Gina Arnold on Liz Phair

True, Liz Phair's first single, "Why Can't I," is as unstoppably catchy as, yes, one of Avril Lavigne's horrid offerings, but wouldn't you rather hear someone with authentic musical context and actual songwriting talent sing a song like that, rather than an eighteen-year-old phony punk rocker?

also,

If Liz Phair can still shock and appall people, in what way is she selling out?

who the fuck is still shocked & appalled by Liz Phair? and how does this concept prohibit her selling out?

"oooh! my parents are scared of her filthy language and base pandering to my 16 year old sexual desires! she MUST still have cred!"

where's Gina Arnold finding these new issues of Forced Exposure?

a critic criticizing other critics for being critical of a critical darling. it's a beautiful thing.

Liz Phair has presented the world with a conundrum: a commercial record by an edgy artist. As such, it has created the greatest example of raging idiocy in rock criticism since the mainstream press decried Elvis Presley for wiggling his hips. Perhaps this was inevitable since, like Presley before her, Phair is a breaker of gender stereotypes -- from the outset she has written great, true songs about what assholes guys are, and how it feels to be female.

is so monumentally stupid, puffed up, and full of uh gross exxxagerations (what my mom would call "fibs") that i don't even know where to begin.

Similarly, maybe, an abandonment of the sonic *signifiers* of indie while still not producing "bad" songs challenges the indie ethos to the core, promises the overturn of Albini and The Velvets and Theee Pixees by THEEE MATRYX.

1) The world in small or large terms was NOT panting with anticipation for a new Liz Phair album, from what it seems.

2) The announcement of a new album that was more overtly pop-friendly caused a slew of biases to (re)emerge that had nothing to do with the album -- to force a comparison, it was a case where a specific event resulted in axes being reground as much as they were on the social and political front after 9/11.

Add to that the fact that Arnold is now a Hilburn for the alt set and frankly who gives a flying one.

Wow! Okay, on second thought, I DON'T agree with it anymore. (In fact, Gina Arnold proclaiming "we won" after 1991, the year Nirvana got famous, was pretty ragingly idiotic in its own rock-crit right.)

>>Which published criticisms in particular struck you that way, chuck?"

Start with the New York Times one, then work your way down. (Never read the Pitchfork one - they gave it, like, a 0.0, right? Idiots.)

*well OK Sigue Sigue Sputnik.

"Why Can't I" is a good song anyway, but not as good as "Complicated" or "Sk8er Boi" or "I'm With You".

All the rest of the "indie" comments seemed to be sour grapes from Liz and people who liked the album, accusing its detractors of clinging to "indie" when they weren't at all.

but this:

Perhaps this was inevitable since, like Presley before her, Phair is a breaker of gender stereotypes -- from the outset she has written great, true songs about what assholes guys are, and how it feels to be female.

my mom has spent a lot of time telling me what assholes guys are, too, lately, on the eve of her pending divorce. but, um, doesn't that just sound like the nbc must-see-TV line-up to anyone else?

I'm surprised you found the NY Times article to be "ageist"; I remember it being thoughtful, and very specifically about one person's relationship to specific aspects of Liz Phair's music.

From the Onion AV Club's review (which I remembered mentioning this same song, and specifically discussing others): It's hard to sound condescending singing to a child, but Phair pulls it off with "Little Digger." The lover-as-underwear metaphor of "Favorite" wouldn't work even with a better tune, and the semen-as-skin-conditioner ode "H.W.C." seems thrown in out of some vestigial desire to shock.

Is the Onion saying any of what Arnold says "the critics" are saying? Is it saying that "the life experiences of women in their thirties (and forties and fifties and so on) have no place in pop music"? Or is it just saying that the songs don't work? Which is what I remember most of the negative reviews saying.

The ageist stuff was, for instance, when the writer was comparing Liz to a mid-life-crisising guy buying a sports car (or something like that -- don't have the review in front of me) as if it's only okay (or daring, or whatever) for REALLY YOUNG women singers to have sex lives, or sing about them. The rest of the article struck me as even-more-deluded-than-usual seventh-grade* whining-about-selling-out-and-about-how-much-more-innovative-indie-rock-is-than-pop-music cliche's. One of the dumbest pieces of music criticism I've read this year if not ever (though the Northern State thing in Pitchfork comes close).

