
6214 Posts |
 Posted - 09/17/2013 : 01:08:57
|
Some of the new songs, like Silver Snail or Magdelena would be perfect for The Catholics
---------------------------
BF: Mag ik Engels spreken? |
 |
|
|
Jason
* Dog in the Sand *
1446 Posts |
Posted - 09/17/2013 : 08:36:21
|
I can honestly say that I like Frank's whole discography. There are peaks and valleys, of course, but I enjoy Frank's vision so much (and I think he's always stayed true to it) that I could put on any Frank Black/Black Francis record right now and enjoy it. Like many prolific artists, there's a coherent narrative across Frank's body of work. I like that he's very diverse. I like that his music's gone through changes. I've been following his music for about twenty years and I've gone through changes, too. I've changed along with it--and for the better, I feel.
Even the Nashville records are, I think, where Frank's music was heading with The Catholics. On those last few Catholics albums, I hear a solo singer/songwriter ready to bust out, take a break from rocking and go in a more "adult" and elegant direction. And, to me, those records are wonderful. Then, he got that out of his system and morphed back into Black Francis, where anything goes, up to and including funk ("The Seuss") and lo-fi blues punk ("Get Away Oil"), even some singer/songwriter moments that require close listening. Frank's music today is the sum of everything he's done. There isn't a "solo Black Francis sound" like there was a "Pixies sound" or a "Catholics sound". His next record could be anything (a hard rock record, the softest record he's ever made, an album performed with a jazz combo) and it would be in character. And I love that.
I'm a Frank fanboy. I'll admit it. I do my best to not be obnoxious about it, though. I'm not a Christian for my favorite musicians. I don't try to convert people. I'm more of a quietly devoted Buddhist. |
|
|
|
lucmove
- FB Fan -
Brazil
116 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2013 : 08:16:35
|
I have a hundred things to say on this topic, so congratulations if you have the patience to read it all. Hey, I read all the posts in the thread!
First off, lots of uninformed opinion flung around about Sonic Youth. It's one hell of a solid, history-making band. They deserve their legendary status. The NYC-Ghosts&Flowers album is good, though certainly not their finest. Pitchfork was unfair with their review, but not completely inaccurate. The album was largely criticized by the critic, especially because of the lyrics, which are lame indeed. That's more or less the same I think about the Pitchfork review of EP1, the score was too harsh, but the argumentation was very valid. EP1 is a major disappointment, only rabid fanbois refuse to see it. Dissing Kim Gordon is foolish. She is sexy and does her job pretty well with the bass. Why should there be any loftier expectations around her? What is wrong with being just good? She is not even the frontman. And she screams only occasionally with the Sonic Youth. I know, I am a fan. Kim Shattuck, in comparison, does nothing but scream. Well, at least so it seems from the two Muffs albums I downloaded recently. Anyway, these two Kims should not have been compared, because they're too different.
I have nothing to say on this alleged EP2, since it's not even released yet. Apparently, neither have you lot. Look at how this thread went quickly from "EP2" to "hey let's all talk about Charles Thompson's awesome body of work as a whole." Makes sense, since EP2 doesn't even exist yet. But I also think it's telling that talking about Charles Thompson's awesome body of work as a whole still generates a lot more numerous, passionate and detailed posts than the pitiful EP1 will ever generate. I can add mine, but with less passion.
I love everything that Stevio10 wrote about the Catholics era, but I have a quite different view of Charles' trajectory. It's a little bit grim, so brace yourselves.
I tend to view Charles and His Monikers as an artist that craves attention and recognition and works really hard for it, and has gotten an endless dose of frustration in return.
It all begins with the Pixies. It's awesome, public and critics love it, but Kim Deal suddenly becomes a big deal, steals the spotlight and everybody now knows that Black Francis hated that. He soon got to hate the woman, mostly for having her own charisma. So he pulls the plug on the Pixies with a fax. Meow.
Then he wants to put the Pixies well past him. He changes his moniker to Frank Black to make it very clear that the Pixies era is finished, and also makes it very clear who wore the pants in the Pixies by releasing two albums that blow all ships, cruisers and carriers out of the water. Two albums that got... very little attention. Nearly none in comparison with all the hoopla the Pixies had been growing used to. Frank Black thinks... what the hell???
Enter the Catholics era. I have mixed (and possibly very uninformed) feelings about that era. On the one hand, it's always seemed to me that he was kind of broke around that time and didn't want to spend a lot of money with overly produced albums anymore, especially if they're not going to get the attention and recognition they deserve. What about touring that kind of material? He would need an orchestra to replicate the sound. He would probably not even have enough attendance to pay for the extravagance. Besides, the muthafucka really set the bar impossibly high and would soon find himself in serious trouble for not being able to outdo or even keep up with himself. I suspect he felt he was painting himself into a corner with that and decided to take a sharp U turn: two track, count to three and rock'n'roll. Cheap, sustainable and effective. That's my view of the Catholics era: it was sustainable. Sure, the man summoned a pretty impressive line-up, he's never been one to be sloppy, but that arrangement was probably almost as cheap as respectable.
Another thing about the Catholics era was glaring to me: although it was awesome rough rock'n'roll, I remember I was particularly stricken by how formulaic it often was. Examples: Six-sixty-six, Solid Gold, Steak'n'Sabre, The Man Who Was Too Loud, King and Queen of Siam, Billy Radcliffe, Constant Sorrow Man, Pan American Highway, Le Cigar Volant, Whiskey in Your Shoes, and numerous references to dogs. Just look at those titles. They all sound contrived. I can see a man wearing a trenchcoat, dark glasses and a badass frown trying hard to be seen as a very, very serious dark and mysterious man who tells stories, nay, legends of the wild west carefully crafted to send chills down spines, make jaws drop, and strike awe and... aw sorry, I mean the whole thing sounds foolish under a certain light. If it's any consolation, this comes from a guy who loathes Tarantino because he spends way, way too much time shooting extreme violence and moronic dialogues in an endless effort to seem badass.
