Head To Head
Log In
Register
Unsung Forum »
Soundtracks of Our Lives week ending 25 November 2012 CE
Log In to post a reply

94 messages
Topic View: Flat | Threaded
keith a
9573 posts

Re: Soundtracks of Our Lives week ending 25 November 2012 CE
Nov 27, 2012, 12:54
IanB wrote:


I didn't say "the fewer records she sells the more popular she gets". I said "more famous". She is famous for being famous. Joe Public have no idea what she sounds like(other than the the shortlived use of the "It's Oh So Quiet" thing as a football chant), and could care less, but more and more people can pick her out in a line up of quirky celbs that have come out of Art and Fashion. She would be a big number on Pointless in a picture round. Like say Grace Jones* or Dali or Orson Wells towards the end of his life (though he had huge mitigating circumstances).



Well Joe Public is aware of who she is because of those hits and video's. They might not know what she sounds like nowadays or even know that she is still making records, but that is ultimately why she is recognisable. And because she is, when it comes down to it, so distinctive looking.

But this is probably in danger of turning into something of a conversational cul-de-sac. You don't like her. Fair enough. I think, as someone else noted, that this is ultimately more of gut reaction that is then be intellectualised?

Personally, I haven't got a problem with artists being 'arty', or artists trying to do something different, and I don't think you have overall or you wouldn't be a fan of, say, Bill Nelson. There seems to be a feeling that this makes them somewhat po-faced, but a read of Saturday's Guardian interview with Scott Walker shows that this isn't necessarily the case. I've never thought of Bjork in that way either.

I can see both sides of the story here when artists change and get more 'arty' (sorry, that word again!). I've pretty much avoided David Sylvian since he left Japan. The irony is, of course, that I would probably find much to enjoy if I jumped in, but for some reason I can't really explain there's some little barrier that has stopped me. (At the risk of going off on a tangent, Talk Talk on the other hand are another thing. I liked the early pop singles, but Spirit Of Eden is something else and like many others I'm glad that they pursued that different 'artier' direction).

As for Scott Walker - I'm a big fan of Scott's early stuff, not just the first four solo LP's but the Walker Brothers pop tunes as well. To be totally honest I will probably never like a new Scott LP as much as I love Scott 4 or The Sun Ain't Gonna Shine Anymore for that matter, but I'm interested in what it sounds like. Yes, I would love to hear the man croon again like he used to, but I also like the fact that he is doing stuff that sounds like nobody else (that I've heard anyway). If he could combine the two different parts of his career (there's certainly enough time between reeleases!!) then that would be perfect IMO.

And yes, I'd probably prefer it musically if Bjork was still making records like the first two, but reports of the live show a year or two ago had me regretting that I'd not gone. It really sounded like she was trying to do something different, yet it sounded entertaining at the same time. I played Vespertine earlier this year and saw that on Soundtracks of our lives I wrote "Lacks the consistency of the first two solo albums in my opinion, but then suddenly moments of brilliance arrive, seemingly from nowhere. Maybe I just never played this one enough." I think I'll give it a spin later!

The final part of your last post seems to come down to 'image' which has always been around in music and is perhaps a discussion for another day. Like music I like some image - a flash of lightning across Bowie's face is fine. The haircut of that fella in A Flock Of Seagull's is a different matter!! But to suggest that Bjork has become just a quirky celeb on a picture round is way off the mark IMO, Ian.
Topic Outline:

Unsung Forum Index