* -- nothing against seventh graders; when seventh graders make these kinds of comments, it might actually BE interestesting or daring. I'm assuming, maybe wrongly, that the writer was NOT a seventh grader.

http://www.theonionavclub.com/review.php?review_id=6598

And the sports car thing... I dunno, I'd still need to see actual passages of reviews that criticized the idea of older women having a sex life. I don't know if it was knocking the idea of older women having sexuality/being sexy/presenting their sexuality how they want to, or if it was expressing embarrassment over the way Liz was doing it.

the thing that i was most surprised about in the times article was that the editor would think that "what indie rock means to me" was worth devoting column-space to, given their basic readership.

Keller is not Raines redux. But he, too, will need to be cognizant of the 18-to-34 demographic that advertisers love so dearly. Just listen to what Raines said on The Charlie Rose Show about his talks with publisher Pinch Sulzberger. Does anyone really think they hadn’t discussed those NYT statistics showing that 80 million people in this country have “the intellectual appetite for a paper like The New York Times,” yet it only has a circulation of 1.2 million daily? That the two hadn’t believed in the need to “change the paper, not in its standards, not in its principles, but in the breadth of its intellectual interests and in its vitality in graphics, in the way it’s written, in the way stories are selected so that you get the other 78 million.”

http://www.laweekly.com/ink/03/36/deadline-finke.php

Then why doesn't everyone listen to a GOOD one? Like Kristen Hersh's Grotto or the spectacular Throwing Muses reunion (that's gotten far less press than Phair's album - undeservedly), or Kay Hanley, or Tanya Donelly?

which in a sense is me agreeing with ned. phair + matrix = crisisininfiniteindieworlds, regardless of quality (which IS good just rubbing salt in wounds hahahahaha)

your party line is boring and does nothing to explain why the music is "bad."

It's also pretty accurate, jess.

This would never happen to a man. [Cough] Geldof [Cough].

People seemed to dig seediness when it came from Marianne Faithfull. Or when it's Kim Cattrall (on TV).

(not YOU "YOU" chris, but y'know)

If the lines quoted above are typical, the Onion reviewer isn't saying much of anything, at all. It reads like your typically colorless dime-a-dozen book-report-style Rock Critic 101 Negative Review. (Though again, maybe you just quoted the lamest lines; I have no idea. If they *are* typical, the writer should perhaps consider investing in a personality, or in another line of work.) (And I'm not just saying that because those are three of the album's best songs.)

Yeah - we're all forgetting that Phair has suffered backlash since DAY ONE, since the Chicago Reader started hyping her before she'd played a single gig. "Dude, she hasn't paid her dues! So what if it's a great album, she should be playing opening Monday slots at the Lounge Ax for three years before I even give her the time of day!" Said backlash has continued unabatingly through all of her albums up to this one. (Whip-smart and the good half of Whitechocolatespaceegg have never gotten their fair due.)

The difference here is that she aimed to get a national hit - so now the ENTIRE COUNTRY is slamming her instead of a bunch of indie rockers and Chicagoans. Makes sense to me.

I disagree. "Writing proper pop songs" is most definitely a criticism. The best part about phair's early stuff was the kind-of-off structure and melody (cf. "Stratford-on-Guy"). There's nothing half as interesting-sounding as that song on "Liz Phair" (or "Whitechocolatespaceegg" for that matter). But hey, who am I, anyway? I don't like Avril at all (the big choruses drive me nuts)!

That's a good point, I like that analysis. And I second that Phair's appeal wasn't in writing straightforward pop songs.

It would if the ENTIRE COUNTRY was slamming her. Instead, it is only a small cadre of music critics.

Very interesting to see what the reviewers make of Bowie's matrix collabs when they surface.

btw I am a rockist.

you're overreading the point, but jess (no offense) I really hate yr musical taste! You hate virtually everything I like!

I would be so curious to know how the average music consumer (i.e. not an ILM reader) perceived this record & the coverage of it. Phair had a HALF PAGE FEATURE IN TIME MAGAZINE about how she wanted to get on the radio. I imagine this nation of Time readers scratching their heads who Liz Phair is & why they're supposed to care if she sold out. But are they buying her record?

