ajejebrazorf

Easy, but what do you mean by autoreferenzialità this time? (Given that twin infinitives is one of those albums I still need to form an opinion on). Anyway, as I’ve already said, I really like the rhythms. It’s not a mental wank, it’s not that high-minded of a discussion. And for example, those rhythms that have been labeled as "nonsense" (not to mention the alleged atonality of many tracks, which are perfectly tonal) have a distinctly minimalist stamp and are much more rigorous than they may initially appear. For me, this album has inspired quite a bit of math rock.

a nice pop album, and I didn't believe it.

Well, imagine that, I'm not a fanatic either, these are just considerations. I don't think there's any difference between the opinion of an enthusiast and that of a critic; critics are, above all, enthusiasts. If they say their nonsense, it's because all enthusiasts do, so let's not make distinctions between "real life" and reviews. Bangs apparently decided to become a critic after listening to this record; I would say that if an album changes someone's life, it has to mean something, right? And this also leads to the other point: that is, to the fact that, as you say, this is not music but a conceptual exercise and a provocation. I don't believe that it was premeditated (like, the captain wakes up and says, "now I'm going to make a provocation and create a horrible and incomprehensible record", but-you-can-not-believe-it, seeing the hunger), but rather simply stems from the impact that a record like this could have on a world accustomed to much more conventional music. I don't believe it was a cold conceptual exercise; it's anything but cold, it's instinct, as I said before. However, it's true that you can read many things into it, but it's not a symbol that conveys specific messages; it's, first and foremost, music, and fun music, provided you accept its rules. The mental gymnastics come afterwards; Beefheart and his band simply followed their hearts and bodies, disregarding the little rules. This doesn't prevent one from thinking a lot about the meanings that such a different way of making music can have.

Unfortunately, when talking about certain groups, Scaruffi always comes up, and if someone has a dislike for him, every band he likes that doesn’t resonate with someone who holds the critic in low regard turns into a "Scaruffi band," and this is an absurd situation that annihilates any discussion. Now, Scaruffi has indeed become an enormous echo chamber, but ten years before Scaruffi, the biggest critics in the world (names? Reynolds, Bangs, in Italy Bertoncelli) were tearing their clothes over him, "oh captain my captain." As for the Aspromonte scene, well, what can you say, but you must consider that people like Zappa and his musicians who participated in the album definitely knew how to play. Regarding innovation, forgive my French but I couldn't care less, seriously, and I don’t see it as that much of a "white fly," there was free jazz, and in rock, there were the Godz (those really didn’t know how to play). It remains that for me, and for others, it’s a record that is decidedly enjoyable and wildly free, not to mention all the rhythmic ideas that are present, which are never discussed in relation to innovation and the liters of seed spilled. It’s not homogeneous and it’s verbose, but for me, it's a great album, without worrying too much about where it ranks among the best rock music albums.

"studied on purpose just to impress" by people who starved for the love of music? Do you think so?

"Real innovators (I remind you that music must also be harmony) are elsewhere, here I find a different concept of art, just this... it doesn't take much to amaze you, you know..." In my opinion, behind this statement lies the old notion that "there must be effort behind a record," and that if certain patterns (harmony) are not followed, there is no effort, and consequently, value is lacking, forgetting that art is not craftsmanship and cannot be measured in this way.

@cptgaio: truly this record is the exact opposite of intellectualism. it's a record of instinct, it doesn't follow the rational rules of harmony (behind which, yes, there is intellectualism and rigor in abundance). Brian Eno said it well (I think): true abstract art is the three-minute song with a chorus. But for us it's easier to accept: we grew up with it.

but who gives a damn about eclecticism, come on. In my opinion, the style is quite uniform (the first safe as milk is much more normal and therefore different), but that’s not the point. The value I see lies in the primitivist, instinctual approach. It’s the opposite of the European approach to harmony.

dear eneathediavolo darling, you know that I also appreciate sciurze, it was just the desire to debunk the myth of the supreme heaviness of this. I know you won’t agree, but you are in electronics, you’ve never appreciated the rotten and filthy side of rock, correct me if I’m wrong, especially if “disorganized” as in this case.

Yes, of course Beefheart's band is the Magic Band, but if I'm not mistaken, here both the Magic Band and a good part of the Mothers are playing.