stranger on the shore

i made it five days

2008-04-24T02:00:00.002+01:00

tom will be glad to know it's easier to quit smoking than mypace

mymonth without myspace

2008-04-18T02:29:00.003+01:00

that's right; in addition to my bottomlessly insightful rants about british bands (which i haven't really done in ages), i'm now going to waste space on myblog writing about what it's like to not be on myspace anymore. i'm quitting it for now (and facebook, too) in the hopes of reclaiming some of myvaluablesparetime and using it towards more productive ends. i sort of did this once before, when i quit the infamous and much-loved bowlie. it was like quitting heroin, but i left myhome away from home for a month that turned into almost a year and by the time i decided to go back, i didn't really give a shit anymore. i even tried the surrogate site anorak but i had changed too much to derive any pleasure from it, too. i don't really know what it's like to quit heroin, but i have decided to stop doing other drugs for awhile while i clear the (bad) internet out of myhead.

so i will now do something with mylife. besides writing a dissertation and teaching college. i figure that the people who know me will either call, text, hang out and drink with me or even read this. i liked myspace as a way to keep in touch with acquaintences, know and let it be known what others and i were doing on saturday, and even stalk people sometimes. i guess i just got tired of communicating with myfriends by tossing a bulletin out into the great wide vastness of nothing; i long for the old days when one had a party and actually had to call people and be able to hear immediately in their voice how they were a) in trouble with their girlfriend and staying in that night or b) stoked to come out and get loaded. myspace was making me friendship lazy. i'll miss shakefork records.

i'll let you know about the awesome short film i shoot or hit single i record. but first i need to clean myroom.

please give a rat's ass. when i am raking in two grand a month on google ads telling you about my clever dog/new baby/favorite baseball team someday, i will buy everyone who reads a drink.

the new indie colonialism

2008-04-15T01:51:00.002+01:00

Who would have thought that all this fuss is being made over Vampire Weekend's supposed (inept) thievery of African music styles? Read the Robert Christgau piece mentioned; it's far more enlightening than someone just bitching about how they know more about music than their competitors do as the Reader thing does. Thank god I will never earn a single penny from writing (ineptly) about music, as I will never feel the need to protect my fragile sense of music-knowledge self-esteem. About a month ago I was describing them to someone as "reggae or calypso or something; i don't really know." I've seen about a hundred more African films than Richard Roeper; but if he started writing about Tsosti (did he?) when it was clearly the only African film he'd ever seen, who fucking cares? Vampire Weekend rocked live and I didn't have to pay to get in. The moral of the story: don't wear a soccer jersey out when you don't even know what team it belongs to.

This isn't really a post about the Cribs

2008-03-27T21:10:00.005Z

But I did just see them two nights ago and they were great. Yes, they seemed very drunk and were incredibly sloppy, defying expectations driven by their seemingly life-or-death reliance on tightness on the records. Yes, they provided entertaining banter between songs and were charming. Yes, they rocked. What they also did was to insult the "UK music scene", a concept often bandied about on this page, while never really defining it beyond the Kooks. Well, granted they said quite a bit but I couldn't hear from where I was standing. None of it was complimentary. Anyway what they (Gary, actually) said was "We'd like to apologize for the UK music scene but we don't really feel like we're part of it." And then noted that that will likely be up on NME.com the next day. Someone please send NME this link; I need the traffic. Also, they automatically win awesomeness award of the year for covering "Bastards of Young." Anyone complaining about their sloppy live show should take that citation into consideration and be happy with whatever they get.

PS I wanted one of those awesome "Wakefield: home of the Cribs" tshirts but the person I was with got sick and I had to leave Double Door before I could buy one. If anyone has a spare medium...