B.) Liz Phair is "an edgy artist"? What? I mean no disrespect to her, I like Liz Phair. But...what?

...Guyville is now universally acknowledged as one of the best LPs of the '90s, but when it first came out, the record -- or, more accurately, Phair herself -- was also excoriated by (mostly male) critics who found her persona (smart, blonde, sexy, self-aware) too threatening for their weak little brains to contemplate.

but the LP was #1 on the Pazz and Jop poll for that year. Also the comment about the songs being "unstoppably catchy" when Liz does them but "horrid" when Avril does them is puzzling.

as for liz, her chainsaw matrixpop is completely at odds with her lilith fair-cruising-aol-chatroom lyrics, thus scaring the kids while annoying their parents.

then again, we needed a new juliana hatfield.

And in case anybody missed it in another thread, I dig the Liz Phair album as much as any of her others (good for a few stunning singles, lots of filler).

And in case anybody missed it in another thread, I think Gina Arnold is usually full of shit.

Male modest-sex-shuffle counterparts: Steve Tyler? Beck? R. Kelly? Prince? (Flaming Lips? I have no idea what their modest shuffles are about, but I do remember they had a song where they used vaseline.)

Younger modest-sex-shuffle counterpart: Liz Phair, 1993

A modest shuffle about their sex lives with each other might be interesting. You know, some sorta twist on the Beyonce/Jay Z thing.

And I'd definitely argue most of Phair's reviews have been just as good as these guys recently. Except Beck, who yeah, kinda sucks!

It would if the ENTIRE COUNTRY was slamming her. Instead, it is only a small cadre of music critics.

And I think Liz'd be a lot happier if they were. As it is, the ENTIRE COUNTRY is just ignoring her (perhaps she'll go away) ...

Well, hers are better. But maybe critics just hate songs about sex.

I meant in the NY Times, not Rolling Stone. (I forget how they reviewed it. Spin gave it a 6 or so, I think -- and again, acted like it was huge dropoff from her past albums. Which it just plain isnt.)

In which case, who succeeds better in yer eyes, her or Sheryl Crow? I'm not being sarcastic.

>>In which case, who succeeds better in yer eyes, her or Sheryl Crow?<

Wow, a close call. I guess I own more Sheryl albums, though. I never understand when either of them get compared to the Rolling Stones. (I'm thinking Shery's a better singer, and has a better sense of rhythm, and Liz writes better words, but not THAT much better, in either case. I probably have more in common with Liz in some ways, but I graduated college [Missouri, '82] with Sheryl. So who knows?)

I can't imagine Steven Tyler or Anthony Keidis would get high ratings in Pitchfork, Chuck. And they're better than Liz Phair (at least Steven Tyler was and Anthony Keidis is NOW).

Liz gets compared to the Rolling Stones because her first album had the word "Exile" in the title. Sheryl does because her opening guitar riffs sometimes sound like the beginning of "Tumbling Dice."

Never met Sheryl in college. (She wasn't in ROTC, I don't think.) (Just kidding. Anyway, we had different majors, or something. I vaguely remember her belonging to a sorority, but I'm probably wrong.)

Problem is that most labels wouldn't consider doing that until the artist dies. I hate to say it, but the rampant bashing of this CD (both here, and in print) makes the "reviews" more interesting than paying $11.99 to hear it (or downloading it free, for that matter).

Does this mean that when she puts out another, the listening public will run away in droves?

Male modest-sex-shuffle counterpart: Bob Dylan
Younger modest-sex-shuffle counterpart: Karen O

(And yeah, I know. But Liz isn't really "modest" either, right?)

And I doubt anyone would let Dylan get away with an x-box reference either. Though if you want to argue he's overrated, I'd agree.

(relatively flavorless, secretly scary, supposedly better for you or something but actually worse ... a simple pleasure destroyed)

(Though people did take the piss out of that track.)

So what the hell's "modest" about adult contemporary? Indie rock (in the strictest timid wallflower '90s sense of the term, anyway) is WAY more modest than, say, Celine Dion. That makes no sense at all.