Let me explain one thing I always loved about the Pixies besides their music: their pictures. More specifically, their smiles and natural attitude before a camera. Especially Kim. Oh, that smile on Kim... She smiled like an amateur. An awesome amateur. What the fuck? It's just a picture. Let's do what any normal person does when taking a picture: let's smile for posterity. Meanwhile, countless bands went miles out of their way just to seem badass in their pictures. Or weird. Or intellectual. Or any other warm, steaming pile of bovine feces. Not the Pixies. They didn't need that shit. They would just smile like kids on vacation, then walk into stage and deliver such a punch that made Metallica or Iron Maiden sound like pussies. Francis all humble in his flannels but RAGING on the microphone and Kim aways smiling, occasionally saying " - Thanks!" They were frighteningly powerful and frighteningly natural. Gosh, that was humiliating to a lot of people. The Pixies were the perfect response to all the clowns that wear leather pants, hair extensions and make devil signals with their hands. The Pixies outed their travesty without a single speck of mercy, the exact amount they deserved. I have no idea if any of that was ever intentional or at least aware. I don't care. Who does? Justice was served.
Every moron who even utters "Loud Quiet Loud" should get a hard slap upside the head. Loud-quiet-loud never had anything to do with anything. The Pixies were awesome because they were unpredictable in a shockingly natural way. Trying to peg the Pixies was like trying to swat a fly in a house infested with slow, crawling roaches.
So it took me a while to stomach the Catholics era. Most of it didn't seem natural to me anymore. It seemed that Frank was trying too hard to impress. I don't like that, as you can see. Anyway, the central part of this rambling is that I see the Catholics era with a slightly desperate Charles Thompson trying to impress, especially while or after The Breeders' "Last Splash" got so much attention. He even hung up the phone on a journalist who asked him about Kim Deal's successful ventures. He was sour. He was doing a great job, and it was not properly recognized. It is understandable. Meanwhile, mediocre bands were getting lots of attention: The Strokes, Coldplay, Greenday, Blink 182, even the fucking New Radicals were getting more exposure than Frank Black. What the fuck is wrong with the world?
Well, Mr. Thompson certainly delivered a large amount of impressive work with the Catholics, especially with Black Letter Days and Devil's Workshop, nicely chronicled in one single post by fellow forum member Stevio10. But there is yet another glitch in my very particular view.
I consider Black Letter Days and Devil's Workshop another grab for attention: TWO albums released simultaneously. I am not complaining, I loved it, I love the two records, but it totally seems to me that Charles was showing off: look at me, releasing two albums, I am that prolific and awesome, that should get some attention from the press, who else can pull something like that off... Did it work? It should have, but it doesn't seem like it. I saw few mentions of it anywhere. I remember how lonely I felt. Again. Nobody cares about my hero. The world sucks.
I already thought that Frank Black was being formulaic with the Catholics and their songs about would-be legends of the far west. But I got a quite uncomfortable feeling when I saw pictures of FB & C all dressed in cowboy outfits. That really seemed like a money grab to me. You know, cowboy music is kind of a sure shot because it's such a faithful crowd. They just work hard during the day then go to the bar at night and love their sweet, country music. Good, money-earning-and-spending patrons. Also, not a very demanding audience, very different from the pretentious, impossible-standards artsy alt rock brat crowd that accepts nothing but a constant stream of groundbreaking shit with every record and... doesn't work much and is always broke and has no money to spend and complains that comeback EPs are overpriced. Let's face it: it makes sense from a business perspective. The rock'n'roll audience is tough and ungrateful unless you play for the dumb heavy metal crowds.
Soooo, when Frank Black went into his so-called Nashville period, I couldn't avoid thinking, Holy shit, the man has totally switched crowds. This guy knows what he is doing. He gave up on shitty, thankless rock'n'roll, has become a country musician. Sigh... He will be missed, but whatever he wants to do with his life is his business, I guess. Sobs...
In the larger picture, what I mean is that Charles was once again going where he thought he was going to get more recognition and reward. Call it "commercial" if you will, I've been avoiding that word all along my post, but you don't have to if you don't want. Just don't lose sight of it: my point is that he is, in reality, constantly looking for very explicit recognition. He has been sick of being "alternatiive" for a very long time.
Don't worry, my post is just about to get worse.
I don't mean this has been just about fortune and glory. Clearly, the man has issues with his ego. For starters, he hated Kim Deal for stealing a little bit of his stardom. Joey confirms that theory in that documentary we all know. That just doesn't make sense to me. If I had a band, I would love to have a Kim Deal bringing audience to the gigs. People knew he was the songwriter, and she was just a nice sight and a sweet voice, nothing wrong with that, but he couldn't stand it. Then the same documentary shows the man talking on the phone and complaining that nobody cares about his solo work, just his Pixies era so he has to reform the band, then he goes to bed with headphones on and some kind of Stuart Little self-confidence building mantra... Everybody has issues, and he has his share. Fine. But that reveals something about him that I sometimes perceive as a flaw: insecurity and a need to impress. That doesn't jive with the monster that plastered the world against the wall while he was fronting the Pixies. Sometimes I even think he doesn't realize who he is and what he represents. More likely he does, but doesn't care for/about it.
Which brings me to the next part: after Catholics.
