Giona

@Bob: The Kandahar really have a great formation! Curiously, some aspects of their artistic journey remind me of the Cos, with two fantastic initial albums around the mid-'70s ("Long Live the Sliced Ham," "In the Court of Catherina Squeezer") and a noticeable decline with their fourth release ("Ghent, Somewhere in Europe"). However, I must say that Jeff De Visscher's gravelly voice doesn’t resemble Pascale’s even remotely...

Thank you all for your comments. I believe that a beautiful way to unveil the potential of art is by highlighting its immeasurable breadth and the surprising flexibility through which various artistic currents intersect as if they were a single, intricately articulated entity. This is why I enjoy creating a journey in my writings: narrating the unfolding of this continuous amalgamation of different forms of expression, which can span, depending on the case, from history to painting, from folklore to theater, from literature to pure reflection, and then observing how everything harmoniously converges into music. I realize that this is neither a site for in-depth studies nor one for lengthy narratives, and that certain choices are inevitably destined to be unpopular, but the internet is filled with "standard" reviews, and if I were to set out to write the usual monothematic analysis (or simply adorned with some unconventional element, but essentially decorative), it would seem to me that I would not be fully exploiting the potential of a free and informal review space like DeB.

This will be the first and last time I vote for my own review. The sense of this contradictory behavior (considering that the assessment is already there) resides in the thick fog that sometimes arises between a purely objective view of things and a more personal and subjective one. This "proto-debut" by National Health is both my favorite album by this formation and the only one (among the "studio" ones, although in this case the term should be taken with a grain of salt) to which I haven't awarded excellence. How can this be explained? The reason lies in the singular nature of the album, which I feel I haven't illustrated with sufficient clarity. Although this may be a posthumous work, lacking a certain homogeneity and coherence as well as an audio quality worthy of the name (at least in today's terms), it can only deserve the highest possible rating when it comes to a musical work. The reason for my "only" 4 stars can be traced back to my attempt to highlight, thus warning the reader, some shortcomings that might weigh on a listener perhaps unfamiliar with the Canterbury Sound. In trying to "keep my feet on the ground," I have, however, made the mistake of not giving due and rightful credit to a masterpiece that, besides boasting a stellar cast (Bill Bruford, Mont Campbell, Steve Hillage, just to name a few who would leave before the release of the 1977 self-titled album), consists of some of the most audacious and successful compositions of the entire movement of which it is a part (I can mention "Paracelsus," as well as "Clocks and Clouds" or "Zabaglione," but in reality they are all at the top). Thus, we arrive at a genuine misunderstanding: the tracks are perfect except for the last two, which I mistakenly considered part of the main tracklist when in fact they are merely bonus tracks included in the album for reasons of completeness and irony (“Starlight on Seaweed,” “Walking the Dog”). The first was not even created by National Health but can be considered a "cover," performed by Barbara Gaskin and Dave Stewart in '95, in honor of the original composition by Mont, which was never recorded (at least not decently) and therefore never reached us. I hope that with these further words, I have finally done justice to one of the gems of a genre that will never be celebrated as much as it undoubtedly deserves.

Following the exchange of views with Jargon, I realized that my emphasis on a full (or almost) belonging to the realm of fusion for this record was entirely misplaced, so I took a step back and corrected a sentence that could have misled the unwary reader who might trust my inexperienced observations. I consider the current formulation much clearer and more accurate, although I will never cease to repeat that it is extremely difficult (and perhaps even pointless) to attempt to identify a concrete and defined boundary around the elusive term "fusion," which, due to its very nature of "melding" (that is, of being an exclusively hybrid style), can exist in an endless array of forms and percentages, especially when we examine this delicate period in which jazz-rock was bringing certain elements to maturity that would later constitute, in the immediate ensuing years, the backbone of a type of jazz that makes "chameleonic" its own philosophy of life.

I apologize for not considering the last comments, but they completely slipped my mind. Returning to the prog-folk discussion, I can only say that, in my humble opinion, Amazing Blondel does not stray far from those folksy, honest, and traditional atmospheres that have very little to show in terms of experimentalism or innovation. The Morgans are already more "dynamic" and alternative, but in their case, the folk element is so minimal that I struggle to include them in the category of the aforementioned bands. While some episodes veer into excessive "easy listening," the suite "Nova Solis" presents some rather interesting ideas (but again, nothing to do with folk).

Well, dear Jargon, perhaps that would be a bit radical. You must admit that Lula Côrtes and Zé Ramalho are not exactly household names in the music scene (whatever the genre)... In fact, I would say that considering the thick darkness surrounding the subject, it could have been much worse ;)

Thank you again to everyone who attended! I'm very pleased to see how we all agree on the value of this remarkable concert :)

Interactive review just how I like it :) As interesting as the album proposed is, I admit that the inner revolution (let’s call it a whirlwind) disturbs my limited and rational senses a bit too much for my taste (it would be a 4, but I won't rate it because it's very likely I haven't fully grasped the work yet). In any case, long live rural relaxation! :p

Wow, I totally missed this ode to Lindsay (and to the female universe in general). Well, better late than never... right? :p

Thank you all! Too kind. I'm glad that you weren't too affected by the length (in some cases, a must) of the topic (although it would be more accurate to say 'topics' :p) covered. As a storyteller, I certainly couldn't shy away from illustrating in detail, with a wealth of anecdotes and specifics, what is essentially just a small province in the magnificent and vast kingdom of Her Majesty. @Blech: Almost. The precise period is between "Larks" and "Starless". "Red" is from the following year ('74) and its compositions are not yet featured in this live performance.