Why SHOULDN'T people get away with X-Box references, Anthony? And what makes you think, if there was one on either of those last couple Dylan albums, that many critics would have complained? I mean, very few critics complained about ANYTHING about those albums! Why would X-Box references (which, again, I have no problem with) ne different?

Re Yeah Yeah Yeahs: If THEY kicked as hard as people act like they do, I'd like them more. I'll take Liz's 2003 album over theirs, no contest. Hers has way better melodies, for one thing. Better lyrics, too, and better singing. And it's less of a rehash.

Re Grandaddy/Nick Lowe: The hook in "El Caminos in the West comes from "Tonight," off Nick's first album. Lene Lovich covered it once.

I meant why would they BE different?

Or "Come Up the Years" by Jefferson Airplane, or "Does Your Mother Know" by Abba, or "Go Away Little Girl" by Donny Osmond, or "Young Girl" by the Union Gap featuring Gary Pucket, or (maybe???) "Age Ain't Nothin But a Number" by Aaliyah. Liz's song is better than four of those, but either way, it's a great song topic. Always will be.

Geez Chuck, you might not have noticed this, but P'fork rarely deals with mainstream releases, save for those that (yawn) rise out of the indie-landscape (hence Phair, Metallica, Mars Volta). To take us to task for this is to ignore what we do offer coverage of. Where are the Voice pieces about: Christian Fennesz, King Geedorah, Sunburned Hand of the Man, Animal Collective, Clearlake, Enduser, Alamaailman Vasarat, Bob Drake, M83, etc.?

I wonder if there were vaudeville songs in 1900 complaining about kids playing stickball.

And when did Metallica "rise out of an indie landscape"? Like, 1984??

I meant even THOUGH every....(obviously)

Well, so did the Red Hot Chili Peppers. And Aerosmith.

(Only thing I REALLY hate is mainstream artfucks, probably.) (Well, except for Mars Volta. They're great! Best Rush album in years!)

What are "crisps"??

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

[stabs self in neck]

as for black dice, i like them too, but to deny they're anything BUT wallpaper is foolish.

anyway, for those with their scorecards handy, last week the voice covered the blood brothers, the locust, and melt banana. and who knows, maybe chuck will even eventually run my erstwhile piece! < /gross public display>

Very little interests me less than Liz Phair. Watching laundry dry, perhaps. But:

The Echo and the Bunnymen thing, while both the most remarked upon and most obvious influence, isn't really that central. (But yes, if you don't like them, you may not like Interpol.) I hear more Joy Divison, and esp. the Furs. I think the Byrne thing is overstated, but I see a twinge. Sorta like the Faint, they're this band you were waiting for in 1987 but never showed.

Anyway, even were it the disaster it's not, a record recombining these influences would be a helluva lot more interesting to me than an album that lashes the same old "paradigm-subverting" meditations on the hardships of being young, attractive, white, upper-middle-class, and--heavens!--female to a sterile tweenie pop idiom. Also, Liz hasn't a sincere bone in her body, which I find extremely tiresome, and even if you think they're awful, Interpol seem sublimely/ridiculously on the level. Finally, it's completely clear Liz holds pretty much anybody who isn't Liz Phair in contempt; I don't get that from Interpol.

Or maybe put it this way: "Stella Was a Diver" is in some ways completely awkward and stupid--at least until the endless finish, which is better. So are those lyrics about love in the kitchen and the culinary eye and all that. But these failures are way more compelling to me--at least charming a la early Bernard Sumner lyrical fumbling--than gaffes like, say, "H.W.C.," which haven't even a shred of engagement to recommend them.

But then I see no significant difference between Britney and Madonna, so ...

When has this ever been a hindrance to making good records? (note please that I'm no fan of Liz Phair myself but still)

it's completely clear Liz holds pretty much anybody who isn't Liz Phair in contempt

I don't hear this in her music at all. I mean, she has plenty of nice things to say about the guy with the xbox!

But these failures are way more compelling to me--at least charming a la early Bernard Sumner lyrical fumbling--than gaffes like, say, "H.W.C.," which haven't even a shred of engagement to recommend them.

but isn't engagement in the ear of the listener? for all I know Toto and Journey were probably more engaged in their music than, I dunno, the Velvet Underground were (I mean, come on--"Andy's Chest" and "Temptation Inside Your Heart" were fucking JOKES) but that doesn't mean I'd rather listen to them than the Velvets.