Who is he, and what does he represent? I have come to believe, regrettably, that the real significance of Frank Black Francis is widely but almost secretly known, and will never be duly recognized until he is dead, cold and stiff. When he passes, you can bet your ass the the story-hungry press will sing every single possible kind of praise to him, and an army of artists will pay tribute to him, and the public at large, this dumb mass that can't tell Steve Winwood from Justin Bieber and needs to be told what to like will just think,
What, this guy was that awesome? Really??? How come I never heard of him? Gee.. Well, I guess then I am going to buy and listen to his shit.
Because baby, that's art. That's how a lot of this shit business works.
And I guess post-Catholics Charles Michael Kittridge Thompson the Fourth (no less) realizes that, has gone through therapy, and gracefully given up on becoming a widely recognized living legend, and lends himself to much more personal and unpretentious songwriting. After the Catholics, I see a much more free Charles or whatever he calls himself dabbling here and there, back to rock'n'roll where his REAL audience is (what the hell were you thinking???) and not giving much more than half a fuck and doing pretty great sometimes, not so great at others, because this is the second decade of the Internet-based, proudly jaded 21st century and you're a fool if you give a full, whole fuck about anything anymore. He will just spend some time with his kids and crank out some tunes now and then. He doesn't seem to be pretentious anymore.
But wait! Suddenly the Pixies are back! Why??? What does he want with that? Ooooh! Suspended breath. What is going to happen now...?
Aw, geez. Another Toe in the Ocean??? The guy wants to be popular again???
Go home, Charles. You're drunk.
(fwiw)
________________
"- Thanks!" |
Edited by - lucmove on 09/19/2013 08:22:51 |
|
|
|
Jason
* Dog in the Sand *
1446 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2013 : 08:35:15
|
quote:
Originally posted by lucmove
Another thing about the Catholics era was glaring to me: although it was awesome rough rock'n'roll, I remember I was particularly stricken by how formulaic it often was. Examples: numerous references to dogs.
Just another grab for attention, I say! Frank knows that most people like dogs and "Dog in the Sand" and "Dog Gone" were clearly calculated attempts to pander to this demographic. It was very cunning on his part. |
|
|
|
lucmove
- FB Fan -
Brazil
116 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2013 : 08:50:50
|
No, not that kind of formula. Another kind.
Dogs squint a lot and withstand very hot weather, the kind of weather in deserts or California, and they exist unaffected across many times, as if they were impervious or oblivious to man's vanities, instabilities, strife and altercation. Dogs have no vanity.
That kind of formula.
Come on.
________________
"- Thanks!" |
|
|
|
IBreed
= Cult of Ray =
310 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2013 : 08:57:14
|
there's a lot of weird generalities and gross hyperbole in your post, but the button point is right on. the more i sit with EP1 the more i dislike it and what it represents. that hesitancy. it's a half measure. the want to release new music, tour and yet still avoid having to go up against their older material/legacy (even though that's absolutely impossible). how it's arbitrarily carved up to suit their promotional needs. they landed with a sputtering thump when skepticism was at an all time high... given the songs in their 2013 repertoire, it's almost unforgivable. each previous pixies release was so cohesive, so representative of a shift, a new era. this is just a smattering of shit thrown against the wall to see what sticks. indie cindy and what goes boom are great fun, but half a release does not a classic make... and the sonsofguns had it in them to put out something really strong- a statement of intent. forget "EP1". jesus. none of this comes across as a bold move for the songs and band to be judged on their own merits- presentation and titles be damned- it comes across as a passionless shrug to keep the money maker alive. shouldn't this thing be getting better in time, not worse?
where the fuck is classic masher and greens & blues. a year away, likely. when they announce their canadian casino tour.
|
|
|
|
IBreed
= Cult of Ray =
310 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2013 : 09:00:17
|
| there's just so little artistry on display here. i'm reminded of that old albini quote where he talks about having never met a band so willing to be led around by their collars. |
|
|
|
trobrianders
> Teenager of the Year <
Papua New Guinea
3302 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2013 : 09:00:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by lucmove
I have a hundred things to say on this topic, so congratulations if you have the patience to read it all. Hey, I read all the posts in the thread!
First off, lots of uninformed opinion flung around about Sonic Youth. It's one hell of a solid, history-making band. They deserve their legendary status. The NYC-Ghosts&Flowers album is good, though certainly not their finest. Pitchfork was unfair with their review, but not completely inaccurate. The album was largely criticized by the critic, especially because of the lyrics, which are lame indeed. That's more or less the same I think about the Pitchfork review of EP1, the score was too harsh, but the argumentation was very valid. EP1 is a major disappointment, only rabid fanbois refuse to see it. Dissing Kim Gordon is foolish. She is sexy and does her job pretty well with the bass. Why should there be any loftier expectations around her? What is wrong with being just good? She is not even the frontman. And she screams only occasionally with the Sonic Youth. I know, I am a fan. Kim Shattuck, in comparison, does nothing but scream. Well, at least so it seems from the two Muffs albums I downloaded recently. Anyway, these two Kims should not have been compared, because they're too different.
I have nothing to say on this alleged EP2, since it's not even released yet. Apparently, neither have you lot. Look at how this thread went quickly from "EP2" to "hey let's all talk about Charles Thompson's awesome body of work as a whole." Makes sense, since EP2 doesn't even exist yet. But I also think it's telling that talking about Charles Thompson's awesome body of work as a whole still generates a lot more numerous, passionate and detailed posts than the pitiful EP1 will ever generate. I can add mine, but with less passion.
I love everything that Stevio10 wrote about the Catholics era, but I have a quite different view of Charles' trajectory. It's a little bit grim, so brace yourselves.
