Published: March 31, 2005
In the late 1990's, Moby wasn't yet an ideology or a brand name or even a pop star.
He was just a soft-spoken music geek, and he seemed likely to spend his career enjoying the kind of underground fame that might ordinarily attach to a punk rocker turned electronica producer turned eclecticist. But then came "Play," in 1999, which laid scratchy old gospel and blues samples over spotless new house music; nearly every track was soothing, sort of melancholy, unexpectedly hummable. And soon Moby wasn't just a musicmaker - he was a paradigm-shifter. Advertisement
"Play" was an unexpected commercial success, even though the guy behind it had neither a famous face nor a famous voice nor even, at first, a famous song. Moby has been lodged in the celebrity constellation ever since. His albums don't sneak into record shops anymore, they arrive - or they are supposed to. This week, his new double CD, "Hotel" (V2), makes its disappointing debut at No. 28 on the Billboard album charts.
How did "Play" make Moby a star in the first place? As most articles about "Play" mentioned, Moby marketed his album by licensing the tracks to commercials and soundtracks; relying on the power of corporate synergy, he had made an end run around the pop establishment.
His wasn't just a success story, then, it was a new kind of success story. Even better (according to the strange rules that governed 1999), it was a success story involving the words "geek" and "synergy." Suddenly, regular pop stars seemed old-fashioned: a bunch of oversized personalities, jockeying for space on radio stations that broadcast their songs using an antiquated system of frequency modulation. By contrast, Moby was a scientist, a musical technician who listened to everything and distilled what he heard into some state-of-the-art pop essence.
"I want to have the broadest possible sonic palette to draw on when I'm composing music," he told Gerald Marzorati of The New York Times Magazine, adding that he'd been listening to "pop records, dance records, classical records." And you could tell he felt a bit sorry for those sad 20th-century types who confined themselves to a single genre. He was a pop star for a world too sophisticated to believe in pop stars - a post-pop-star, perhaps.
"The end of history will be a very sad time," the political theorist Francis Fukuyama wrote in 1989, anticipating, after a fashion, Moby's world. Mr. Fukuyama imagined a future defined by "economic calculation, the endless solving of technical problems, environmental concerns, and the satisfaction of sophisticated consumer demands." The appeal of Moby was that he would give us a way to enjoy this future; he would satisfy our "sophisticated consumer demands" through superior engineering.
In 2002, having picked up a few million new fans, Moby got a chance to put this theory into practice with "18," and it was immediately clear that something had gone wrong. In the liner notes, he opined, "One problem in writing an essay for this record is that the circumstances of the world are in such a state of flux," and many of the songs were just as banal (and, somehow, as smug) as this bit of boilerplate.
Too sophisticated to believe in musical genres, Moby caricatured them instead. "We Are All Made of Stars" had some vaguely new-wavey guitar, a gentle backbeat and lyrics that aped the spaced-out platitudes of a bad David Bowie song: "People they come together/People they fall apart/Nothing can stop us now/'Cause we are all made of stars." From the token hip-hop track ("Jam for the Ladies," which sounded a lot like the Chemical Brothers) to the "Play"-ish "Sunday (the Day Before My Birthday)" - which sounds less appealing, not more, when you learn that Moby was born on Sept. 11 - the album showed the limits of pop as science.
Last year, Moby followed "18" with a stopgap techno album, "Baby Monkey" (credited to his alter ego, Voodoo Child), which was meant as a lark but sounded like an insult. He seemed to think he was a smart producer dabbling in a dumb genre he had long since outgrown (he called the album "very simple, melodic, electronic, dance music"), although the CD swiftly disproved the notion that techno was easy.
And now comes "Hotel," packaged as a two-disc set: the album on one disc, and a series of "ambient" remixes on a second. Again, there are liner notes to guide us through the music. "I don't feel like making music that is airless and lifeless because I also really like people and the messy miasma of the human condition and I want to make messy, human records that are open and emotional," he writes, as if this truism unlocked a secret to music making.
More than ever, the focus here is on Moby as a singer and songwriter, which is strange, because he is not very good at either job. In his effort to leave generic constraints behind, he has drifted toward some rather neutral variant of alternative-rock. In the lyrics, as in the liner notes, he seems to mistake obviousness for truth: the lead single is a mind-numbing song called, "Beautiful," where the romantic dialogue consists largely of couplets like, "I love you baby/I love you now/I love you baby/I love you now."
