Predictions are like “trying to pick up mercury with a fork” claims Weller
Much to the surprise of several midland-based illegal betting syndicates, the annual Mercury Music Prize was last night awarded to dour navel-gazers The Double-X at a darts-tournament-themed presentation ceremony in London.
However, the misguided brummie gangsters were not the only ones to get a fuzzy reception on their crystal ball, as pointed out last night by Slackdad on these very pages following Matthew’s accurately dismissive review of the Londoners’ debut album almost a year ago.
Nevertheless, much as it balks me to stick up for Matthew, I do still think his review was pretty much spot on at the time; and remains so a year later.
What Matthew didn’t take into account last year was the music industry establishment’s fear of appearing “out-of-touch” or “un-cool”, which I believe was the main reason the nu-goth ™ outfit was given the prize.
As the traditional music business with its rigid regime of pigeon-holed genres fragments, and the fault lines that divide the artistic and creative side of music from the light entertainment side widen, the moguls holding the purse strings at the record companies and the corporations that sponsor events like the Mercury Awards are finding themselves in a state of fitful panic.
The XX didn’t win the award because theirs was the best album of the year, or even on the shortlist. It wasn’t. Theirs was simply the best image for the Mercury Awards to adopt for a year. The right image was important to them this year in particular, following the cultural vanishing act performed by last year’s winner – urban act Speech Debelle – as soon as the twenty-grand prize cheque was cashed.
The XX have had a year to establish themselves on the festival circuit, and have tickled the underbelly of the charts if not exactly set them alight. So the Marketing Director at Barclaycard can sleep relatively soundly, safe in the knowledge that their sponsorship investment should continue to pay off for at least a few more months.
I bet last year Barclaycard were left thinking they could have just spent twenty-grand down the pub for all the good Speech What’s-Her-Face did for them.
So, by that token, surely Paul Weller or Mumford & Sons should have won. Barclaycard can, quite literally, take them to the bank, can’t they?
Well, perhaps not. A completely safe-as-houses bet such as represented by those acts would have highlighted last year’s fuck-up instead of quietly sweeping it under the carpet. Media pundits and bloggers would have leapt all over it, claiming that it was a cynical attempt to associate the Mercurys with a successful act for purely business purposes.
I didn’t catch the whole awards show broadcast on the TV last night, but – like the witness to a crime – I saw enough. The live performances largely illustrated what a poor shortlist had been compiled.
The Mumfords delivered a sample of their well drilled live-set which was more than adequate to steal the show from the sample I saw. I’m sure you can catch carbon-copies of Villagers in the back room of pubs at open-mic nights up and down the country. The lad simply doesn’t have a ring of quality about him, and looks like he’s being pimped about by handlers trading on his doe-eyed shyness and funny haircut. I Am Kloot were clearly very competent songwriters and soulful performers, but somehow put me in mind of Chris De Burgh.
Corinne Bailey Rae and her band just embarrassing. She started off by showing us some hesitantly picked arpeggios she learned in her first guitar lesson that morning (she’s not there yet but she’ll probably get the hang of it in time); before her backing band came struck up. Well, I don’t know which phone-in competition they’d each individually won to get the chance to play on stage at the Mercurys, but you’d think someone would have given them the chance to practice together first.
After that we watched as the token jazz trio from the shortlist warmed up by playing three different songs at once. It was certainly intriguing, but it would have been nice to see their actual performance. At least their sense of rhythm was better than Corinne Bailey Rae’s band. (Having said that though, Matthew’s sense of rhythm is better than Corinne Bailey Rae’s band.)
So for another year we’re left with the bitter aftertaste of music being misappropriated for the sake of corporate media-grabbing, and the unpleasant sticky residue reaches even the fringes of the music scene as the Mercury Awards flaunt their ill-deserved “edgy and independent” image in the music news headlines. How depressing.
Any predictions for the Mercury Awards 2011 then?
This post is as good an example of insularity as you need ever read, well done!
You can talk!!
hhhhmmmm i don’t see your point Mr M.