I tend to view Charles and His Monikers as an artist that craves attention and recognition and works really hard for it, and has gotten an endless dose of frustration in return.
It all begins with the Pixies. It's awesome, public and critics love it, but Kim Deal suddenly becomes a big deal, steals the spotlight and everybody now knows that Black Francis hated that. He soon got to hate the woman, mostly for having her own charisma. So he pulls the plug on the Pixies with a fax. Meow.
Then he wants to put the Pixies well past him. He changes his moniker to Frank Black to make it very clear that the Pixies era is finished, and also makes it very clear who wore the pants in the Pixies by releasing two albums that blow all ships, cruisers and carriers out of the water. Two albums that got... very little attention. Nearly none in comparison with all the hoopla the Pixies had been growing used to. Frank Black thinks... what the hell???
Enter the Catholics era. I have mixed (and possibly very uninformed) feelings about that era. On the one hand, it's always seemed to me that he was kind of broke around that time and didn't want to spend a lot of money with overly produced albums anymore, especially if they're not going to get the attention and recognition they deserve. What about touring that kind of material? He would need an orchestra to replicate the sound. He would probably not even have enough attendance to pay for the extravagance. Besides, the muthafucka really set the bar impossibly high and would soon find himself in serious trouble for not being able to outdo or even keep up with himself. I suspect he felt he was painting himself into a corner with that and decided to take a sharp U turn: two track, count to three and rock'n'roll. Cheap, sustainable and effective. That's my view of the Catholics era: it was sustainable. Sure, the man summoned a pretty impressive line-up, he's never been one to be sloppy, but that arrangement was probably almost as cheap as respectable.
Another thing about the Catholics era was glaring to me: although it was awesome rough rock'n'roll, I remember I was particularly stricken by how formulaic it often was. Examples: Six-sixty-six, Solid Gold, Steak'n'Sabre, The Man Who Was Too Loud, King and Queen of Siam, Billy Radcliffe, Constant Sorrow Man, Pan American Highway, Le Cigar Volant, Whiskey in Your Shoes, and numerous references to dogs. Just look at those titles. They all sound contrived. I can see a man wearing a trenchcoat, dark glasses and a badass frown trying hard to be seen as a very, very serious dark and mysterious man who tells stories, nay, legends of the wild west carefully crafted to send chills down spines, make jaws drop, and strike awe and... aw sorry, I mean the whole thing sounds foolish under a certain light. If it's any consolation, this comes from a guy who loathes Tarantino because he spends way, way too much time shooting extreme violence and moronic dialogues in an endless effort to seem badass.
Let me explain one thing I always loved about the Pixies besides their music: their pictures. More specifically, their smiles and natural attitude before a camera. Especially Kim. Oh, that smile on Kim... She smiled like an amateur. An awesome amateur. What the fuck? It's just a picture. Let's do what any normal person does when taking a picture: let's smile for posterity. Meanwhile, countless bands went miles out of their way just to seem badass in their pictures. Or weird. Or intellectual. Or any other warm, steaming pile of bovine feces. Not the Pixies. They didn't need that shit. They would just smile like kids on vacation, then walk into stage and deliver such a punch that made Metallica or Iron Maiden sound like pussies. Francis all humble in his flannels but RAGING on the microphone and Kim aways smiling, occasionally saying " - Thanks!" They were frighteningly powerful and frighteningly natural. Gosh, that was humiliating to a lot of people. The Pixies were the perfect response to all the clowns that wear leather pants, hair extensions and make devil signals with their hands. The Pixies outed their travesty without a single speck of mercy, the exact amount they deserved. I have no idea if any of that was ever intentional or at least aware. I don't care. Who does? Justice was served.
Every moron who even utters "Loud Quiet Loud" should get a hard slap upside the head. Loud-quiet-loud never had anything to do with anything. The Pixies were awesome because they were unpredictable in a shockingly natural way. Trying to peg the Pixies was like trying to swat a fly in a house infested with slow, crawling roaches.
So it took me a while to stomach the Catholics era. Most of it didn't seem natural to me anymore. It seemed that Frank was trying too hard to impress. I don't like that, as you can see. Anyway, the central part of this rambling is that I see the Catholics era with a slightly desperate Charles Thompson trying to impress, especially while or after The Breeders' "Last Splash" got so much attention. He even hung up the phone on a journalist who asked him about Kim Deal's successful ventures. He was sour. He was doing a great job, and it was not properly recognized. It is understandable. Meanwhile, mediocre bands were getting lots of attention: The Strokes, Coldplay, Greenday, Blink 182, even the fucking New Radicals were getting more exposure than Frank Black. What the fuck is wrong with the world?
Well, Mr. Thompson certainly delivered a large amount of impressive work with the Catholics, especially with Black Letter Days and Devil's Workshop, nicely chronicled in one single post by fellow forum member Stevio10. But there is yet another glitch in my very particular view.
I consider Black Letter Days and Devil's Workshop another grab for attention: TWO albums released simultaneously. I am not complaining, I loved it, I love the two records, but it totally seems to me that Charles was showing off: look at me, releasing two albums, I am that prolific and awesome, that should get some attention from the press, who else can pull something like that off... Did it work? It should have, but it doesn't seem like it. I saw few mentions of it anywhere. I remember how lonely I felt. Again. Nobody cares about my hero. The world sucks.