But then I see no significant difference between Britney and Madonna

about two dozen good-to-great singles, for starters

There's this band called the Kitchens of Distinction, see, and...

"On Liz Phair, she seems to cop the attitude that since everyone always accuses her of selling out, she might as well go all the way with it. That includes roping in The Matrix, the production team behind Avril Lavigne's recent hits, which Phair has made no bones about attempting to emulate. But since Lavigne wants to sound like early Alanis Morissette, and Morissette started out trying to do a slicked-up impression of Liz Phair, isn't that a bit like Bruce Springsteen hiring away Jack Johnson's collaborators?"

The difficult part of this album isn't the subject matter, some of which I applaud, some of which I think (as on everything she's ever done, reluctantly including Guyville) she takes cheap shots at instead of nailing. The difficult part is hearing her imitate paler, less mature (even than she was a decade ago) shadows of **herself**, when you'd hope that she'd do the kind of work that would make her previous sharp-as-shit but still occasionally kneejerk best sound like baby stuff.

This is at least a better album than whitechocolate... , though. But sadly I think its failure is going to make the chances of Ms. Liz staying the music game at all less than 50/50.

Brian, what about not giving a crap if some cruddy indie rock band recombines a few marginally interesting influences in the first place? I mean, I only own the Echo and the Bunnymen greatest hits cd, and I still haven't picked up those two archival live Joy Division cds - surely the latter kick the shit out of Interpol! And most importantly, you don't think Interpol are "young, attractive, white, and upper-middle-class"?! Anyway, what the heck does that matter one whit? As far as sincerity goes - I happened to have dinner with a Matador pub guy last fall and he was practically doing backflips over the fact that the band had placed in some teenybopper rag, and the singer had offered some quote about girls opposing their meanie boyfriends and how the band felt their pain.

Anyway, in 1987 I think I was just waiting for Hysteria to come out.

I'm flattered you read it at all. But twice!

I was just trying to address the nebulous 'interesting' thing as gamely as possible, and of course it's pretty fucking subjective. That's why it's more interesting to me. The influences--say, the Furs--may indeed be marginal, but I was really interested in where they might've went. (Ned: liked Kitchens of Distinction, wanted to like them more) Turn on the Bright Lights is pretty flat the first few listens, superderivative, and definitely flawed, but I'm really fascinated by the superneutral Numanesque manner of the distillation, which doesn't seem to bring anything but awkwardness and competence to the mix, yet achieves some kind of bright grey identity.

I mean, I only own the Echo and the Bunnymen greatest hits cd, and I still haven't picked up those two archival live Joy Division cds - surely the latter kick the shit out of Interpol!

Yes.

And most importantly, you don't think Interpol are "young, attractive, white, and upper-middle-class"?! Anyway, what the heck does that matter one whit?

Touche, but: the lyrics aren't anywhere near so engaged in empty, literal reflection on the situation.

As far as sincerity goes - I happened to have dinner with a Matador pub guy last fall and he was practically doing backflips over the fact that the band had placed in some teenybopper rag, and the singer had offered some quote about girls opposing their meanie boyfriends and how the band felt their pain.

[does spit take with beer] Well that's the last time I believe what I read!

Anyway, in 1987 I think I was just waiting for Hysteria to come out.

Just (finally) got a DVD player; the enhanced Hysteria is first up. And despite his failure to appreciate Buffalo 66, Matos is pretty much OTM (though I really gave up after "like a Prayer"); Interpol hits me in a way I like, Liz doesn't.

Fair enough -- at the time they also got quite a few Echo comparisons themselves, so the whole cycle is a long and drawn out one. But while on the one hand I like your 'Numanesque' take on Interpol -- as a hyperNuman fan I sense what you're saying, but I also think you're potentially selling both Numan and, if you really like them, Interpol short -- on the other hand the Kitchens, while doubtless having an appeal for me tied up with a certain nostalgia, also brought something different to the table. Not least of which was Patrick Fitzgerald and his lyrical concerns -- he's one of the few whose words really broke through with me and stuck, and though I consider myself straight rather than gay or bi, his warmth and directness on those subjects of love, not to mention the many songs that dealt with other issues, possessed a grace, a warmth and an intelligence I found and still find striking. Add to that the sheer goddamn strength and power of Julian Swales on guitar and how Fitzgerald and Dan Godwin were a brilliant rhythm section and jeez, I wasn't going to say no! Saw 'em three times and each time they were both breathtaking AND very warm and friendly folks -- couldn't ask for better.