It's Just What All Young Lovers Do

2008-03-07T01:10:00.004Z

I'm going to hate myself after this. I'm about to do something that I always thought was unfair, lazy or even downright rude. I'm going to review two different bands at the same time. I know. When I was growing up, trying to absorb as much information about rock as I possibly could, I read music mags a lot. And when I was 12 and living in the suburbs with the local Jewel my only source of culture (this was way before the internet thing), that meant Spin. Rolling Stone seemed like it was all about classic rock, and at the time, I associated it with the Rolling Stones, who in my non-conformist little pea-brain I considered to be the lamest pile of archaic musical bullshit the world had produced up until 1982. As if they didn't look old enough, people at my school that wore those big ugly red lips t-shirts smoked pot. At the time, one of the few things I thought was lamer than the Rolling Stones was pot.

So I remember buying the 'punk' issue of Spin and based on that it seemed to be a pretty decent collection of writings about rock. I continued reading in subsequent months. It remained good; I thought that Spin represented the apex of music journalism and embodied all the coolest shit in the world. I know. Remember, I also was 12 and thought pot was lame. The one thing, though, that bugged me about Spin's journalistic policies was that sometimes a reviewer would write about two different records in the same review. Why? I thought. Doesn't each of those records deserve its own individual assessment? Would that writer like it if some guitarist reviewed Spin and Rolling Stone together and said something like "These two mags both have a lot of influences in common and end up sounding pretty much the same. No need to buy both if you just want your basic dose of rock and no real basis to choose; one's about as good as the other." Never mind that that is, of course, exactly the truth.

What I didn't realize at the 12-year-old-hated-pot-smoking time was that there might be a fairly decent reason for this. I guess I didn't understand the concept of genre or affinity of any sort. I thought it was just an easy way to dismiss two bands in one column. I'm not sure that it ever made sense to me until a few months ago. I have been wanting to write about The Maccabees and Good Shoes, two very good quirky pop bands from the south of England that have been getting some positive reviews in music magazines lately. I just couldn't finally decide on which one, primarily because they sound fairly similar and are about equal in quality in my mind. Oh.

I don't remember how I first heard the Maccabees, but they made it onto my constant playlist immediately. Forget that their debut EP sucked a horse's scrotum (do I really need to write stuff like that to make this more interesting of a read?). 2004's 'You Make Noise, I Make Sandwiches' was sloppy and boring. Sorry, guys; I can say that because your more recent stuff is mind-alteringly good. All the 7"s and finally the Colour It In LP from last year (largely collecting the 7" songs, sadly) were the most frequently played songs on my ipod in 2007. No joke. So...touchstones...Gang of Four, early Cure and Echo & the Bunnymen (there I go lumping again), Stiff Little Fingers, all filtered through the better bits of Pulp. The singer borders on glossolalia at times and I actually mean that in a good way. It adds a kind of weird emotional energy to the lyrics. This shit is clever and catchy as hell. Going for the obvious melody is easily one of my main character flaws, but this time it's justified. These tunes are eminently singable but ffs I haven't gotten them out of my head and it's been over a year. It's upbeat, danceable (fuck if i hit the caps lock key one more time I'm gonna give up) and features smart lyrics. Relentless, popping bass and a nice interplay between two jangly (not wimpy) guitars. Thank god most of the world has no taste or this, my favorite little band, would be playing football stadiums all over North America.

Good Shoes, then, is more of the same. And that's not an insult by any means. If you find something as awesome as this, you piss your pants for joy when you find another version that's just different enough to meld familiarity and novelty togetherI understand genre now. Maybe more Cure and definitely less SLF, Good Shoes' songs are a little catchier (take that as you will), but if you muted the vocals I doubt I would know the difference. The guitar interplay is more dynamic, but I fancy the bass-playing a bit less. The singer has an angelic (I'm not kidding) animated voice that I prefer just a tad over Orlando from the Maccabees' voice, but not by damn much. The only drawback? The lyrics are literally some of the dumbest pieces of crap I've ever encountered in my long music-listening career. He keeps talking about how arrogant he is, every song is about a girl he sort of likes, lines and verses get repeated over and over, etc. It borders on mindless. But you know, it's just like that famous quote about Nicholas Ray's 'Party Girl': Who cares? I don't; it almost makes it more enjoyable. The beauty of his voice as an instrument goes perfectly with the consummate kinetic pop songs behind it. This shit rocks and refuses to leave my head just as adamantly. Listen to "Small Town Girl" and tell me you think differently. Incidentally, it's a Blondie rip-off. Uh, who cares?