Tho i am impressed it only took you 16 mins to find that and reply……or did my flowing words from a year ago make such a bold impression on you?
My predictions for the Mercury Awards 2011:
1. The award will go to a band or performer you dislike or actively dispise.
1. (a) You will sneer about this.
2. You’ll still be unable to just ignore the whole thing and do something you actually enjoy with your evening.
(Incidentally, my money’s on the award going to Oasis’ comeback album of Simon & Garfunkel covers.)
i kinda like anotherdave.
This whole post was pretty much an excuse to put a Blue Aeroplanes track up.
I like AnotherDave too, Chutters, but I don’t think he’s entirely neutral on this debate either.
Actually, I did end up buying it. Other than that I stand by my previous comment.
who’s talking about being neutral?
i was talking about your myopia…..!
The XX (sorry, should that be lowercase?) won? Christ.
I’ll disagree though, I don’t think the xx popularity represents a conspiracy to make last year’s choice look good, or a desire to pick something a particular market will respond to, more that a lot of the enthusiasm around the band is based around that fear of being out of touch Dylan mentions.
Some people, I am sure, love the stuff. Some people, myself included, will like any old shit. But more than a lot of other bands they really feel like a band people are oddly nervous of Not Getting.
And they are, let’s face it, dull as ditchwater. The emperor has no fucking clothes, face it.
Hi. I have been reading the blog for a while. Just out of interest – in your opinion, who should have won the Mercury Prize?
Hi! My name’s Sarah, long time listener, first time caller!
It’s a spare, elegant record, the aural equivalent of the xenon lights parading through a night-time motorway tunnel in some dystopian city… it’s the night bus home with the windows weeping drizzle; it’s sitting on your bed while the twilight descends outside.
Whatever. All that’s irrelevant anyway – we can’t choose what moves us and you’re well within your rights, of course, not to take to it.
However, the uphill struggle of any group of disparate, young hopefuls with God knows how many other of life’s foibles to contend with should at least be recognised for being honest, imperfect, vulnerable – it’s so fragile that it’s stunningly strong. It doesn’t hide behind a wall of negativity and a few hyperlinks.
I’m not even here to defend the xx – there are plenty of other bands I’d listen to over them – my principle is to attempt to pinprick through the hot air and bumptiousness that has reached a soufflé-like peak in this blog post.
But, actually… perhaps I’ve got it wrong. On second thoughts, maybe I should revise my opinion. After all, the internet is here for any comer to wax lyrical, far more excruciatingly than a Brazilian, and with a lot less technical supervision. So here I go!
…I see my mistake now! It’s not the writer of the original blog post who’s at fault. He’s right – each and every record on the list is woefully abysmal at best – and, frankly, a conspiracy of Discworldian proportions at worst. It’s not the congenial, good-natured scribe of the zeitgeist who’s erred here. By a process of elimination, then, it must be the music!
Yes! The music. Those songs, that data I siphoned off Mediafire a few months ago. How dare these people struggle through the tribulations of making a record, finding a common thread, a few shared values, getting a room to practise in, the lovely old genre debate (that really gives my critical faculties wings to fly!). Then there’s funding the whole damn thing, getting people to notice, driving to gigs in someone else’s van and trying to get enough for the rent all the while. Just who do they think they are?
Naysaying’s a dashed lot of fun, isn’t it. So satisfying. So rewarding. Oh, I feel simply marvellous now.
So, I’m off to the pub to drink some Best and try to forget about those prats with instruments I saw on the telly. Couldn’t even play their music. Well – some of them could, but those were just grotesque marionettes of the machine anyway, and the rest were cobbled-together mirages of talent scraped off the floor of some plebeian bar, who would be better off mowing the lawn in terms of listening pleasure. How dare they waste my time with their so-called rhythms and laughable harmonies. And their fucking effort, as if they thought that would make any difference. Wankers.
I think the XX are hopelessly overrated, and Matthew points out, rightly,that the emperor isn’t wearing any clothes.