I already thought that Frank Black was being formulaic with the Catholics and their songs about would-be legends of the far west. But I got a quite uncomfortable feeling when I saw pictures of FB & C all dressed in cowboy outfits. That really seemed like a money grab to me. You know, cowboy music is kind of a sure shot because it's such a faithful crowd. They just work hard during the day then go to the bar at night and love their sweet, country music. Good, money-earning-and-spending patrons. Also, not a very demanding audience, very different from the pretentious, impossible-standards artsy alt rock brat crowd that accepts nothing but a constant stream of groundbreaking shit with every record and... doesn't work much and is always broke and has no money to spend and complains that comeback EPs are overpriced. Let's face it: it makes sense from a business perspective. The rock'n'roll audience is tough and ungrateful unless you play for the dumb heavy metal crowds.
Soooo, when Frank Black went into his so-called Nashville period, I couldn't avoid thinking, Holy shit, the man has totally switched crowds. This guy knows what he is doing. He gave up on shitty, thankless rock'n'roll, has become a country musician. Sigh... He will be missed, but whatever he wants to do with his life is his business, I guess. Sobs...
In the larger picture, what I mean is that Charles was once again going where he thought he was going to get more recognition and reward. Call it "commercial" if you will, I've been avoiding that word all along my post, but you don't have to if you don't want. Just don't lose sight of it: my point is that he is, in reality, constantly looking for very explicit recognition. He has been sick of being "alternatiive" for a very long time.
Don't worry, my post is just about to get worse.
I don't mean this has been just about fortune and glory. Clearly, the man has issues with his ego. For starters, he hated Kim Deal for stealing a little bit of his stardom. Joey confirms that theory in that documentary we all know. That just doesn't make sense to me. If I had a band, I would love to have a Kim Deal bringing audience to the gigs. People knew he was the songwriter, and she was just a nice sight and a sweet voice, nothing wrong with that, but he couldn't stand it. Then the same documentary shows the man talking on the phone and complaining that nobody cares about his solo work, just his Pixies era so he has to reform the band, then he goes to bed with headphones on and some kind of Stuart Little self-confidence building mantra... Everybody has issues, and he has his share. Fine. But that reveals something about him that I sometimes perceive as a flaw: insecurity and a need to impress. That doesn't jive with the monster that plastered the world against the wall while he was fronting the Pixies. Sometimes I even think he doesn't realize who he is and what he represents. More likely he does, but doesn't care for/about it.
Which brings me to the next part: after Catholics.
Who is he, and what does he represent? I have come to believe, regrettably, that the real significance of Frank Black Francis is widely but almost secretly known, and will never be duly recognized until he is dead, cold and stiff. When he passes, you can bet your ass the the story-hungry press will sing every single possible kind of praise to him, and an army of artists will pay tribute to him, and the public at large, this dumb mass that can't tell Steve Winwood from Justin Bieber and needs to be told what to like will just think,
What, this guy was that awesome? Really??? How come I never heard of him? Gee.. Well, I guess then I am going to buy and listen to his shit.
Because baby, that's art. That's how a lot of this shit business works.
And I guess post-Catholics Charles Michael Kittridge Thompson the Fourth (no less) realizes that, has gone through therapy, and gracefully given up on becoming a widely recognized living legend, and lends himself to much more personal and unpretentious songwriting. After the Catholics, I see a much more free Charles or whatever he calls himself dabbling here and there, back to rock'n'roll where his REAL audience is (what the hell were you thinking???) and not giving much more than half a fuck and doing pretty great sometimes, not so great at others, because this is the second decade of the Internet-based, proudly jaded 21st century and you're a fool if you give a full, whole fuck about anything anymore. He will just spend some time with his kids and crank out some tunes now and then. He doesn't seem to be pretentious anymore.
But wait! Suddenly the Pixies are back! Why??? What does he want with that? Ooooh! Suspended breath. What is going to happen now...?
Aw, geez. Another Toe in the Ocean??? The guy wants to be popular again???
Go home, Charles. You're drunk.
(fwiw)
________________
"- Thanks!"
Nice try!
_______________
Ed is the hoo hoo |
|
|
|
vilainde
>> Denizen of the Citizens Band <<
Niue
7443 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2013 : 09:08:46
|
Wow, impressive, lucmove. I happen to disagree with every single sentence of your post - except the part about Sonic Youth.
I won't try to answer it cause my english is too poor. Just one remark though, I think summing up 25 years of an artist' career through his supposed longing for money and fame is holding him in incredibly low esteem.
Denis
Obsidiana Bijoux |
|
|
|
Sprite
* Dog in the Sand *
1335 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2013 : 09:20:17
|
quote:
Originally posted by vilainde
Wow, impressive, lucmove. I happen to disagree with every single sentence of your post - except the part about Sonic Youth.
Nah he's wrong about that as well. Impressive effort though, it's like an anti-Fissile or something. |
|
|
|
Jason
* Dog in the Sand *
1446 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2013 : 09:43:39
|
| One cool thing about Sonic Youth is that they don't have many songs that reference dogs. |
|
|
|
vilainde
>> Denizen of the Citizens Band <<
Niue
7443 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2013 : 10:07:47
|
... but they did cover I Wanna Be Your Dog. Sell-outs!
Denis
Obsidiana Bijoux |
|
|
|
billgoodman
>> Denizen of the Citizens Band <<
Netherlands
6214 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2013 : 10:14:54
|
The Catholics recording on two track, on tape and live shouldn't be considered as a wise budgetary move.
It only saves you a lot of time if you don't care about sound and musicianship. The records sound great to me (it's mixed live and extremely well, with vocal effects and stuff, very clevr) and they play very thight.
Digital (especially standard amateur programs) was already cheaper than tape in those days.
