smoe.org mailing lists
ivan@stellysee.de
| From | DanAbnrml9@aol.com |
| Subject | Re: New Joe Jackson |
| Date | Wed, 26 Mar 2003 09:53:59 EST |
[Part 1 text/plain ISO-8859-1 (3.6 kilobytes)]
(View Text in a separate window)
In a message dated 3/26/03 1:25:57 AM Eastern Standard Time, dha@panix.com
writes:
> No offence, but I suspect they're just doing what they want to do (or at
> least what Joe wants to do) and you're just feeling compelled to make it
> fit into what you think they should be doing.
Bad is bad. I've owned most JJ albums at one time or another (save "Will
Power" and "Symphony 1", which I dismissed as "not my thing" out of the box),
and ultimately gave up on many of them because they didn't redeem themselves
even after close, repeat listens. There may be some sort of "concept" to
"Blaze of Glory", but the production is bombastic, inappropriate, and
extremely dated, and only the singles make any lasting impact at all. If you
need largely instrumental late '80s arena rock--flashpots and all--then well,
maybe you'll dig it (and yes, I do realize that was part of the point, but it
still doesn't make for particularly interesting music, at least not for me).
"Body and Soul" was similar--a few great (in my opinion) singles surrounded
by impossibly pretentious, dull filler.
No, I'm not expecting Joe Jackson to fit into some box and be classified, nor
did I expect Look Sharp II. What I am saying is that, even when held up
against much of his decidedly marginal work, these songs still lack any
distinguishing characteristics, hooks or not. I won't be a cheerleader for
his indulgence as an "artiste" because, frankly, he's not a very good one.
He's put out some fantastic records, and those records happened to be pop
records. Despite that audities is a pop-oriented list, I listen to lots of
things that exist far outside of the pop realm and yet I still find little to
love in much of his wanky, bland post-"Night and Day" work. I think I
would've rather if "Vol. 4" had been a full-on "mature" pop/rock album,
because I think that at this point he could've pulled that off much better.
As it stands now, "Vol. 4" sounds more like a mid-life crisis on tape.
<< I was
enthralled when he played "Deep Dark Truthful Mirror" at the Rock and Roll
Hall of fame ceremonies this year, instead of just sticking to the hits as
others did. Sure, he gave them PL&U, but he also reminded them that his
career didn't end with that song. >>
I agree that it's wrong to dismiss the bulk the work that an artist produced
during their less-popular period, and certainly in the case of Costello he
continued to produce lots of worthy work, even if it was more worthy to his
cult than to the mainstream. But my personal opinion (and remember, it's just
mine!) is that JJ produced some fantastic singles post-"Night and Day", but
only produced a couple of decent albums. Realistically "Vol 4" is probably
one of those, but only because it easily tops most of what he's done since
then.
<< . I totally disagree with your statement about the
band...I think they are as tight and energetic as they've always
been... >>
Yeah, just as a correction to my original post... I didn't actually mean that
the band were technically bad or anything, it just feels like the performance
is a bit muted. Graham Maby in particular I know is a massive talent, having
played on tons of records I've loved for They Might Be Giants and Marshall
Crenshaw, among others.
<<BTW, where do you hear the "Night and Day" influence on the record? >>
It's really only a token thing, but it's there. Like that twinkly piano line
on "Take It Like a Man" is sooo "Another World". Actually the idea of "Look
Sharp" mixed with "Night and Day" done by a more mature Joe Jackson certainly
SOUNDS appealing, but this record just feels formulaic and uninspired.
For assistance, please contact
the smoe.org administrators.