I liked the Speech Debelle album; it wasn’t amazing, but it had some good tracks, and was infinitely better than this pish!
I think you’re being a bit harsh. They’re not amazing and definitely aren’t the best thing that Knifecrime Island has produced in the last twelve months (probably Wild Beasts, or maybe The Indelicates’ new album), but at least they’re not Oasis or Phil Collins.
The emperor is wandering around in slippers, slightly ratty chinos and a polo shirt with bleach stains on the collar, eating chips and wiping his hands on his trousers.
AnotherDave wins thread again!
I take it Knifecrime Island means Leeds? Never heard it called that before. And you know, I’d entirely forgotten about the new Indelicates album. I was so disappointed with their last one I guess I lost the urgency. I take it this is you recommending it then!
I actually think they deserve the award. (For what the award is..). I didn’t like the album on first listen – thought it sounded pretty mundane and had the kinda moodiness of a teenager ‘zoning out’ at a crisp-packet.
But its a total grower. I do think It’s simplicity is incredible. That said, the other contenders – to think that Wild Beasts lost out is an equal shame.
I do think the mercury’s have a London-centric attitude (as does the general uk music press) – does anyone up here really have an affinity to ‘dizzy’, feel like he’s ‘our national treasure’?
anyhow, I’m just glad Mumfords didn’t win it – they are sounding more and more like the voice of modern Christianity. you remember when you were 15 and you’d go to some club and then at the end someone would tell you that you were actually ‘at church ya..’ I’ve got a horrible feeling this will happen with the Mumfords…
And the Village–ers. With. Hiz. Ofvv…er. Pro–NoanSee–AA tion ovvv E-vv–rrry worrrrd.. he can suck eggs.
p.s. yes the Blue Aeroplanes track is good.
Sarah – in general I agree with you about not doing young bands down. I think older musicians should really have developed a thick enough skin to ignore a bit of a slagging, frankly, but young hopefuls don’t really deserve it.
I don’t think that really counts when a band have done as well as these chaps though. Honestly, with that many people blowing smoke up your arse I think you can afford to turn a casually blind eye to a few internet naysayers.
I genuinely think this is an appallingly dull album, and at some point I think a band gets famous enough that it’s okay to say so. I wouldn’t, however, write this kind of a post about a smaller band.
And of course, it’s always worth mentioning that I didn’t actually write this post, Dylan did while I’m away on holiday.
Alex – entirely valid question. Haven’t given it any thought yet myself, but I will do when I get home. As Dylan wrote the post I think I’ll let him field this one.
Oh, Alex, from the shortlist or any album I want?
I think whether you like the new Indelicates album will depend on what you didn’t like about the first one. Lyrically it’s much the same – ironic sneering about patriarchy and capitalism, laced with a bit of smugness at how clever they are to have seen through The Cool Kids – but the music is leaner and doesn’t have that over-stuffed syrupy quality that I seem to remember the first one having, which makes the album a bit more cohesive than its predecessor. The 60s pop pastiche from the first album is replaced by a sort of Dresden Dolls cabaret flavour.
I haven’t really listen to either of them recently though, so I could be remembering some other albums completely.
I’d say who on the shortlist first, and then who in your own opinion.
same question to dylan and anyone else.
Alex – will get on that as soon as I get home!
AD – yeah, the arrangements got on top of me a bit with their first album, but I loved their preceding singles.
The Mercury Prize is pay to play so it’s a fair assumption that those who pay most and most often probably walk away with more gongs than a random selection would suggest.
We could have entered Meursault for five hundred knicker for instance but that doesn’t even get you a table at the fucking ceremony.
According to the Grauniad, the Mercury prize was created by the guy who brought the world Now That’s What I Call Music vols. one through earfuck.
Which suggests that complaining that it is overly commercial is a bit like moaning at the sea for being damp. It’s not the award itself that’s the problem, its the whole wankstorm that is our culture, blah blah blah Noam Chomsky.
Intersting post from Sarah. I fear that the relatively small circle of folk who read Scottish music blogs are indeed falling into a trap of becoming pretty jaded. Negativity can become rampant if unchecked.
