Article Response; Stylus reviews Jane's Addiction...

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Karim and I tried out a new format for a review over the weekend and this is the result.

Does it work? Do you like it? Would you liek to read more of this format of review?

Nick Southall (Nick Southall), Tuesday, 29 July 2003 10:18 (twenty-two years ago)

Karim Adab!! Blimey! He's old school a.m.a. you know.

I like the idea of a review as interview but the first couple of 'exchanges' put me off a bit and I'm not interested in JA anyway.

Tom (Groke), Tuesday, 29 July 2003 10:35 (twenty-two years ago)

He's also a damn good buddy of mine. You should see the transcript of the MSN conversation that the review was edited from; if you think the fiurst couple of exchanges were bad, jesus... The stuff that got left out was pure filth! He's a dirty man.

Nick Southall (Nick Southall), Tuesday, 29 July 2003 10:40 (twenty-two years ago)

How could anybody get through a whole discussion about JA without mentioning DRUGS? That seems to miss much of what was special and wonderful about them, about life itself in fact. They were the American Happy Mondays weren't they, right down to a spin-off band that everybody loved for about 5 minutes until they realised wistfully they wanted the old one back. I cut myself once, and said so what, motherfuckin' took the pain.

dave q, Tuesday, 29 July 2003 11:00 (twenty-two years ago)

They were the American Happy Mondays weren't they...

If I was in a church choir I would be hollering YES YES YES at you Dave.

doom-e, Tuesday, 29 July 2003 11:15 (twenty-two years ago)

Er, Dave, drugs come up pretty much straight away. Otherwise, bloody hell, you are so right JA == HM, totally.

RickyT (RickyT), Tuesday, 29 July 2003 11:16 (twenty-two years ago)

I thought the review sucked

Savin All My Love 4 u (Savin 4ll my (heart) 4u), Tuesday, 29 July 2003 22:30 (twenty-two years ago)

Nick, the new style is certainly fun: tis rare when you can see the audience's opinion in 'print', and not only that of the reviewer.

I was drawn to this part:

Ritual isn’t great and disturbing because it's loud; it's great and disturbing because it's fucked up and amoral and surprising.

Tis indeed true, but Ritual was only reflecting the period. In the mega-early 90's, music was just beginning to emerge from the staid-ness of the late 80's. In a sonic wasteland, Jane's aesthetic must have felt like a refreshing dash of ice-cold water. The melodies didn't have a smooth, complete ending. Being loud was just a plus; if it made Mum's eardrums throb, so much the better.

Nichole Graham (Nichole Graham), Tuesday, 29 July 2003 22:48 (twenty-two years ago)

yeah i liked it. i dunno if i would like it all the time though. but i certainly liked it this time.

i'll be quiet now.

gallantseagull, Tuesday, 29 July 2003 22:58 (twenty-two years ago)

i quite like this review style but i'm thinking one or two bits could still have been edited out to make it more of a solid review (that focuses more specifically on "Strays")

weasel diesel (K1l14n), Tuesday, 29 July 2003 23:24 (twenty-two years ago)

i'm thinking some of the exchanges shortly after (and including) "I guess that's why I'm moving more towards electronica..." could be edited or removed. or maybe the whole point of such a review is that it meanders a bit.

weasel diesel (K1l14n), Tuesday, 29 July 2003 23:28 (twenty-two years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.