tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-660808341284783109.post3011237863300851033..comments2024-03-02T07:40:22.786+03:00Comments on Only Solitaire blog: Bee Gees: Spirits Having FlownUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-660808341284783109.post-35417298684370123892014-05-21T22:27:04.462+04:002014-05-21T22:27:04.462+04:00Some on-the-other-hand thoughts:
To be sure, it’s...Some on-the-other-hand thoughts:<br /><br />To be sure, it’s certainly a possibility that your review actually triggered the same phenomenon in reverse on me. Perhaps my memory, or lack thereof, was “primed” by your advance claim that this would be a stagnation-fest of limp hooks, no melodies, and no emotional depth. Therefore my “dashed” expectations may be elevating my rating of the album much higher than I ordinarily would have put it. Or maybe I just have a bad pre-impression of stinky Seventies bell-bottom prom-pop, and any group with a relatively filler-less album and a sense of craft impresses me. Whatever works.<br /><br />I will drop the subject soon, but one last question needs to be asked: why do I lambast strict chronological order this way, in defiance of what you would likely consider good sense and simple taste? <br /><br />Well, I recently tried an experiment. Namely, I tried to do what you seem to do, and listened to all the classic Sixties albums I have (Sgt. Pepper, Velvet Underground, Beggars Banquet, etc.) in more-or-less chronological order, attempting to gain new insights into the revolutionary qualities of the music, year by year. <br /><br />I did garner some interesting revelations. For example, I discovered that Highway 61 was even more out-of-the-blue revolutionary than it seems from the vantage point of today--seriously, there's nothing even remotely in its ball park in August 1965. Also, 1969 was chiefly a year of profound cultural sadness, a quality of its music that's not always audible hearing it on the radio sandwiched between other classic rock like Nazareth and Supertramp. Also, even if the Beatles weren't your favorite band in their early or middle years, they had to be--absolutely had to be--by late 1968. By then, they actually COULD do anything, to an even greater extent than was the case circa Revolver.<br /><br />But alas, there was also one revelation of a more negative variety. Specifically, the music sounded. . . somehow, more BORING in chronological order. Far, far more boring. <br /><br />Take, for example, King Crimson’s debut. Sounds great when played back to back with most other music, right? Put it back into chronological order, and. . . with a few exceptions, it sounds actually. . . safe. Predictable. Challenging to an extent, but not all THAT challenging. And the same goes, with rare exceptions, for Paul McCartney, Nick Drake, or anyone else of that fertile, fertile period in pop history. <br /><br />It gives me almost the exact same impression I get when I’m forced to listen to a few hours of modern pop in a row. Namely, Give Me Something New.<br /><br />Honestly? I think that’s the phenomenon at work here. When you put Spirits Having Flown on the turntable (aka Spotify playlist), you were looking for something that gave you something very, very new. Or at least pushed forward what you considered good about the previous two hit albums, and eschewed what you considered smelly. <br /><br />To someone fresh, it sounds fresh. To someone already saturated in disco cheese and soft-focused yellow shades, it sounds every bit as stinky as all of that. That really is, I think, all it amounts to.Double Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14932050167918995108noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-660808341284783109.post-52443364628444106222014-05-21T22:24:46.649+04:002014-05-21T22:24:46.649+04:00Ah HA. I've finally figured out your problem,...Ah HA. I've finally figured out your problem, George, reading this review. (This is going to be a rather long comment, so forgive me if it rambles.) Namely:<br /><br />You appear to treat most music accordingly to strict chronological order. <br /><br />Though that’s an understandable problem to have, it's still a problem by my standards. Because it means everything a band does, in your eye, is tainted/colored/irreparably changed in sound, purpose, enjoyability, and both written and unwritten worth, by what came before it--and much worse, what surrounds it.<br /><br />It’s a fine theory, don’t get me wrong. But the greater number of music, even good music, does not work this way in practice, no matter how much we like to hope otherwise. Granted, some musicians do make an honest effort to orient their creative process to fit this theory—Black Francis is an infamous case in point, and has been known to lecture his producers on “how Buddy Holly would have done it”, among other things. But he is an exception that proves the rule. I guarantee you, for every band that was inspired by Nirvana and/or Soundgarden, only about one out of four have ever heard of the Pixies or the Stooges. And if they did, rightly or wrongly, their response will usually be, quite bluntly, "What the heck is that crap?" <br /><br />Almost none of them care a whit whether they reside on the "first wave", the "second wave", or the "crap wave" of a movement (the Beegees, admittedly, were probably in the last category in 1979). May be unfair. But the musical world does not generally fret about where they fit in on the grand scheme of things (excepting extreme circumstances, like, say, Oasis vis-a-vis the Beatles). Save whether they succeed in their aims.