"Uh Huh Her." Thoughts on the new PJ Harvey?

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (498 of them)
Is rock somehow conservative in a way that pop isn't? I don't see it.

Jonathan Z. (Joanthan Z.), Thursday, 17 June 2004 11:51 (nineteen years ago) link

There are a million ways I think rock is more conservative than pop, but if you want just one, I'd say it's this insistence on the timelessness and endurance of its (totally played-out) expressive grammar.

Momus (Momus), Thursday, 17 June 2004 12:09 (nineteen years ago) link

whattayaknow:
posted on Fallnet:
From a recent interview with Polly Jean Harvey (Filter Magazine, Spring 2004):

And if you're looking to crack the surface of what turns this girl named Polly Jean into the songs, sounds and ever-morphing images of PJ Harvey -- the things that may prove to be powerfully influential over her -- you won't find too many people she considers contemporaries.

“I do try and listen to what's happening in contemporary music, but there is very little that I get excited about,” she admits, without a hint of regret or an apologetic sigh -- it's just the way it is, as far as she's concerned. “I do tend to listen to older music rather than newer music. Having said that, a band that I always follow is a band called The Fall, from England. I do find that he's one of my favorite contemporary songwriters -- Mark E. Smith -- and their albums, the last run of them, the last three or four, have really been incredible. And they put out a couple of records a year, so it's always exciting to me that they're releasing new stuff. Other than them, there's very little I've been listening too lately.”

sexyDancer, Thursday, 17 June 2004 13:49 (nineteen years ago) link

That's one smart lady.

I'm the crank stuck outside the Tate railings protesting

That would make you stuck!

Bimble (bimble), Thursday, 17 June 2004 14:38 (nineteen years ago) link

Her name-checking Mark E. Smith is just another example of her fixation on authenticity, since he's the Obelix of authenticity: dipped in a vat of the stuff at birth.

Momus (Momus), Thursday, 17 June 2004 16:05 (nineteen years ago) link

http://heim.ifi.uio.no/~janl/ts/obelix.gif

I'm fit and working again-ah!

Momus (Momus), Thursday, 17 June 2004 16:07 (nineteen years ago) link

what major event will have to happen in your life for you to stop hawking this "fakery is the new authenticity" line anyway? and will your aesthetic sensibilities deepen or will you just go in for another ad-agency-sounding line? i'm really curious to know what "momus at 60" will look like, and whether any of us will recognize the values he will have assumed by then.

amateur!st (amateurist), Thursday, 17 June 2004 17:45 (nineteen years ago) link

i mean, more generally, that i'm amazed at the length of time you have been mounting this sort of argument, and the energy you apparently put into doing so, when it seems--at bottom--rank sophistry decorated with--but not fundamentally effected by--life-observation. it sounds like the kind of thing that would be exhausting after awhile.

amateur!st (amateurist), Thursday, 17 June 2004 17:47 (nineteen years ago) link

dipped in a vat of the stuff at birth.

Is that why all his teeth fell out?

mei (mei), Thursday, 17 June 2004 17:50 (nineteen years ago) link

...well, i find it exhausting, at least. hence my increasingly crabby and personal replies.

amateur!st (amateurist), Thursday, 17 June 2004 17:53 (nineteen years ago) link

To rock is to have chosen the past over the future.

"There won't be any future without rock" sounds equally ridiculuos as apodictic statement but is probably closer to the truth. People will always connect to the primal feelings expressed in rock. Rock has been there for 50 years or so (not counting the blues past)and has been declared dead hundreds of times. Whereas something newish like laptop music may well cease to exist tomorrow as other recent trends like techno already have more or less. They simply don't have the power and the urgency of rock. Playing identity games is so 1960s. On the long run people get bored with it and want the real thing. Andy Warhol was the future in the 60s but he is dead now.

alex in mainhattan (alex63), Thursday, 17 June 2004 17:59 (nineteen years ago) link

i'd like to give you my theory of music marketing. it goes like so:

EITHER

[b]Same Shit Different Arsehole[/b]

this is the pop music business model obviously. you give 'em the same catchy pap fronted by an ever-changing conveyor belt of young faces. witness cover version recyling, the stock in trade of breaking a new pop 'artiste'.

[b]Same Arsehole Different Shit[/b]

this is a more radiohead/U2 type of schtick. you've got to deliver the goods that your core fanbase want, at the same time as only [i]cosmetically[/i] altering what you really do. witness Achtung Baby, Joshua Tree with a few knobs on, sold to joe P as the new ironic post-modern U2 with artwork to match. actually that's unfair to radiohead, they have made actual musical changes over their lifespan.

so back to Peej. i must out myself right now as a HUGE fan, but i feel she's kinda treading water on this one. i can't listen to ITD front to back, but on some of those tracks the phasers are clearly set to 'Mindblowing' (Sky Lit Up, No Girl So Sweet etc). UHH sounds like a retread of old stuff but done in a slightly more palatable fashion. i dunno, i'm not feeling it. i expect a certain amount of [i]risk[/i] out of her - hell, Stories was so unexpectedly caution-to-the-wind melodic and poppy that it knocked me clean off my feet. no, it isn't her 'best' work, but you could still feel the decisions and the price it exacted from her. my bitching is testament to how high she's set the bar on previous outings.

on the plus side, the seagulls send me off into a deep and blissful sleep.

j clarkson, Thursday, 17 June 2004 18:12 (nineteen years ago) link

Has she been listening to Alejandra and Aeron, then? Field recordings are the new rock; there's nothing more authentic than just holding a mic up to the world.