I'm enough of a fanboy that when I happened to be in Tooting Broadway station back in 2001 I was happily singing the song to myself the whole time.

I look forward to this.

black dice are not amazing live and I have no desire to hear their records. Interpol didn't impress me that much, either, from the little i've heard on 'alternative' radio.

I think when the hype machine targets some other band of hopeless twats, when the dust has settled etc...only the memory of those no neck blues band records will remain.

[clinks glass]

(except maybe dave q)

if she was an actor, her current career path would be not unlike john travolta circa in between look who's talking too and look who's talking now. not to say there's not a pulp fiction in the works to get her records on the radio and in the hands of new fans in the future (collaborations with luomo/dizzee/matmos/the dfa/timbaland...!?!?!?!?!).

i like the girlysounds tapes probably the best. she's an underrated guitarist (i've said this on some other ILM thread), she has this way of playing chord fragments that's actually fairly sophisticated (you can hear it on some of her hi-fi songs on the first 2 albums), but hey this boys club would rather talk about her dirty lyrics and her tits.

put simply, she should wear a trucker hat.

Are Interpol? I mean, I would think, with that kind of music (no matter what you think of it -- myself, I don't love it and don't mind it, though I think "the subway with a porno" is a WAY WAY WAY more empty and vacuous sex line that Liz Phair is capable of), isn't insincerity sort of THE POINT?? I mean, early '80s MTV pop and Visage and Spandau Ballet and all those other dumb bands Interpol rip off were completely *detached*; they didn't WANT to be sincere, did they?

(I mean, I guess IAN CURTIS was sincere. Or at least, he wasn't faking about being depressed; just ask the rope, right? But Interpol don't really sound anything like Joy Division, at all. And even if they did, they're clearly WEARING A COSTUME. It's all a HAIRSTYLE to them. Not that there's anything WRONG with that. But still...)

to those who asked: gina arnold is very much not my idea of attractive. her aroma is even worse.

I guess I meant: "DO Interpol?" But whatever

This is such a good question I'm about to start a thread!

The Liz Phair album is arguably deeper and more profound but if I'm sitting in my room I'd rather listen to the more dynamic band that sounds like they could ride that boat in Duran Duran's "Rio" with total confidence. Most of Liz Phair's recent music (when the lyrics aren't painting a more fascinating portrait) only reminds me of those dorky session guys who stand behind female singers these days.

Hey, maybe it's about those totally pervy Michelob Ultra ads! Those are GREAT! (Hey, they worked for me -- that is one refreshing beer!!)

I forget all their other unforgettable lyrics, though.

New York Cares (got to be some more change in my life)
New York Cares (got to be some more change in my life)
New York Cares (got to be some more change in my life)
New York Cares (got to be some more change in my life)

subway she is a porno and the pavements they are a mess
i know you've supported me for a long time
somehow i'm not impressed

It's up to me now turn on the bright lights
It's up to me now turn on the bright lights

New York Cares (got to be some more change in my life)
New York Cares (got to be some more change in my life)
New York Cares (got to be some more change in my life)
New York Cares (got to be some more change in my life)

It's up to me now turn on the bright lights
(got to be some more change in my life)
oh, It's up to me now turn on the bright lights
(got to be some more change in my life)

that is to say: untrue, lazy, and easily adopted by blogger types worldwide.

The only Interpol song that even SOUNDS like Joy Division is the last song on the album, which has the cheesiest lyrics of all (that "urge in the icebox"/"kid gloves" stuff).

Actually, Scott, the point of Interpol is to get girls, ROCK, not have to work day jobs and dress cool. Getting kids to listen to the bands they're supposedly ripping off is YOURS and every other anglophilic critic's job. Do you really think Interpol has heard EVERY band that stepped on a reverb pedal from Echo & The Bunnymen's "Crocodiles" through MBV's "Loveless"?