I didn’t wacth the Mercury, not my kinda thing. I don’t “get” the xx, but maybe it’s in the same way I didn’t immediately “get” Massive Attack, about 15 years ago. Who knows how the xx might develop? £20k might help them along.
(Though the splendid Wild Beasts were definitely robbed!)
I think the band on the shortlist that are genuinely worthy of a bit of negativity are Mumford and Sons. Many bands have already done what they do far better. Yet somehow they appear to be getting a bit of respect from folk who should know better. it’s weird, in the same kinda way that Glasow or Edinburgh uber-musos tell you all about all their muso knowledge, then turn round and declare that their favourite band is some perfectly pleasant but hugely derivitive bnch of stiffs like (for wantof a better example) Fleet Foxes.
Puzzling.
D.
Being hugely into music or hugely knowledgeable about it doesn’t stop you having bad or just plain bland taste.
Some of the punkier or more lo-fi stuff excepted, I could play most of the music I write about or release to my parents, quite happily. There’s no shame in that of course, because half my music taste comes from what they played me while I was growing up, but it certainly shows that I can’t be all that cutting edge.
Everyone has an opinion, the only difference with a reviewer is that they tell you theirs all the fucking time.
Said and said again by Sarah and Cathybird (although the latter seems to think that ‘up here’ is a somehow detached from ‘down there’ by something more significant than 4 1/2 hours on the train and an accent – I think Dizzee is as much ‘our’ loveable rascal as Paulo is ‘our’ loveable spliffhead-with-a-cod-Jamaican-accent)
If the Mercury is London-centric maybe that’s because the music biz lives in London and the idea of a regional (‘Scotland’s a country not a region!!!’) lucky dip is closer to the Mail’s idea of PC gone mad than a sane way to make a commercialised competition fairer.
For my money, the look on Weller’s orange face was worth the admission when they announced the winners… when will the old boy realise, we want Eton Rifles, not Humble Pie?
It is also worth noting that three times as many people live in London (depending of course on where you draw the line) as live in Scotland, which may explain something of the impression of bias. Mind you, I will confess that when I lived in London I did quickly develop the rather worrying attitude that my friends should visit me rather than vice versa but that’s another story.
As for Sarah, I have no idea what she’s on about, but pointing out that the Mercury Prize winning album is shit is hardly a crime, a travesty or a sign of negative or positive anything. The absolutely overwhelming majority of posts on this site are positive, because I can rarely be arsed writing about anything other than music I like, but on this occasion I think it’s fair to express dissent.
I’ll confess I think all that conspiracy stuff is a load of old bollocks, but I’ll be very surprised if that isn’t just Dylan trying to bait comments again, shame on him.
And I’ll re-state this, just for the record: The xx are just plain fucking dull. The thing I hate most about them is probably this very blandness – nothing to like, nothing to hate, just boooooring.
If this hurts your feelings to the extent that you start prattling on about an entirely fictional sea of negativity or whatever kind of attitude you think is embodied in Scottish music blogs (as if we all get together and agree on the collective tone for this month’s posts in advance) then grow a fucking pair and fuck the fuck off.
Tim, just to address your point, I do think the split between England and Scotland is more significant than just an accent. Do you not think the Scots have a very definite sense of national identity which changes how things affect people up here, and their relationship to cultural stuff in particular? It’s not always positive and can be downright parochial, but it’s more significant than just the miles travelled, wouldn’t you say?
I think Sarah’s saying something like “making music is difficult so you should give them credit for trying”, which I have to disagree with, considering we live in a world containing a large number of people who, while they should be actively dissuaded from any form of musical endeavour, are in fact promoted as towering musical geniuses.
But doesn’t my principle is to attempt to pinprick through the hot air and bumptiousness that has reached a soufflé-like peak in this blog post just give you hope for the future of mankind?