<br /><br />Why do I say this? Because I came to this album fresh. I had heard a good portion of the Beegees' Sixties output, mind you, but I had not--and have not--sat through either the Main Course album or the SNF soundtrack. (Excepting the inescapable hit singles, of course.) <br /><br />So the complaints you have toward this album--which appear to mainly revolve around arguments like "they're stagnating compared to two years ago", "their creativity is a pale shadow of 1975" and "whatever happened to the guilty pleasure of 'their work on the soundtrack'" are likely wasted on anyone who isn’t familiar with said background material, their potential validity notwithstanding. This is the first cheesy gooey Seventies prom-pop I've heard since I accidentally clicked on a Lite FM station last month, and the first actual CD of the genre I've bought since purchasing a latter-period ELO album. It's not prime Funkadelic or anything, but there is much, much more memorable craft on this album than I was expecting, particularly after reading your review ahead of time. (Specifically, tracks 1, 2, 6, 8, and 9 seem rather locked in my skull right now, to my coworkers' amusement. For some reason, track 3, which was apparently a number one hit, does not. Must have been a flash-in-the-pan.) <br /><br />Perhaps it's craft of an "inadequate" flavour. Perhaps its memorability is of a "bad" type if it comes right after hearing the relatively grittier beats and melodies of its chronological predecessor. Perhaps if my memory was primed by the relatively upbeat (and more culturally legendary) disco fiesta of their immediately previous work, or of their reportedly more musically diverse output of 1975, I would have my expectations dashed, and my opinion accordingly altered. As it is, I have no expectations, beyond the generic Seventies cheesy-pop ones. In combination with the above track nods, I therefore have no complaints. Double Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14932050167918995108noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-660808341284783109.post-38554222524167180962013-05-22T01:32:42.490+04:002013-05-22T01:32:42.490+04:00I've never heard this album. But its terrible ...I've never heard this album. But its terrible album cover has always bugged me. Who thought a fuzzy red blotch obscuring a third of the image would make for good album art? That, and the band looks totally stoned.Kenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04990529203943926383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-660808341284783109.post-18454629311965764292013-05-17T17:46:45.322+04:002013-05-17T17:46:45.322+04:00I never cease to be amazed at the sheer number of ...I never cease to be amazed at the sheer number of albums recorded by some of these acts that clearly should have called it quits much earlier in their careers. The Bee Gees aren't even the worst of the lot.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-660808341284783109.post-58861102030961072142013-05-16T21:10:58.182+04:002013-05-16T21:10:58.182+04:00People who have actually listened to 1981's Li...People who have actually listened to 1981's Living Eyes LP from front-to-back tend to concur that it's one of their best albums. I think it's their strongest since Bee Gees' 1st. One track, "He's a Liar", presages Hi-NRG by a few years. It's ironic how in 1977 they were playing music that would sound awfully dated within four-year's time, yet by 1981 they were playing music that was four years ahead of its time.Zaragonhttp://rateyourmusic.com/~Zaragonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-660808341284783109.post-15494415611110448152013-05-16T00:51:18.532+04:002013-05-16T00:51:18.532+04:00"The emotion in these songs is incredible.&qu..."The emotion in these songs is incredible."<br /><br />yeah, because when i think of "emotion" i think of that fucking falsetto.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-660808341284783109.post-75125964528195854442013-05-16T00:40:15.200+04:002013-05-16T00:40:15.200+04:00This album is horrid. If they wanted to be taken ...This album is horrid. If they wanted to be taken seriously, they needed to kill the falsetto. I was surprised Alvin and the Chipmunks didn't sue them for stealing their singing voices.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-660808341284783109.post-68716021370240217732013-05-16T00:08:08.889+04:002013-05-16T00:08:08.889+04:00Spirits Having Flown is one of the best love songs...Spirits Having Flown is one of the best love songs ever - and one of the best performances. The emotion in these songs is incredible. The depth not so much, but then, is even Bob Dylan really that deep?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-660808341284783109.post-66925151389530738882013-05-15T22:31:01.916+04:002013-05-15T22:31:01.916+04:00To sum this (and lots of the former) crap up:
http...To sum this (and lots of the former) crap up:<br />http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-gZKRKNy4w<br /><br />Nuff said.Manfrednoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-660808341284783109.post-24711166262654705352013-05-15T21:30:56.693+04:002013-05-15T21:30:56.693+04:00The good thing about the two hits from this album ...The good thing about the two hits from this album - Too much Heaven and Tragedy - is that even the Bee Gees couldn't sink lower than on SNF - or perhaps I just had run out of hate. They don't offend me as much. The other good thing is that Tragedy was the Bee Gees last major hit in The Netherlands for 8 years. In 1987 I only was listening to the radio for classical music, so I happily have missed all the rest of their career.<br />Alas I missed Metallica too, until 1990.MNbnoreply@blogger.com