Tuesday, August 15, 2006
art, growth and blink-182
i have a habit of getting into musical sounds, eras, etc, after they're defunct or passe. my current target is the punk-pop band, blink-182, which i first heard two years ago when my friend stv laid the mp3s of Enema of the State on me. i found myself listening to that album more and more, so i finally decided to do a little research and found the band to be a good target for my obsessive style research.
i read how enema of the state was a cross over from their punk-rock core because it was recorded digitally and has a really clean sound. i have to admit, this is part of the reason i like it so much. i also read that their last, untitled album, was far more mature and developed. this lead to claims that blink sounded like the police or even U2, although the band says they took cues from the cure (Robert Smith does guest vocals late in the album.)
so is it bad of me that i actually don't like this album so much upon my first two listens? i mean, i like it, but where's the quirky, good-time lyrics and just-for-fun approach to music that attracted me in the first place?
SIGH
i know. bands can do no right, they can't grow.... the good news is, there are plenty of other albums in the blink catalogue that probably follow the formula i'm interested in. no wonder the group broke up. if all the blink fans were like me and resisted the band's new sounds, what fun would it be? as an artist there is no worse hell than to make the same music year after year.
but i'm not going to apologize for my taste. i'm sure had i been there on the ground, growing up with the music while the band was rocking, i'd want them to transform as well. looking back at what i've heard so far, i want a slice of the energy that the early albums capture. that's all. it's not wrong for me to enjoy and seek out a specific moment in a band's career. i do it to jazz players all the time.
i read how enema of the state was a cross over from their punk-rock core because it was recorded digitally and has a really clean sound. i have to admit, this is part of the reason i like it so much. i also read that their last, untitled album, was far more mature and developed. this lead to claims that blink sounded like the police or even U2, although the band says they took cues from the cure (Robert Smith does guest vocals late in the album.)
so is it bad of me that i actually don't like this album so much upon my first two listens? i mean, i like it, but where's the quirky, good-time lyrics and just-for-fun approach to music that attracted me in the first place?
SIGH
i know. bands can do no right, they can't grow.... the good news is, there are plenty of other albums in the blink catalogue that probably follow the formula i'm interested in. no wonder the group broke up. if all the blink fans were like me and resisted the band's new sounds, what fun would it be? as an artist there is no worse hell than to make the same music year after year.
but i'm not going to apologize for my taste. i'm sure had i been there on the ground, growing up with the music while the band was rocking, i'd want them to transform as well. looking back at what i've heard so far, i want a slice of the energy that the early albums capture. that's all. it's not wrong for me to enjoy and seek out a specific moment in a band's career. i do it to jazz players all the time.