AD – I really disagree too. Trying really hard doesn’t exempt you from criticism, nor should it. I’ve been called a cunt often enough on my own site to know that. It’s not exactly fun, but if you’re going to put your work in the public domain then you have to accept that some people are going to think it’s rubbish and say so.
I wouldn’t slag off a small or emerging band for all the reasons she mentions, but given the status they’ve achieved this year, I hardly think that exemption applies to The xx.
And as for that last sentence, you know it actually reminds of something Dylan himself might have written, funnily enough. And given he wrote the post it’s either good satire or excellent irony, and I think I tend towards the former, myself.
Just read this today, awfa fun like. Bit harsh on Villagers, if he was from Edinburgh you’d be right up his arse.
Mumford & Sons away with you.
@ Al re: Villagers – hur hur hur, I was watching him and thinking of how much I’d like to have seen Withered Hand singing about blood stained sheets… as for Mumford and their posh Wurzels act, they frighten me as much as Camerborne.
Matthew, when the sense of national identity takes the form of extreme chippy-ness I think other areas of the UK can give Scotland a run for its money… at times it feels so desperate I almost feel sorry for the flag wavers: trying to forge an alliance with Scandinavia, supporting any football team apart from England in the world cup etc Ask a nationalist where the real border is between Scotland and England and then talk to them about the Reivers, about the Glencoe massacre… who did what to who… basically, once you get rid of the odd king or three and some fuss about different strands of christianity you’re left with another bit of the same island, full of assholes and saints, just like London.
Nationalist, patriots – can’t be assed with them, they get in the way…
Posh wurzels – that’s hilarious!
Nah, I know what you mean about the nationalism stuff. I studied in Glasgow where the anti-Englishness is generally much shriller (and more threatening) than Edinburgh, and it used to irritate the living shit out of me, in part, as you say, because it really was a bit pathetic at times. Especially as I am not particularly English.
Still, I find the whole Scottish national identity thing quite a bit less high-pitched in Edinburgh, which is maybe why I have more time for it these days.
“grow a fucking pair and fuck the fuck off” har har that made me laugh out loud, I should be prepared now for all your naughty words!
Easy tiger, I just dip into blogs and quite often I see folk mumping and moaning about daft things. Perhaps I am very much mistaken!
Fucking hell.
I stopped reading this thread right around the time of my last comment. It all went off after that didn’t it?
Anyway, in response to Sarah’s really impressive (genuinely – I’m not being sarcastic) contribution to the debate, The XX aren’t the wide-eyed ingenues you describe.
As Mrs. Toad pointed out, record companies have to pay handsomely to get their bands onto the Mercury shortlist in the first place. It’s not a random selection or a genuine cross-section of current British talent in any way.
And as for
Then there’s funding the whole damn thing, getting people to notice, driving to gigs in someone else’s van and trying to get enough for the rent all the while. Just who do they think they are?
…have a look at some of the other recent posts I’ve written and guess how I spent my weekend.
Additionally, as Matthew pointed out, The XX have reached the point where they’ve won a Mercury Music Award. They’re fair game for criticism. The pitiful ramblings of one temporary caretaker blogger on one small blog aren’t going to have any effect on their career.
Even if they are shit.
Al,
Bit harsh on Villagers, if he was from Edinburgh you’d be right up his arse.
Nope. I can confidently say if he was from Edinburgh he’d still be shit.
I just might not have said so on here while he was in the early stages of his career and playing the back rooms of the local pubs.
There are actually plenty of guitar-touting troubadours tramping their way around the pubs of Edinburgh, and I do think many of them are shit. I just don’t announce which ones they are on here.
There also a few that come to mind who are much, much better than Villagers; and, being as he’s the one who’s appearing on the telly on the Mercury Awards extravaganza, then – as per The XX in my previous comment – he’s fair game for criticism too.
Haha you say that but I still reckon if he came from Edinburgh you’d be lapping it up.
“I just might not have said so on here while he was in the early stages of his career and playing the back rooms of the local pubs.”
Why nae? As Matthew so eloquently put, “grow a fucking pair and fuck the fuck off”
– don’t you just love smileys they’re so fundamentally passive aggressive!