---------------------------
BF: Mag ik Engels spreken? |
|
|
|
Jason
* Dog in the Sand *
1446 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2013 : 10:35:52
|
billgoodman speaks the truth. Some of those Show Me Your Tears songs have what sounds like ten people playing on them. They're elaborate arrangements. Multi-tracking it and laying on overdubs would have been a cinch (and not expensive). Coordinating it all live in the studio, and getting it to sound as good as it does, surely took much more work. If recording live to 2-track tape was cheap and easy, every band would be doing it, especially new bands with no money. Few do, however.
The Catholics did it for aesthetic reasons. Frank liked the idea of recording that way. It was a nod to the past and he also probably liked the sound of it and the process. Also, he had a strong band who could pull it off. |
Edited by - Jason on 09/19/2013 11:11:30 |
|
|
|
sdon
= Cult of Ray =
France
786 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2013 : 11:33:54
|
No artistry? Commercial?
Come on, watch the live videos
They're not afraid of presenting new stuff, and let it be compared with the classics
They earnt millions of dollars with the reunion tours
They're not running after money (just saw bands on youtube sounding like shit in stadiums and huge stages, trying to impress with pyrotechnics, etc. For instance Garbage just to name a semi-respectable band years ago)
They want to write good songs, show that they still have that collective mojo (which was not for certain when you see Bam Thwok was their only original release in two decades). And at least half of the new songs are really great. Joey's better than before, less gimmickey, more confident. Dave has become incredible, he may be the best 'technician' in the band, bet never tries to show off (except on Vamos), Charles has enriched his palette, screams his lungs out but also croons or spoken-words now. Kim Deal does really good stuff solo, she's on her own ship now because she's much more than a bassist. But Kim Shattuck, even at 50, is hot and brings youth, attitude and energy to the band, that's such a good choice. They don't look over-happy on stage, but they're cohesive, detached and at the same time quite into it and together.
My bet is that they'll record 5 new albums that will at least equal the original albums. They're just all better now, and have nothing to prove, they're free.
--
"Aristophanes! (gong sounds)" |
Edited by - sdon on 09/19/2013 11:36:17 |
|
|
|
Sprite
* Dog in the Sand *
1335 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2013 : 11:39:17
|
| Kim Shattuck is older than Frank Black! I am ASTOUNDED..... |
|
|
|
Jason
* Dog in the Sand *
1446 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2013 : 11:43:40
|
THE CATHOLICS EXPLAINED
by Jason
Frank Black thought it would be cool to take his music in a more traditional direction. He'd already made a bunch of "weird" rock music and he became interested in making music that could sit comfortably next to The Rolling Stones and Bob Dylan. Sad songs, road songs, drinking songs. Country, folk, and early rock 'n' roll influences.
WHY did Frank do this?
Firstly, I think he just likes that music. I like that music, too. I get it. I like punk and noise and weird shit, but I also like The Stones. Frank, I suspect, is made of similar clay.
Secondly, I think he saw it as an interesting challenge.
Thirdly, as a rock music lifer himself, I think Frank identified with these old guys who never stopped doing it. Bob Dylan's never going to retire. He's in his 70s, he still tours, and he put out a new album last year. I think Frank has a similar vision for himself. The Catholics were workhorses. They didn't stop until they broke up. The Catholics toured constantly and recorded a new album (or two) almost every year. That's the troubadour's life.
Artists have interests and obsessions that come and go or sometimes just mutate into other things. What lucmove sees as some calculated commercial conspiracy (over twenty-five years), I just see as an artist doing what artists do. |
|
|
|
IBreed
= Cult of Ray =
310 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2013 : 12:04:12
|
quote:
Originally posted by sdon
No artistry? Commercial?
Come on, watch the live videos
They're not afraid of presenting new stuff, and let it be compared with the classics
They earnt millions of dollars with the reunion tours
They're not running after money (just saw bands on youtube sounding like shit in stadiums and huge stages, trying to impress with pyrotechnics, etc. For instance Garbage just to name a semi-respectable band years ago)
They want to write good songs, show that they still have that collective mojo (which was not for certain when you see Bam Thwok was their only original release in two decades). And at least half of the new songs are really great. Joey's better than before, less gimmickey, more confident. Dave has become incredible, he may be the best 'technician' in the band, bet never tries to show off (except on Vamos), Charles has enriched his palette, screams his lungs out but also croons or spoken-words now. Kim Deal does really good stuff solo, she's on her own ship now because she's much more than a bassist. But Kim Shattuck, even at 50, is hot and brings youth, attitude and energy to the band, that's such a good choice. They don't look over-happy on stage, but they're cohesive, detached and at the same time quite into it and together.
My bet is that they'll record 5 new albums that will at least equal the original albums. They're just all better now, and have nothing to prove, they're free.
--
"Aristophanes! (gong sounds)"
well, i was arguing the EP releases lacked artistry and were instead motivated by commerce. that's ok. it's disappointing, but it's ok.
as far as the rest, it's entirely impossible to qualify. joey's better now? they're all better now? i haven't heard anything to give that any weight. but, on the other hand, there's nothing to suggest they're worse than they were before, either. i think another toe is a fucking blight on their discography, but i don't think it's symptomatic of some larger internal problem... it's just, to my mind, a crappy song among some other really good ones. assuming it's not a sign of things to come.
|
Edited by - IBreed on 09/19/2013 12:05:00 |
|
|
|
Jason
* Dog in the Sand *
1446 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2013 : 12:09:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by IBreed
well, i was arguing the EP releases lacked artistry and were instead motivated by commerce.
Didn't you argue in another thread that the Pixies would make LESS money from the EPs than they would with a traditional album? |
Edited by - Jason on 09/19/2013 12:12:09 |
|
|
|
Chris Knight
= Cult of Ray =
USA
899 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2013 : 12:24:53
|
| Another Toe is the best song on the EP...my two cents |
Edited by - Chris Knight on 09/19/2013 12:26:36 |
|
|
|
IBreed
= Cult of Ray =
310 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2013 : 12:35:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jason
quote:
Originally posted by IBreed
well, i was arguing the EP releases lacked artistry and were instead motivated by commerce.
