Massimof

Bruce Springsteen is a legend of American music. Period. Just like Bob Dylan and Jimi Hendrix are for different reasons. I don't ignore much. Part of my free time (and my substances) has been dedicated to music. However, even though I listen to an incredible amount of music, I've only sought out and delved into what I liked. I used "seminal" partly to provoke you. It’s clear that almost everyone has copied almost everyone who came before or at least has been inspired by them. Don't be too convinced of your convictions. What you think is only what you think. It's not necessarily gold. Try to occasionally insert phrases like "for me," "in my opinion"… and everything becomes clearer. Did you like these little phrases? Come on, this sport of downplaying Springsteen doesn't hold up anymore. And you still haven't listed 5 current bands that will make it to 2035...

Let's just say that Bruce is a symbol of American music. He has now become part of the history of American music. One question: how can you say that I ignore half a million bands? How can you? Entire salaries spent on records and CDs, and someone who listens to Black shit comes to lecture me. Oh my God!

"You from the 60s and 70s really know little, and it shows in how you talk about Born To Run, which isn't seminal at all." Oh my! With this bait, I could strangle myself!

I knew you would immediately bite on this juicy and hefty bait! Snap! Gotcha. Let me summarize in points: 1) Springsteen started playing in the early '70s, around 35 years ago. In the '70s, rock music truly blossomed with new sounds, new stimuli, new ideas. The '70s, in my opinion, were a second renaissance for rock. And you can't tell me that albums like Born to Run (1975) weren't "seminal." That is, they didn't influence many subsequent bands. 2) I say again that today there are several bands that serve up a reheated dish. The usual mush with a slightly different sauce. Question: name me 5 bands that by 2035 will have albums that will be considered historic (I didn’t say there aren’t any, but I want to see where you’re going with this). 3) My style, whether good or bad, is to write "mythological phrases" when I believe in something. It’s to give it color, liveliness, depth. One can use insults, sins, obscenities. I, instead, when I find it appropriate, include phrases that reflect like a neon light. A matter of choices. 4) In summary, what I wanted to convey with the above post is that albums like this MUST be heard and absorbed, AND THEN today's music can be listened to with a better understanding. Simplifying, if a little rock/blues band today plays a guitar riff like Magnolia, it's hailed as a miracle. Only if one hasn't listened to J.J. Cale before. It was an invitation to listen to these classics to have a more accurate judgment. That’s all.

Egebamyasi... well, between my 3 and your 2 there's not much of a difference. That extra number is probably due to nostalgia. Likely, if something like that came out now, I wouldn't pay much attention to it anymore.

Damn nostalgia! Those '80s are haunting me. I don't have the CD, but having lived through those years, it's ingrained in me whether I like it or not. A bit like 'Vamos a la playa' by Righeira!! Jokes aside, this Sommerville had an incredible energy and creativity during those years. Sure, it was still dance music, but in that realm, he was a big deal. Whether he was gay or not didn't matter back then, let alone today...

Great and historic album. I agree with Bluemask, this is his masterpiece. And it's another one of those albums that one should own in order to discuss music, thus avoiding the glorification of small groups that re-make records from thirty years or more ago, or perhaps discovering bands that create truly original music...

Yes, this review is funny but... are you becoming "bad" too? Because I like the bad ones...

I would say classical music...

This review was also in my line-up. A true classic. A very warm album. Exciting.