Momus (Momus), Thursday, 17 June 2004 18:22 (nineteen years ago) link

in total sincerity, you maintain a consistently interesting tension between wrongheadedness and knowing self-parody.

amateur!st (amateurist), Thursday, 17 June 2004 18:29 (nineteen years ago) link

"There won't be any future without field recordings" sounds equally ridiculous as apodictic statement but is probably closer to the truth. People will always connect to the natural sounds captured in field recordings. Field recordings have been there for 50 years or so (not counting field recordings of the blues) and have been declared dead hundreds of times. Whereas something newish like rock music may well cease to exist tomorrow as other trends like techno already have more or less. They simply don't have the power and the urgency of field recordings. Playing authenticity games is so 1960s. In the long run people get bored with it and want documentary. Jimi Hendrix was the future in the 60s but he is dead now.

Momus (Momus), Thursday, 17 June 2004 18:31 (nineteen years ago) link

field recordings = possible with the innovation of electronic recording = began ca. 1927 = approx 80 yrs old

amateur!st (amateurist), Thursday, 17 June 2004 18:33 (nineteen years ago) link

(Yes, Prof! My statement was a détournement of Alex's. By the way, détournement was invented in 1957.)

Momus (Momus), Thursday, 17 June 2004 18:38 (nineteen years ago) link

oh, i didn't realize the "50" part was taken from the previous post as well.

sorry for being a dreary pedant.

amateur!st (amateurist), Thursday, 17 June 2004 18:41 (nineteen years ago) link

Perhaps I've not been here long enough, but I find Momus' contribution to this thread very entertaining.

mei (mei), Thursday, 17 June 2004 19:03 (nineteen years ago) link

nice reply, momus. even though guy debord is dead as well...

alex in mainhattan (alex63), Thursday, 17 June 2004 19:43 (nineteen years ago) link

http://ew2.lysator.liu.se/fanq/h/e/hester2/dogmatix.jpg

And we all know who this is, don't we Momusmatix?

mei (mei), Thursday, 17 June 2004 19:50 (nineteen years ago) link

Guy Debord is dead

Bobby Gillespie once said, in a rockist justification of his relevance despite being over 40, 'The young can't get it up like us and Iggy can'. So I'd paraphrase that and say 'The living can't get it up like Andy Warhol and Guy Debord can'.

Momus (Momus), Thursday, 17 June 2004 19:53 (nineteen years ago) link

guy debord was such a party animal.

amateur!st (amateurist), Thursday, 17 June 2004 20:56 (nineteen years ago) link

...censure and mockery indeed.

sexyDancer, Friday, 18 June 2004 13:31 (nineteen years ago) link

four months pass...
Cripes I forgot how long this thread was. Anyway, finally got the full album (as I'm seeing her on Tuesday at the Wiltern, I figured better late than never), and so far it's pretty damn good.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 21 October 2004 02:44 (nineteen years ago) link

I enjoy it too. I haven't heard any others post-To Bring You My Love. This doesn't seem as great as that one or Rid of Me but it's still nice, more stripped-down and 'punky', and still sounding very 90s to me. There's something weirdly formalist about it for me, in that I'm reminded of Patti Smith and Siouxsie Sioux much more often than with those others. Somehow Mecca Normal and Kim Gordon's songs on EJST&NS also came to mind as reference points for some reason. My favourites are the slower ones like "It's You". It's probably at least as good as the Blonde Redhead album.

sundar subramanian (sundar), Thursday, 21 October 2004 05:01 (nineteen years ago) link

And, yes, I enjoy her accent very much.

sundar subramanian (sundar), Thursday, 21 October 2004 05:02 (nineteen years ago) link

those are all valid reference points but duuuuude hear Stories From The City. Try.

manthony m1cc1o (Anthony Miccio), Thursday, 21 October 2004 06:08 (nineteen years ago) link

PJ Harvey is a rockist!

Momus (Momus), Thursday, 21 October 2004 06:32 (nineteen years ago) link

Are you kidding? It's like 20 times better than the Blonde Redhead album, which isn't really bad but is just kinda there for me.

Raymond Cummings (Raymond Cummings), Thursday, 21 October 2004 14:41 (nineteen years ago) link

Reading back over the whole thread almost gave me a headache.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 21 October 2004 14:57 (nineteen years ago) link

Haha this is one of my favourite albums this year but I never actually posted about it after I heard it - I think I just couldn't be arsed to wade through all the... stuff here.

The Lex (The Lex), Thursday, 21 October 2004 15:17 (nineteen years ago) link

i am not sure but can it be that you only need a certain amount of pj harvey albums in your life? i got all of them before this one. and i have listened to most songs as mp3s and they were ok but i absolutely feel no need to get this album.

by the way the blonde redhead album was a major disappointment imo. almost mainstream sounding. like a bland pop album.

alex in mainhattan (alex63), Thursday, 21 October 2004 17:14 (nineteen years ago) link

two years pass...

This thread is bonkers. But anyway, I've listened to this a few times over the weekend and it's very, very god, isn't it?

Scik Mouthy, Tuesday, 28 August 2007 09:52 (sixteen years ago) link

very god? Begotten not created?

Mark G, Tuesday, 28 August 2007 09:58 (sixteen years ago) link

haha, yes and yes!

joanet vich, Tuesday, 28 August 2007 10:00 (sixteen years ago) link

Hmmm. Damn my cold fingers.

Scik Mouthy, Tuesday, 28 August 2007 10:02 (sixteen years ago) link

nine months pass...

i love this album.

The Brainwasher, Friday, 30 May 2008 09:07 (fifteen years ago) link

"I have no time for anal love" still cracks me up

The Brainwasher, Friday, 30 May 2008 09:11 (fifteen years ago) link


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