These bands are both young, with just one LP each. Things get a little loose at times. However, I predict you will soon see them at a football stadium in North America. Opening for Arctic Monkeys or the Kaiser Chiefs. And blowing them the fuck off the stage.

Good Shoes official website

The Maccabees official website

do you like rock music?

2008-02-08T00:35:00.000Z

i guess this question is intended to herald a concept album of sorts (stylistically maybe), because there's no possible way that british sea power coincidentally began to rock right at the moment they decided to give their new record an analogous title. after having treated this band as a mildly pleasurable curiosity for the past few years, i have to admit that they have transcended their mediocrity and finally risen to the status of kickass-ness.

don't get me wrong. i never disliked british sea power; they just never grabbed my attention enough to make it into regular airplay. i did make the single "it ended on an oily stage" a standard of the short-lived 1774 brit-themed dance parties, but the rest of their 2005 album "open season" was just decent, with a couple of stand-outs sprinkled in. their supposedly epic, sprawling mini-arena rock just didn't have enough balls for me somehow.

maybe the title of their new record was what made me give it a try. if they intended this to be the effect, then they will succeed wildly. their 'new' sound isn't that much different from their old sound. there are still the soaring melodies, the enigmatic lyrics, the feeling that this is what echo and the bunnymen might have sounded like if they had been more ambitious. speaking of musical touchstones, i think it's fair to say that bsp has noted the success of the arcade fire formula--and i make that comparison loosely, as i don't even like that band much--the rhythms of "no lucifer" and the choral backings on "waving flags" bear a passing resemblance to that canadian group.

having said that, i want to emphasize that bsp rocks way harder. songs like "lights out for darker skies" sounds like mission of burma covering "oily stage" and "down on the ground" just plain old beats your ass. "do you like rock music?" is definitely the place for the uninitiated to start.

there is still the same cuteness and wimpiness (don't, god forbid call anything english "quaint" in the presence of an englishman) that they displayed on their previous records, but it seems as if they realized they were not going to truly be able to take over the world until they turned their guitars way up, got back to someone's roots and started being less thought-provoking and more awesome. best album so far this year (ok, i realize we're only one month in...it's still incredible).

they have a website here

myspace page with songs at this location

for those of you in chicago, they are playing the empty bottle on march 24. supposedly they have a giant bear as part of their live show. holy shit.

bubblegum, punk pop, disco, don't stop!

2008-01-16T16:53:00.001Z

if you know where that lyric is from, you must have already met helen love. it's a good encapsulation of the various sounds that go into the mix, but--as with any good, long-lasting band--there's more...

take the melodies and themes of the ramones, cheezy keyboards, fuzzbox guitars, hand claps, sometimes pounding 4/4 drum machines and an incredibly clever welsh girl with a beautifully melodious voice and you have the best punk pop band of the 90s and 00s. they've been around for over 15 years, but have only had limited success in the uk, and almost none here in the us. this is wrong.

having cranked out what seems like thousands of singles and compilations of those singles (ok, not really), helen love offers a non-stop assault of (in her own words) "uptempo, toe-tapping, happy songs," coming off as the disco/new wave/punk/60s bubblegum and girl group hybrid band that we should have heard in the early 80s but didn't simply because no one was smart enough back then to figure out this perfect pop recipe.