This music isn't just dull, though. Like much of what Moby has produced since "Play," it's condescending, too. Much of it sounds like the work of a producer who thinks pop music is supposed to be kind of idiotic, and who thinks pop audiences should be glad that he deigns to give us what we want. Do we like sex? O.K., here's "I Like It," four singularly unpleasant minutes of heavy breathing. Do we like songs about how the world is happy and sad and good and bad? O.K., here's "Slipping Away," with a wispy beat and Moby crooning, "Open to everything, happy and sad/Seeing the good when it's all going . . ." - you can finish the couplets yourself. And, knowing that we like familiarity, Moby has his collaborator, Laura Dawn, sing a slowed-down version of the New Order hit "Temptation."
Maybe this isn't really Moby's fault so much as it is ours. Like so many other things in the late 1990's, his new paradigm seemed like a great idea: car commercials were going to be the new pop songs and laptop composers were going to be the new pop stars. But it turns out that we really do like those oversized personalities who clog the radio stations - some of whom even double as superior engineers.
Mr. Fukuyama, in his famous obituary, might have written (but didn't quite, of course) that "boredom at the end of music will serve to get music started once again." That's an appealing idea, but it's also appealing to know, listening to "Hotel," that it won't be necessary. The end of music seems to have ended itself.
― scott seward (scott seward), Thursday, 31 March 2005 14:40 (nineteen years ago) link
Hahahahaha!
― scott seward (scott seward), Thursday, 31 March 2005 14:41 (nineteen years ago) link
ouch!
― scott seward (scott seward), Thursday, 31 March 2005 14:42 (nineteen years ago) link
PWND!
Damn!
― scott seward (scott seward), Thursday, 31 March 2005 14:43 (nineteen years ago) link
― Sven Basted (blueski), Thursday, 31 March 2005 14:49 (nineteen years ago) link
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 31 March 2005 14:50 (nineteen years ago) link
― mark grout (mark grout), Thursday, 31 March 2005 14:51 (nineteen years ago) link
― scott seward (scott seward), Thursday, 31 March 2005 14:54 (nineteen years ago) link
― mike h. (mike h.), Thursday, 31 March 2005 15:08 (nineteen years ago) link
― pdf (Phil Freeman), Thursday, 31 March 2005 15:10 (nineteen years ago) link
― Drew Daniel (Drew Daniel), Thursday, 31 March 2005 15:24 (nineteen years ago) link
― scott seward (scott seward), Thursday, 31 March 2005 15:42 (nineteen years ago) link
Yes, Moby totally sucks and Fukuyama's rhetoric totally sucks and yay kelefa for nailing those two targets . . . but neither of those things should lead to the overcompensating, equally triumphalist conclusion "hurray, now we cultural gatekeepers can make sure that all pop stars have outsize personalities again- no more of these evil people who just make music (probably with laptops) but who try to opt out of having a Big Pop Star Look". I am sorry but that is an ultimately conservative, "hurray for Business As Usual!" notion that is also lame. Moby's way of doing an end run around radio (loads of ads) is barfy and creeepy, there's no doubt about that. But thinking that radio is a trustworthy and democratic means by which pop music gets selected meritocratically (ie. that it really reflects 'what the public enjoys' ) is, in the age of Clear Channel and rampant payola, highly questionable.
― Drew Daniel (Drew Daniel), Thursday, 31 March 2005 15:50 (nineteen years ago) link
― Sven Basted (blueski), Thursday, 31 March 2005 15:51 (nineteen years ago) link
― scott seward (scott seward), Thursday, 31 March 2005 16:06 (nineteen years ago) link
Yeah, the tone of that over the last few years in particular in various corners has been wearying. Throwing the baby out with the bathwater in saying all chart music sucks is ridiculous, but similarly the encomiums of "Gee top 40's the most democratic and truly best thing around for reflecting the popular mood" = haha, you make me laugh.
Tim, unsurprisingly, summed up the best attitude when he noted that one can like something that's in the charts rather than liking something *because* it's in the charts.