But seriously, I don’t think it’s a great idea to slag anything off for the sake of it and despite our difference of opinion regarding Villagers as I happen to think the kid is awright, I think it’s interesting that you have a set point where it becomes fair game to rip the shit. I think it’s fair game from the moment they get up on stage in a small local pub, why not? It’s the same with reviews and such, an artist shouldn’t send their EP or album out to anywhere if they just want showered with praise especially on a local level, it just dilutes the opinion of the editorial or blogger. If you get up on the stage then it’s fair game, if you make a CD for other people to hear then it’s fair game. And from the other perspective why bother at all if you’re going to say “the pitiful ramblings of one temporary caretaker blogger on one small blog aren’t going to have any effect on their career”, that’s just a cop-out, of course it won’t affect their career but just like the songwriter and his song, you didn’t write this article for no-one to read it or you wouldn’t have blogged it.
So your benchmark is when an artist has reached the status of being on the tele a couple of times late at night or had some degree of national press, that’s fine it’s all fair game but if your reasoning is that because of this you think they’ve ‘made it’ then that’s a bit mince in this age of the industry too. Ok the majority of the Mercury list was a bit gash and fully deserving of your ribbing, just thought your Villagers critique was ill-informed, and I couldnae resist especially after you admitted to not watching the whole show just popping it on to get a wee boner for Mumford and Sons. Geez peace!
Haha you say that but I still reckon if he came from Edinburgh you’d be lapping it up.
No, I find I’m sufficiently experienced in – erm – listening to music to be able to tell the difference between the music I enjoy and the music I don’t, regardless of where the performers are from.
“I just might not have said so on here while he was in the early stages of his career and playing the back rooms of the local pubs.”
Why nae? As Matthew so eloquently put, “grow a fucking pair and fuck the fuck off”
Matthew’s site, Matthew’s rules.
I do largely agree with him on that point though.
But seriously, I don’t think it’s a great idea to slag anything off for the sake of it…
…if you’re going to say “the pitiful ramblings of one temporary caretaker blogger on one small blog aren’t going to have any effect on their career”, that’s just a cop-out, of course it won’t affect their career but just like the songwriter and his song, you didn’t write this article for no-one to read it
You seem to contradict yourself here, but I’ll try my best to respond.
This is partly a music criticism site. Matthew has laid out his manifesto that small grassroots bands won’t be criticised negatively here, and that’s sensible enough. However, I think an act that receives the the exposure created by a Mercury prize nomination, appears on mainstream terrestrial TV, gets signed to a significant record label (still an indie – but one of the big ones), and gets the sort of press coverage he’s had, is no longer ‘grassroots’.
You don’t have to agree, but if I think an act at that stage of their career is shit, I’ll quite happily say so on here.
If they’re still in the back rooms of pubs and I think they’re shit, I simply won’t mention them on here.
Not until they either improve, or achieve that level of success and exposure.
So your benchmark is when an artist has reached the status of being on the tele a couple of times late at night or had some degree of national press that’s fine it’s all fair game
Correct.
just thought your Villagers critique was ill-informed
Why ill-informed? I pretty much stated I didn’t like his song, his performance or his haircut. I arrived at those opinions during the course of the song he performed on the TV show. I didn’t feel that further research would have made me change my mind about any of those things.
I couldnae resist especially after you admitted to not watching the whole show just popping it on to get a wee boner for Mumford and Sons
I just turned over the TV after something else finished. I had no idea which acts I was going to see or which acts I’d missed.
I’m not ashamed of being a fan of Mumford & Sons, I have been for quite some time now.
I think the current backlash they’re enduring is just down to a misguided preconceived notion of “cool”, combined with a hint of jealousy, and is actually a bit sad.
Not so long back, I got the chance to stand in a fucking living room with them while the four of them launched into those stratospheric harmonies of theirs, and it was fucking mind-blowing.
If experiences like that don’t give you a “wee boner”, then you’ve got no business sharing your point of view about music with anyone else, if you ask me.