I only know one INterpol fan (I don't get out much), he's my best friend, and he's not humorless. Likewise I don't think I know ANY Liz Phair fans, at least, outside of ILX. So I have only a vague idea how they are typically talked-up and appreciated.

I kind of figured Interpol are being a bit t-i-cheek but even if they're not, like you said, they have a strong rhythm section and great songs and good production. So I don't need to care too much about the sincerity or lack-thereof in the words.

i never thought i'd say this but i'm actually envious of being some rock critic where the pressing issues in music were the lyrics and delivery or precursors of all these promo copies laying around the office... being that single-minded when listening to music is probably a really handy skill when you have to write a few paragraphs before the hour's up.

I really like Interpol = my favorite record from 2002. I haven't heard any of the new Liz Phair. But I could give a shit about Interpol's sincerity or their lyrics or who they're ripping off or how much hype they've gotten. I like Interpol because yes, their rhythms are strong and driving, and the guitars are tight and jagged, and I'm always a little biased toward dark, minor-key sounds, and the part in "PDA" where the drums cut out and then come back in is so explosive, it makes me really happy.

Sounds like they deserved each other.

http://corall.ca/x/lizandgina.gif

Matos is unbelievably OTM here. *goes to put on Diary Of A Mod Housewife*

Actually, I kinda do.

I don't buy the argument that the band has some spectacularly great rhythm section, BTW. Not at all. The drummer is no De Freitas, no Lever, no Morris, no Mik Glaisher from the Comsats etc, and the louder it's being shouted that he IS a great drummer that really contributes something special to the band the more I just plain shake my head.

For instance, even though Our (Un)Darlings Radiohead have been around in the public eye for ten years plus, they still seem high-profile/'current' enough to count, and based on their live work alone, freaking fantastic. Argue to me that Phil Selway in particular IS a great drummer that brings something to the band and I will heartily agree.

I don't even know the name of the Interpol drummer. He doesn't do anything that calls enormous attention to himself. I just think their music has a forward momentum--a very POP sort of momentum--that's very powerful, a nice BIG bass-and-drums sound.

[throws credit on bar; 'sorry for the mess']

Noted, but again, I really do lurv them Faint and them Rapture, and they're just as entrapped in the context. So I'm hardly damning across the board. I will say that being able to see the Chameleons live three times in a week last October reminded me once again how readily they hit a peak for me that Interpol couldn't begin to climb at present -- and Mark Burgess is just as apt at sometimes bemusing and sometimes clunky metaphors about love and connection as Interpol, if we have to play the lyrical game. So why do the Chameleons, with lyrics from when THEY were the same age as Interpol, capture in my mind a sense of encompassing, enveloping warmth which Interpol lacks? I don't think it has anything do with sincerity or its perceived application, but I sure do think it has a lot to do with how they can fire on all fours in the ways others here have been crediting for Interpol -- but in a band like the Chameleons is where I hear it, not in Our Apple-Cheeked NYC Quartet.

Maybe 'cause they're the sort of guys who'd hang out to talk Merovingian conspiracy theories after a show (true story, I couldn't make it and my 'buff' brother went instead. He had a great time!)--whatever else you'd say about Interpol, I don't see 'em doing that ...

Liz Phair sold more right out the gate than Interpol has, so ya know. And it may well sell more. Just today I heard that Lilix song about how it's about life and it's about the Matrix and I thought it was Liz Phair until about the chorus (the LP song is way better, don't get me wrong. I just think her sonic similarity with everyone else on the radio will boost sales a bit, especially since she has better lyrics).

I see the Liz Phair album possibly taking the same "slow burn" path that, for instance, Norah Jones did. And what the figgity fuck do Interpol & Liz Phair have to do with each other in 2003? At all? Huh? Wha? (Matador affiliation don't mean sheeeeeeeeeeit in answering this inquiry, BTW.)

as some (not to reopen a can of worms but) maybe felt about Guyville, making subsequent bites harder to swallow ...