Didn't you argue in another thread that the Pixies would make LESS money from the EPs than they would with a traditional album?
i think so, especially given my bloody valentine's success (and the pixies similar stature). but being as the top selling vinyl album of '12 was around 18,000, and the pixies plan was hatched well before MBV's surprise release, i'd offer the EP idea was seen as a sure thing, whereas the idea of an LP was a gamble.
further, i'm positive the EPs serve as promotion for their touring schedule. every release will coincide with a new leg being announced or ventured on.
|
|
|
|
IBreed
= Cult of Ray =
310 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2013 : 12:36:27
|
quote:
Originally posted by Chris Knight
Another Toe is the best song on the EP...my two cents
?!?! what are your favorite pixies songs? |
|
|
|
Sprite
* Dog in the Sand *
1335 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2013 : 12:44:43
|
quote:
further, i'm positive the EPs serve as promotion for their touring schedule. every release will coincide with a new leg being announced or ventured on.
Yeah I suspect you're right. I like the idea of the EPs but they should have done it one a week or month at the worst. It's going be very frustrating watching the set lists incorporate more already recorded new songs as time goes by. |
|
|
|
IBreed
= Cult of Ray =
310 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2013 : 13:20:12
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sprite
quote:
further, i'm positive the EPs serve as promotion for their touring schedule. every release will coincide with a new leg being announced or ventured on.
Yeah I suspect you're right. I like the idea of the EPs but they should have done it one a week or month at the worst. It's going be very frustrating watching the set lists incorporate more already recorded new songs as time goes by.
totally. the IDEA behind the eps isn't inherently flawed. i liked billy corgan's narrative (though it was all smoke and mirrors) about watching a band's growth. but just chopping up something recorded a year ago is ludicrous. it's entirely predicated on promoting their touring schedule and being able to sell a larger number of "limited edition" EPs. frankly it just reaffirms so much of the criticism about the band; they're doing it for the moolah. and maybe they should be. they deserve it. but it can't be this grossly transparent and frankly punishing to fans who think they're a vital band with more to say. this certainly doesn't give that impression.
it's enough to make me want to write them off. it certainly doesn't make me want to defend them, even when i see shitty, unfair, reactionary reviews like pitchfork's, because... i kinda get it.
|
Edited by - IBreed on 09/19/2013 13:21:30 |
|
|
|
Sprite
* Dog in the Sand *
1335 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2013 : 13:48:56
|
quote:
The reunited band, which also includes the guitarist Joey Santiago and the drummer David Lovering, has played 324 concerts around the world, and sold about $65 million in tickets, according to its management. Eventually, though, some new fuel was needed to keep the train moving and the musicians feeling inspired. .
I don't for one moment think it's about the money. $65 million means they must be finacially sorted by now. Frank trod his own (sometimes lonely) path resisting milking the Pixies cash cow for a long time. I think the EPs come from all the talk of legacy fears amplified no doubt by the fact there has been nearly 10 years of will they/wont they speculation. But if every EP is going to get a 1/10 review from hipster publications they might as well say f**k it and throw the bunch of them out in one go. I'd certainly be happy and the tour will still be a sell-out as they are basically a critic-proof entity now anyway.
|
|
|
|
IBreed
= Cult of Ray =
310 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2013 : 14:10:16
|
assuming that's accurate, its 65 million in gross (?) over ten years. a-fucking-lot of money to be sure, but god knows what their lifestyles are, or how much of that is net. i doubt they're set for life, though yes, they're likely all millionaires in some capacity.
i'd also agree they're largely critic proof, but i'd love to know the fan reaction to the new music, especially those who dove headfirst into buying it. the next EP will really tell the tale.
|
|
|
|
Jason
* Dog in the Sand *
1446 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2013 : 14:31:27
|
It's a cliche-and-a-half, but patience really is a virtue. Patience is a graceful thing, and perhaps too delicate of a thing for some in the Instant Gratification 21st Century. Me, I'm neither graceful nor delicate, but I do have patience, mostly because I already have tons of music to listen to, books to read, movies to see, and places to go. EP-2 could come out four months from now, for all I care. And I'm a Frank Black fan to the max. You can't mention a B-side that I haven't heard.
If there is some kind of tour-related strategy to the release of the EP series, well--GASP!--that just sounds like the realities of the present day, where records are just trinkets, accessible on Youtube four seconds after they come out, and a band's bread-and-butter is their live show, where the people who actually like them show up to see them play.
And you say the band are playing three or four songs that you haven't heard on record, yet? So what? Frank Black & the Catholics would play nearly full albums a year before they came out. (Seriously. Most of Dog in the Sand debuted on stage almost a year before the album saw release. From what I remember, fans got a kick out of that. It caused no one any psychic pain.)
The EPs will continue. The band's intentions have been announced. It wouldn't surprise me if sleeve art and pressing arrangements have already been made for the whole series. Nobody minds much. The people who like EP-1, like EP-1. The people who don't like EP-1, don't like EP-1. The people who don't like EP-1 and still somehow wish it was longer (I'm having a hard time figuring that one out) have their own little small and obscure cage in the zoo. You're just going to have to screech. The future has moved on without you. |
|
|
|
IBreed
= Cult of Ray =
310 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2013 : 15:14:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jason
It's a cliche-and-a-half, but patience really is a virtue. Patience is a graceful thing, and perhaps too delicate of a thing for some in the Instant Gratification 21st Century. Me, I'm neither graceful nor delicate, but I do have patience, mostly because I already have tons of music to listen to, books to read, movies to see, and places to go. EP-2 could come out four months from now, for all I care. And I'm a Frank Black fan to the max. You can't mention a B-side that I haven't heard.