Dylan.
Mornin’
Fair enough – good comeback min.
To quickly respond…
The bit where you said I’ve contradicted myself, what I was trying to say, is there’s nothing productive about slagging grassroots acts for the hell of it, breaking kids hearts and shattering dreams, BUT even at a grass-roots level I think it’s better to have an honest critique for better or worse – but then I appreciate this is a blog and blog’s are generally favourable as the writer wants to write about stuff they like rather than waste time dissin’ stuff they do not. I think Matthew is pretty good at judging this and in turn I return to see what he’s jabbering on about next. Did that make better sense?
I have no real beef about dissin’ Mercury nominees or whatever, and really the only comment I wanted to make was it sounded “a bit harsh” on Villagers. I don’t like the ‘I’m just a blogger on one small blog’ line tho but there you go.
What else…ill-informed. Ok you judged Villagers on an acoustic version of one song, and you didn’t like his hair, well the album’s worth a listen, and a set of clippers will sort the rest.
Can’t believe you showed me the rulebook tho! It was like a yellow card on Song, By Toad.
As for standing in a room with the Mumfords with a boner on – sorry sorry sorry, of course you’re entitled to be a fan, that’s fine, and as you’ve posted it on here people are entitled to retort. I’m sure standing next to the guys while they sang a song was a great experience for you. For sure if I was stood in a room while Frank Black belted out a tune or two I’d be weak at the knees.
I wasn’t aware of a Mumford & Sons backlash and I’m certainly not jealous, I’d love to click with Mumford but I just don’t engage with the songs, having listened to their record several times thinking – surely loving Johnny Flynn as I do I should at least appreciate this – but it just washes over me in a pleasantly competent manner, maybe one day…
Ok amigo.
John D – sorry, that wasn’t supposed to sound as harsh as it came out. I have no problem with people ‘robustly’ disagreeing with me on this site, I really don’t, but sometime I, er, robustly disagree back.
In general I don’t think this is that negative a site, honestly. I know I personally can come across as pompous or arrogant a lot of the time, but I don’t think a lot of people who really know me would think that, or at least I hope not. Either way though, people just aren’t always going to like you, so I don’t worry about it.
I tend to write about music that interests me, it’s that simple. Generally music interests me because I really like it. Sometimes, though, bands from my musical neck of the woods (in terms of sound, generally, not location) make it big enough that I become interested in them whether or not I like their music, and that’s when I’ll write about them anyway, good or bad.
I think Dylan is roughly following these general guidelines here, give or take a conspiracy theory or two.
Al – I think you have a point about people being from certain places and so on. I hate Coldplay, mostly just for being Coldplay really, but I do sometimes wonder if we’d all be so much more behind them if we’d watched them emerge from the local pub circuit in our own town, and I bet the answer is yes. For me, anyway, but then I can be a bit hypocritical that way.
Villagers actually put me in mind of one or two acts from Edinburgh that I don’t like.
And I’ve heard the album.
For sure if I was stood in a room while Frank Black belted out a tune or two I’d be weak at the knees.
Me too, brother.
Yeah, sorry, I was more trying to make a general point rather than specifically suggesting that Dylan would like Villagers if they were from Edinburgh.
I passed on bothering to write that review myself as well, actually.
I’ve not visited SBT for a week or so, and I’ve enjoyed all the debate above. My mischievous posting from the old review was only because, whilst I’m no more of a fan of the xx than Matthew (there was a Glasgow-based band in the ’80s called The Wake who must be sucking a thoughtful tooth at all this acclaim – its nothing new, folks) but I just felt that, whatever the opinion of any reviewer, it was clear that the xx were here to stay. Its been a source of constant disillusion over the last 12 months to see the number of times their music’s been crowbarred into adverts/promos (Election Night, anyone?), so there just seemed to be an inevitability that it would win.
For all its a bad album, I really enjoyed the mash-up “wait what’s The Notorious xx” did last year where their music was mixed up with the raps of Notorious B.I.G.
That at least sounds less boring than their music on its own!