(in my neighborhood at least. Liz Phair should be playing farmer's markets)

* the source of my bitterness to be sure

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Girly Sound is (so far) Liz Clark Phair. She lives in a suburb of Chicago in her parents' house. She's done with college, done with the notion that she may have been the one whose life could have started with a silver step (it didn't). For now she's staying home and scrounging for some evidence of her existence. In between her life she's put out a tape of some of the most moving music made in a bedroom. The tape contains 12 songs with a homemade cover, and is mesmerizing. The arrangement throughout never varies: only her voice (double tracked) and a lone electric guitar playing made up chords, simple elements endlessly repeated until they become a sensual drawl slipping you into her short life. This is her first batch of songs and her self-consciousness shows. Being at her parents' house she can't possibly weigh her words with a passion that might complement her music but the result is an unbearable nervous calm that's unsettling and beautiful.

Her singing style is a drawl, as if she's talking into her own head about every friend, fuck or house she's known. The evidence comes effortlessly because she's been walking for miles now. She fills her songs with the mundane details that turn into jewels inside her hesitant mouth, a shy voice singing, "you've gotta have FEAR in your heart..." over and over. The mixed up guitar chords are barely enough to catch a thought or a phrase before it's tossed away.

It's meaningless to offer up Jandek or Daniel Johnston as comparison here despite the obvious qualifications. Girly Sound is My Bloody Valentine, is (My) Sonic Youth, it's every immensely popular "cool" band we've ever spent the night listening to, digging it like a sucker. I know in some ways Liz Phair, like a lot of people would settle for popularity and recognition, a little conversation, no problem. We wouldn't settle for anything less (meanwhile working at temp jobs, if working at all). We get high and INTO it and RELATE to our "secret personal friendships" with Pussy Galore, Galaxie 500 (i.e. our favorite whoevers), we want to appear in Sassy because we want to swoon and be swooned on. And that is the stupid heart of Girly Sound, staying up all night with a dumb dream of success.

The subtle kiss that will emerge once you get past the boo-hoo sentimental meaningfulisms is that this music is really joyful and funny. It's not a sarcastic in-joke but it's in the concept, get it?

She's singing with closed eyes, "...you've got a lot of nerve coming here after all the times that you tried to pull the wool over my eyes and ears and nose and mouth and don't be so in love with yourself cause I'm not... and he said you've got a lot of nerve painting me like I'm the villain what about all those words like 'he's just a friend' what a load of bullshit..." Out of stagnant fouroclockinthechicagofuckenmornings she's dashing out the dots of her aimless Liz Phair story, and I am AAAAAAHHH. Send her some cash for a tape, she'll probably be up to tape #11 by the time you read this. (Liz Phair, [address withheld], Winnetka, IL 60093)

- Tae Won Yu
Chemical Imbalance Magazine, 1991

Jandek + The Matrix = ????

Just preferably not California ones that old men drive cars through.

She sang with him the last time I saw him play! That's the cool way to tour with a kid. The not cool way was when my wife took me to see Shawn Colvin, and Colvin's two-year-old daughter came out between songs and everyone in the audience went, "Awwwwwwwww." Like, look kid, if you can't sing or dance, stay out of the limelight. Of course, she was only two.

Please tell me her daughter was wearing a bullet-proof vest.

in what way?

"For some reason, my opinions are read as threatening--and I don't know if that's because they are uttered by a girl, or because they actually ARE threatening (although if it's the latter, people sure are easily cowed)."

I want to say something here, but perhaps Gina does a better job herself. Boy am I scared.

her 33 1/3 book is out today. haven't read the times review

the opening few posts of this thread are like the worst

disagree. "Writing proper pop songs" is most definitely a criticism. The best part about phair's early stuff was the kind-of-off structure and melody (cf. "Stratford-on-Guy"). There's nothing half as interesting-sounding as that song on "Liz Phair" (or "Whitechocolatespaceegg" for that matter). But hey, who am I, anyway? I don't like Avril at all (the big choruses drive me nuts)!

― J (Jay),

There's so much of early ILM saying everything contemporary is utter shit yet everyone likes now

Hm. Missed that Jay post the first time. At least he was defending the appeal of "intuitive" composition. I thought it was nice at the time but that was before the Internet and it seems too personal and sensitive for me now. I can't even bear to peek at the book.