Hal

I need more details, I'm going, thx

It’s unlikely they will come by my area, which is a shame because it seems like an interesting proposal. Nice cover, which appears to owe a debt to A. Spiegelman.

Well ...

Beautiful title

While respecting everyone’s opinions and without wanting to be polemical, I would like to understand, taking myself as an example, why the fact that I feel nothing while listening to this CD should necessarily place me in the category of those who criticize premeditatedly and out of trend? They might exist, I don’t deny it. Prejudices are widespread. But why generalize? Perhaps just because some tastes don’t align with ours? But is it really so absurd that this record might not appeal to everyone? It seems perfectly normal to me. When I listen to Coltrane, I feel a shiver run from my neck to my hands. Some of my friends, on the other hand, break out in hives. That certainly doesn’t make me angry. Nor do I shout about prejudice: “Ah, you’re just like all those who say ‘jazz is boring,’ while you simply lack the patience to listen.” That would be nonsense, if not a hidden prejudice wrapped in generalization. The perception of music normally divides people into different opinions. Moreover, everyone’s background is a factor that influences such perception, as is one’s mood. Knowing, albeit not perfectly, the tastes of many users of this site, I don’t believe their opinions are premeditated and expressed merely to follow a trend. I’m not speaking for everyone; I couldn’t, but I believe I can say this about the people who have written on this page. They can always deny me if that’s not the case. As for me, I turn to Francis: you’ve already heard my opinion about this record in your review. Today I can only add that I listened to it again, but nothing has changed. In the future, one can never say. Bye.

I don't quite agree with eclipse because I believe there are three stories of PF with three protagonists: Barrett first, Waters later, and finally Gilmour. It’s clear that in the history of a band, all its members have their intrinsic importance, but there are also different specific weights. Their specific weight in the three phases of the band's activity, in terms of influence and leadership, has been significantly defining in the creative process of their music, in my opinion. Bye.

It's difficult to review albums of this kind without spending millions of words; however, perhaps psycho is right in pointing out that despite the completeness of the information, there remains a feeling that something personal is missing, but maybe it would never be enough. Hi (ps for zurk "Fusi di Testa"? Yes, I remember :))

I share much of logic's comment. Waters identifies in the connection between music and lyrics that "state of disintegration of the miserable human being" (this phrase is truly spot on). In PF and as a solo artist, he has highlighted the contradictions of society and the individual's difficulty in relating to it. Not only the words, but the music also describes alienation and existential discomfort. He conveys this, and for me, it wasn't an easy task. Amused to death, then, for me today is still a highly relevant album, I would add tragically relevant. I truly do not know where the line is between "construction" and "genius," nor do I even know if they are incompatible, but if Waters' work isn't genius, I would say it's very close nonetheless.

How was it? Ah yes, here it is... "Free, feeling free / perhaps for a moment it's possible / but what sense does it make, if within me / lies the measure of my uselessness. / For now, I postpone suicide / and join a study group / the masses, the class struggle, the Gramscian texts / Pretending to be sane, pretending to be..." I was struck by the contrast between the lyrics and the way he performed his songs, even though sometimes the term song might be inappropriate. Sometimes, when he sang words like these, looking straight into the audience's eyes, he would sketch out that half-smile, contagious, pessimistic, and bitter, as if he were saying, "Don't you see it's all a farce?". Sarcasm and disillusionment characterized his relationship with the audience. Sharp and uncomfortable. He shook consciences. Many pretended to love him, but in reality, they felt annoyance because he pointed out the wounds of society, because he undermined certainties. Moreover, he was not just a singer-songwriter; he was an interpreter, an actor. Yet, despite all this, I don't love this album that much. It leaves me with a strange melancholy, as if one could sense the end.

I see that this is your first authenticated comment, Marco T... welcome anyway, hello again.