If there is some kind of tour-related strategy to the release of the EP series, well--GASP!--that just sounds like the realities of the present day, where records are just trinkets, accessible on Youtube four seconds after they come out, and a band's bread-and-butter is their live show, where the people who actually like them show up to see them play.
And you say the band are playing three or four songs that you haven't heard on record, yet? So what? Frank Black & the Catholics would play nearly full albums a year before they came out. (Seriously. Most of Dog in the Sand debuted on stage almost a year before the album saw release. From what I remember, fans got a kick out of that. It caused no one any psychic pain.)
The EPs will continue. The band's intentions have been announced. It wouldn't surprise me if sleeve art and pressing arrangements have already been made for the whole series. Nobody minds much. The people who like EP-1, like EP-1. The people who don't like EP-1, don't like EP-1. The people who don't like EP-1 and still somehow wish it was longer (I'm having a hard time figuring that one out) have their own little small and obscure cage in the zoo. You're just going to have to screech. The future has moved on without you.
thanks for sidelining my argument for a stock 'millennials lack patience' diatribe. i've myself admitted that the EPs are a done deal, and to paraphrase Breaking Bad, i'm not too stupid to see that they made up their minds 10 months ago.
but that doesn't excuse the process from criticism.
the idea that albums are just trinkets nowadays is a boring one. i disagree. albums are only as disposable as the artists that make them. the pixies are an album band. they're not rhianna or lady gaga. many, many people went to see doolittle played front to back. "singles" and "EPs" in place of LPs is the future as much as 3D movies are the future. spoiler: they're not. however, lets say you're *right* and the future is bands and fans entirely ditching the album format, when the fuck were the pixies concerned with whatever the status quo was? the mainstream came to them, not the other way around.
now, let me unequivocally state i would defend this idea to the death if frank and the gang had initiated the process. but they didn't. they signed off on a business proposal. they took their album and arbitrarily cleaved it into fifths. that's not how i want to think of the pixies.
as far as touring being an artist's bread and butter, it's basically always been that way.
|
|
|
|
natenate101
= Cult of Ray =
USA
892 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2013 : 16:47:42
|
Guys, we are in BONUS territory with the Pixies, at least to me. ANYTHING they release, in ANY format will garner my support as they've earned the right to do whatever the hell they want.....and the songs are good. This almost didn't happen at all, and I'm not going to let that notion slip out of my mind. I'll take the Pixies any damn way I can get em. They owe me nothing, and I'm just happy they are again making interesting music with a slightly off-kilter approach, both lyrically and musically. Bonus Time, all the way. Bring on 7 eps, if that's what they wanna do.
|
|
|
|
johnnyribcage
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1301 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2013 : 17:04:16
|
quote:
Originally posted by lucmove
I have a hundred things to say on this topic, so congratulations if you have the patience to read it all. Hey, I read all the posts in the thread!
(fwiw)
________________
"- Thanks!"
Luc...
Holy shit. Holy fuck... Dude. I skimmed everything after yours but it all kind of washed over..
While I respect that you have read all the posts... oh man.
You've got a bone to pick here that is way beyond anything I would ever expect to read on a basic fan site. I would recommend that you go listen to the Catholics stuff again but what good would that do other than to fan the hard core anti-FB flames that you already have blazing for the world to see. Every single thing you said, I whole-heartedly disagree with.
Everybody calm down, I'm the Burgermeister of Purgatory |
Edited by - johnnyribcage on 09/20/2013 00:53:09 |
|
|
|
Jose Jones
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1758 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2013 : 17:06:43
|
lucmove, i like the layout of your post ("it gets worse"). made me laugh as well as keep reading.
i also like that you started with the SY note. you're a good man.
i think charles follows his muse. when he was talking all the time about surf music he was... making surf music. when he's showering praises on burl ives he's... making songs like "stupid me." he's obsessed with Herman Brood for a moment so he... makes a rocking album about herman brood. he's listening to Exile On Main Street thousands of times in the tour van so he... makes killer rock n roll albums with his band.
i don't think his musical turns were motivated by money. the guy is in love with music and making music.
------------------------------
they were the heroes of old, men of renown. |
|
|
|
johnnyribcage
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1301 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2013 : 17:16:37
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jose Jones
i don't think his musical turns were motivated by money. the guy is in love with music and making music.
Yes. That's what's always drawn me to his stuff, and I dare to say, many others. He just loves to make music and loves when other people love what he does. As any other musician does, he picks stuff that gives him a music boner and follows it until he has an album or can't draw any more inspiration. It's a basic pattern that real musicians have followed for centuries.
What the hell is wrong with that?
Just in case I'm not clear - I agree with you Jose Jones.
Exhibit A:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7GX3XxF-o8
Everybody calm down, I'm the Burgermeister of Purgatory |
Edited by - johnnyribcage on 09/19/2013 17:23:36 |
|
|
|
IBreed
= Cult of Ray =
310 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2013 : 17:26:39
|
| the chord progression at the end of "angels" is so good. |
|
|
|
Jose Jones
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1758 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2013 : 18:02:21
|
i said it back then and i'll say it here now: some of those songs, when stripped down, could easily have been off TOTY. angels come to comfort you. your mouth into mine. specifically.
------------------------------
they were the heroes of old, men of renown. |
|
|
|
IBreed
= Cult of Ray =
310 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2013 : 18:12:12
|
| ie. the pixies. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
EP2
