lux

Purply, aside from the fact that I had already said that the fairest rating for Medicine was 4 stars and that I got carried away when submitting my review, I still don’t think that Pornography is an essential album of human and extraterrestrial Rock. It’s not that obvious and taken for granted that this album by The Cure is better than Shot Forth Self Living; for me, it's actually the opposite. And what's this outburst about how "I like to regurgitate clichés"? Because you do, instead? For me, the album is a 3, nothing more. Too artificial and an exaggerated display of pain, as the always punctual and precise Pretazzo pointed out. Among other things, I'm not the only one who gave this album 3 stars in this review; why are you specifically targeting me?

Not all tracks are direct and cold like 100 Years and Cold.

And what if this puppet isn't a fake?

My Starblazer, now you've really hit rock bottom. All you're missing is giving 5 stars to a review of Vasco.

The social aspect has very often accompanied rock, not just in punk, so much so that rock should commonly be a transposition of the artist's mood (I'm not talking about politics here). I agree that “the way currents and trends evolve often does not depend on the quality of the proposals they draw inspiration from, but sometimes it's just a matter of visibility and attitude.” In fact, as I hinted, influence makes sense to me only if it is "good influence." If the bands that will be remembered for something are also remembered for a certain type of interesting musical proposal, in addition to the simple reason that “they influenced.” I would say that the "first" punk, besides having considerable artistic value for me, gave rise to a series of giants (including the bands I mentioned earlier) that I cannot help but appreciate. Then an album like Rocket to Russia, taken in itself, is a fantastic record. Of course, you might ignore the other albums, but that Ramones record, aside from its historical influence, is perfect in itself; it's a return to Rock (more original than ever), after someone in the past had too much fun treating it excessively like something else it never was.

Mmm, yes, but let's not forget about garage rock; perhaps the Stones did have an influence on American garage, that’s true. However, it wasn't a matter of whether they influenced or not, it was more of an analysis on the intrinsic value of their records, on their rock as such. Regarding the fact that punk is a conceptual step back and a simplification of expressive complexity, I don’t agree… not conceptually, at least. It was, at most, a formal simplification and a return "to the roots" (blessed, after the onanistic disasters of the last progressive season) that greatly benefited the same expressiveness. However, the punk expressiveness, in my opinion, had little to do with the Stones' rock-blues, no matter how much it can be a historical consequence.

In my opinion, the good STAYPOWER is a fake by Sfasciacarroze.

I challenge you to find a piece of the imperfect (because still too seminal) enormity of "the Gift" in the Stones' discography.

Holy pretazzo, I agree on everything (but only partially on the Beatles, whom I find influential, but "unfortunately" I add).

Blackdog, besides the fact that I explained why the Stones would at least be more outdated than the VU, my musings with Scaruffi have less than zero relevance since Pierone discusses the Stones in very different and much more enthusiastic terms. That said, I have the doubt that you don't read my posts at all. But then, why comment on my posts that you don't read? Hmm. A mystery.