Socrates

I wouldn't want to find myself in a sterile debate. I've already been through this once with another friend who, coincidentally, resembles you a lot in style. I care little about the "difficulties" of others. I acknowledged your amusing antithetical review, which can be considered one of the very few exceptions to the rule of avoiding double or triple takes on the same album. The only concept I tried to challenge you on and about which I asked for clarification is that of "anachronism" because Fagen has always been "anachronistic." From this perspective, there is no difference between the first and the last. It seems to me that you see the evolution of music in a progressive sense, as if merely moving forward twenty-five years necessarily implies overall improvement. Fagen, rightly or wrongly, does not think so. This is why I told you that, given the premises, it would have been sharper to target the "prototype." But you told me you don’t mind, so let’s leave it at that.

And it's immediately evening. Everyone is alone at the heart of the track/pierced by a beam of light/ and it's immediately evening. :-))

Well! You're having trouble arguing, and I can understand that. Your little "mistake" might have revealed your identity to me.

So it means that Fagen, deep down, doesn’t really bother you. I thought I understood the opposite. Since our feelings are always the same, as you repeatedly assert, and having clarified that you find his songs exceedingly soporific, I don't see why you would save "Il Volo Notturno," which was neither "original" nor contemporary back in '82. It was an album that, even then, couldn’t be placed in any "wave," in any genre, just like the latest one he released. The "strong" title is paraphrased, as you know, from "your" Bangs, who in "Guida ragionevole al frastuono più atroce" titles a chapter "James Taylor Must Die." Having taken such a demanding nickname, I thought you had the strength and desire to provoke, to attack a certain type of musician. But evidently, I was mistaken.

Well! I keep thinking that, if someone doesn't like Fagen, as is completely legitimate and as you suggest in your review, it's more "lesterbangsian" to aim for the big target. As you say, the "materials" he works with are always the same, and he certainly didn't invent them, I would add. You could have titled it "Danald Fagen Must Die." Next time, a bit more courage. ;-)

An antithesis to my certainly likable and entertaining one. On the topics, I do not agree, particularly regarding the alleged "originality," understood in an absolute sense, of "Nightfly": as far as that goes, the first is equal to the last. So, if you wanted to be more worthy of the name you draw inspiration from, you could have tried to take it up with the "big brother."

This time, more than convinced, not wanting to beat around the bush (if you think I'm going to try to piece together the puzzle you've cleverly prepared, you're dead wrong). :-) Shall we give "Villa Arzilla" another twist? But please, next time, don't mention the poet, otherwise we'll only attract some elderly lady. :-)

Finally listened to it calmly. I like it, I like it. "Diva Lady" is among the best songs of the year. (4.5) And I reconsider the rating on the review.

vote...

ReviewNich+massimof+odra: how can one "emulate" at least an album like this?