if you like songs about riding roller coasters, kung fu, dancing, the ramones, smart/tough/slightly feminist girls, football (soccer for you americans) and fun in general, this is the band you've been waiting for but missed out on for 15 years. i haven't heard the new album yet aside from a couple of singles, but have no doubt it will join the rest of their full-lengths in my top 30 all-time records. no kidding. having only heard them when i first lived in the uk 3 years ago, helen love now has a place in my most-loved bands. perfect.

where to start: i recommend either 'radio hits 3' or 'love and glitter, hot days and muzik' (significant track overlap between both)...the earlier radio hits complilations, while good or great, are not as well-produced and musically sophisticated (more in terms of arrangement than song-writing)...once you've started with their best, you'll want more and won't be disappointed at all by their earlier efforts.

find out more at their website here

they're on myspace too of course

wanna come back to my room and listen to some belle & sebastian?

2008-01-11T20:50:00.000Z

that has my vote for greatest record title of the 21st century. if you actually like belle and sebastian (and i do), it's no guarantee you'll like the brilliant band that came up with the title: this town needs guns. but you might. you should. i know i fucking can't stop listening to them. every day. well, almost.

coming off as a revival of early to mid 90s post-rock/emo (true emo, not the shit that takes that label nowadays), this town needs guns has wildly succeeded in translating one of america's indigenous genres back to itself. it's not just imitation though; they actually improve on the traditional recipe.

i used to love this stuff back when i was in college. cap'n jazz, boys life, seam, braid and rodan were some of my favorite bands for many years. i wasn't much of an ebullition records fan; moreso into crank, jade tree and touch & go, with an eternal respect for the influence of second stage dischord bands. if you loved those labels, and the bands associated with them, you should definitely start listening to this town needs guns right away. i don't know why they're not bigger--in the uk and over here. as yoda said, "they will be. they will be."

expect clean AND distorted guitars, quiet AND loud passages. simplicity AND complexity. it's as if victor villareal grew up in aylesbury instead of buffalo grove. and they're not just skillful (and maybe classically trained?) musicians; the singer can write good lyrics and sing and they play with the requisite amount of passion to enable their energy to exceed their technical prowess. they rule. i think they might be my favorite new band of 2007.

get into them at the following locations near you:

-this town needs guns website
-this town needs guns myspace
-i first heard about them at drowned in sound, the uk's answer to pitchfork
-watch/listen to their videos

for it is in london that our scene lies

2008-01-11T20:21:00.000Z

this blog is intended to correct a severe injustice. after the british invasions of the 60s, 80s and 90s, it seems as if no one in the united states cares about music from across the pond anymore. sure, there are many mainstream english, scottish and welsh artists that make it big in america, but they're mostly crap. spice girls. elton john. james blunt.

sure there are occasional english, scottish and welsh bands that are actually awesome and make it (relatively) big over here--mogwai is the obvious example--but we yanks rarely get to hear the lesser known but excellent bands that come from the uk. and when we do get the chance, we are often so hung up on cultural biases and genre straightjackets that we pay them little attention. we are much the poorer with such an attitude.

it took me, a fairly broad-minded music fan, a year of living in the united kingdom to discover my own ignorance concerning close to three thousand awesome bands that i had never heard of or had simply ignored. i'm not trying to claim to be an ultimate authority on british music, but i do know a little. and anyways, i'd like to have this space become a place where people can exchange information and share the bands they love with people who also love them but just haven't heard them yet. (yeah, all three people that read this: jen, scottish steph and maybe brandon). if you are reading this and you share an interest in british music, write me and tell me about awesome bands that i don't know about.

i intend to write about a different english or scottish band (maybe even welsh or northern irish) once a month. they might be fairly new and they might be dead. i think we americans have been sticking our noses in the air towards most of the musical output of country whose rich culture rivals (or even exceeds) our own. this needs to be corrected; it's only just.

(bonus points for anyone who can identify where the title phrase comes from...hint: it immediately follows one of the most famous opening lines in the history of opening lines. what does 'bonus points' mean? i don't know; i'll send you something stupid in the mail or something).