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 31 March 2005 16:09 (nineteen years ago) link
― mike h. (mike h.), Thursday, 31 March 2005 16:15 (nineteen years ago) link
― Pashmina (Pashmina), Thursday, 31 March 2005 16:18 (nineteen years ago) link
Unsubstantiated generalizations give me gas. Also: meet the new old boss; he wears glasses, talks a lot, and is very "sensitive" and "meaningful", but is really no more than a lateral move from the supersized teenypoppers (unless one can spin Play as the barnstormer that allowed producer-led pop polyglotism to become the Billboard lingua franca) (& even then, once you go pop, you are pop; welcome to the machine, here's your Grammy).
[xpost w/ what Mike H said]
Otherwise, what Scott sez. Except I love everyone. Scott, too! (Even though the thread title's too short.)
― David R. (popshots75`), Thursday, 31 March 2005 16:21 (nineteen years ago) link
― scott seward (scott seward), Thursday, 31 March 2005 16:24 (nineteen years ago) link
― pdf (Phil Freeman), Thursday, 31 March 2005 16:29 (nineteen years ago) link
that said, mileage may vary
― Drew Daniel (Drew Daniel), Thursday, 31 March 2005 16:38 (nineteen years ago) link
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 31 March 2005 16:39 (nineteen years ago) link
― scott seward (scott seward), Thursday, 31 March 2005 16:41 (nineteen years ago) link
― kyle (akmonday), Thursday, 31 March 2005 16:45 (nineteen years ago) link
― What we want? Sex with T.V. stars! What you want? Ian Riese-Moraine! (Eastern Ma, Thursday, 31 March 2005 16:47 (nineteen years ago) link
ahahahahaha!
god that cover was dreadful....also: His fucking sludgy shitty Joy Division cover that mars the otherwise perfect 24 Hour Party People soundtrack....that pissed me off just cuz that soundtrack is so fucking great with that one exception....it's like he took a dump on the floor in the middle of the Louvre or something.
― M@tt He1geson (Matt Helgeson), Thursday, 31 March 2005 17:22 (nineteen years ago) link
― Je4nne ƒury (Jeanne Fury), Thursday, 31 March 2005 17:29 (nineteen years ago) link
― Lord Custos Omicron (Lord Custos Omicron), Thursday, 31 March 2005 18:12 (nineteen years ago) link
― The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 31 March 2005 18:14 (nineteen years ago) link
― Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Thursday, 31 March 2005 18:57 (nineteen years ago) link
― ffirehorse (firehorse), Thursday, 31 March 2005 23:14 (nineteen years ago) link
― ffirehorse (firehorse), Thursday, 31 March 2005 23:17 (nineteen years ago) link
― ffirehorse (firehorse), Thursday, 31 March 2005 23:18 (nineteen years ago) link
― Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Friday, 1 April 2005 00:44 (nineteen years ago) link
Advertisement
I know that "Advertisement" isn't part of the article, but it sure looks like it should be.
― Stupornaut (natepatrin), Friday, 1 April 2005 01:22 (nineteen years ago) link
― Hurting (Hurting), Friday, 1 April 2005 01:33 (nineteen years ago) link
― Hurting (Hurting), Friday, 1 April 2005 12:32 (nineteen years ago) link
My memory is that it was a minor hit in the UK, ie reaching no. 20 or something like that.
― Jonathan Z. (Joanthan Z.), Friday, 1 April 2005 12:46 (nineteen years ago) link
― m coleman (lovebug starski), Friday, 1 April 2005 12:48 (nineteen years ago) link
Wait, "Temptation" or "Blue Monday"?
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 1 April 2005 12:49 (nineteen years ago) link
― m coleman (lovebug starski), Friday, 1 April 2005 12:54 (nineteen years ago) link
Because it's wrong? Moby's released at least three interesting albums.
― The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 1 April 2005 13:47 (nineteen years ago) link
― Tantrum The Cat (Tantrum The Cat), Friday, 1 April 2005 14:37 (nineteen years ago) link
― Atnevon (Atnevon), Friday, 1 April 2005 19:40 (nineteen years ago) link
-- The Ghost of Dan Perry
That's beside the point. I don't even like Moby. But Sanneh obviously likes Play, and doesn't like what came after. Alls I'm sayin' is that it's a stretch to go from that to sweeping statements about traditional vs. non-traditional music celebs.
― Hurting (Hurting), Friday, 1 April 2005 21:22 (nineteen years ago) link
A) Play's always struck me as a perfectly good pop record that kind of commodified My Life In the Bush of Ghosts' innovations 18 years after the fact. And that's fine, pleasing even, if not exactly revolutionary.
B) It's hardly surprising that his pop music has gone into the shitter — until Play, the guy was never much of a pop artist anyway.
C) I haven't paid close enough attention to know whether he was making some statement or not, but the "end run" and the licensing blitz came off more crafty than crass or anything. Those who found it really appalling always seem to be under the impression pop music still has some integrity left. Please tell me if I'm wrong here...
― Naive Teen Idol (Naive Teen Idol), Saturday, 2 April 2005 05:51 (nineteen years ago) link
― alex in montreal (alex in montreal), Wednesday, 6 April 2005 12:07 (nineteen years ago) link
― strng hlkngtn, Wednesday, 6 April 2005 12:56 (nineteen years ago) link
― Lethal Dizzle (djdee2005), Wednesday, 6 April 2005 13:51 (nineteen years ago) link
that said, I'm disappointed that he didn't dedicate a blog entry to the review.
― Al (sitcom), Wednesday, 6 April 2005 14:00 (nineteen years ago) link
I..... don't know what to say about this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VASywEuqFd8
― illegal economic migration (Tracer Hand), Wednesday, 19 October 2016 06:54 (seven years ago) link
a late entry for this thread ?
S/D: Mid-to-late-'90s alt-rock-electronic-ish stuff that was probably on a soundtrack somewhere and is now severely out of taste but that I love
― mark e, Wednesday, 19 October 2016 08:44 (seven years ago) link
He was just a soft-spoken music geek, and he seemed likely to spend his career enjoying the kind of underground fame that might ordinarily attach to a punk rocker turned electronica producer turned eclecticist.
Yes, the "underground fame" of having at least 6 top 40 hits (Go, Hymn, Move, Feeling So Real, Everytime You Touch Me, his version of the James Bond theme) and, unlike almost every other electronic music producer of that era, having his face on the cover of his every album and appearing in all his music videos.
But I guess you aren't really famous unless you're famous in the USA?
― Tuomas, Wednesday, 19 October 2016 11:59 (seven years ago) link
http://www.gstatic.com/tv/thumb/dvdboxart/22544/p22544_d_v8_aa.jpg
― Allen (etaeoe), Wednesday, 19 October 2016 12:30 (seven years ago) link
And pre-Play Moby ruled
― Allen (etaeoe), Wednesday, 19 October 2016 12:31 (seven years ago) link
having his face on the cover of his every album
ha ha :D
― Shakey δσς (sic), Wednesday, 19 October 2016 12:32 (seven years ago) link
these new moby songs are extremely confusing
― who is extremely unqualified to review this pop album (BradNelson), Thursday, 20 October 2016 00:00 (seven years ago) link
nine inch moby
rip moby https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WywzWjZATKA
― esempiu (crüt), Thursday, 20 October 2016 00:03 (seven years ago) link
most of moby's music is not very good and much of it is bad but I will stan for everything is wrong forever and bc of that album and moby's general way of being I will always kind of like him
― marcos, Thursday, 20 October 2016 00:15 (seven years ago) link
"Everything Is Wrong" was good, yeah, iirc, but "God Moves Over the Face of the Water">>whatever else is on that record.
His memoir is supposed to be pretty good.
― Josh in Chicago, Thursday, 20 October 2016 00:31 (seven years ago) link
this was a really good read (account of the Aphex Twin/Orbital/Moby U.S. tour from the guy hired to be Moby's fake keyboard player):
http://inthemix.junkee.com/my-1993-rave-adventure-with-moby/19934http://inthemix.junkee.com/how-i-survived-americas-first-ever-rave-tour/20112
and this is a very entertaining thing based around the guy who lent Moby those Alan Lomax cds: https://gimletmedia.com/episode/2-gregor/
― sam jax sax jam (Jordan), Thursday, 20 October 2016 15:26 (seven years ago) link
i totally understand the hate moby incites, however, i cannot help it, i have a lot of time for moby.whenever i see him interviewed he seems like a really decent chap that i would love to have a few drinks with.oh, and despite the overuse of certain presets, he has tunes.simple as that.re this new album : i will totally buy it when fopp have it for a fiver.
― mark e, Thursday, 20 October 2016 20:13 (seven years ago) link