lux

Alfrè, I had no doubts about your good taste :-)

Incredible how David didn’t understand a damn thing I wrote. The Beatles' style is more conventional than that of the MBV, so anything the Beatles play in their style will be less interesting and original than what the MBV could do. This is true regardless of the actually totally different historical contexts of the two bands. But I'm talking to you about the attitude of the two bands, which is universal and clearly visible. A cute and catchy melody can also be pulled off by Ligabue, but go see what clichés he uses to dress it up... haven’t you realized yet that rock is a way of being, huh?

Sick of it? Anyway, do you know about BimboDavid? Think what you want and keep believing in the secular superiority of the Beatles, in the existence of Santa Claus, in the good faith of politicians, in the idea that Mutu never said yes to Roma, and in various twisted and convenient versions of reality... your mental change can only come from you; I don’t care what you listen to. After all, without getting lost in chatter, it's enough to listen to certain records to draw certain conclusions. It’s just that with your filter/mental schema that sees the Beatles reigning over the entire planet (the greatest cliché after "music is subjective," so it's all good), you'll never grow.

David, don’t be an idiot, come on, I asked you innocently if you knew the MBV, how the hell should I know if you’ve listened to them... given that you admitted not knowing Robert Wyatt (and having previously criticized groups and artists you’ve never listened to), anything can be expected from you. I could repeat all of this to you live as well. Rather, you seem very childish and immature to me; if you’re really 28 years old, you’re a serious case.

David DARK SCHNEIDER may have expressed himself poorly, but try to grasp the essence and not engage in sterile polemics. You see... some melodies from certain songs by certain bands might remind you of the Beatles, but that's not the point. Even if it evoked A Day In The Life, the key is HOW it reinterprets the melody and HOW it makes it its own, creating something new. You see it as a simple matter of melody, I’m talking about approach. Let me turn the question back to you: if the Beatles were to cover a track by MBV, they would undoubtedly trivialize it with their conventional melodic style, making it annoyingly standard and ordinary. Is it clearer now?

David, the reasons for their superiority I've written above, please I can't repeat them.. But have you at least listened to the MBV? Search online if you're not convinced by what I say, at least you'll gain the right conceptual distance and understand in what historical context they were born and why they were one of the most important bands of the 90s.

David, I understand that abstraction is not your strong suit. Let me rephrase DARK SCHNEIDER's statement for you: "If you got so angry over this review simply because it criticizes the Beatles, I can't even begin to imagine how you might have reacted to the review of Immagine where they even glorified the assassin." Now read the sentence again, take a deep breath, calm down, and read it carefully before going wild.

There’s no doubt that Pixies, Beatles, and MBV have different goals and purposes (although I believe only the latter possess a certain artistic stature); however, we’re still talking about rock in both cases, or at least music that aims to reach a wide audience... because the background of MBV is absolutely that of popular music as well. What changes is the quality and artistic awareness in approaching this genre. I agree on the ability to synthesize, which is essential in this era of empty rhetoric (also) in music, but for me, the only substantial synthesis the Beatles achieved is the short duration of 3 minutes per song... within those 3 minutes, I honestly don’t see any significant syntheses, even musically, for the reasons I mentioned in the previous post. That doesn’t take away from the fact that they still produced enjoyable records, but while they were churning out pleasant albums, others were delivering genius. I realize I’m not being original at all, but that’s not really my goal after all. X-D

Pixies, maybe I’m not explaining myself well: for me, pop is not a bad word. Even without removing the walls of feedback, it’s evident that pop exists in MBV, but it’s not a matter of "ingredients" (Pop + electronics + guitar, etc.), it’s a matter of style, of how these elements are brought to a synthesis. The pop melody in MBV is a futile pretext for a dreamlike experience, indeed for a dreamlike message. The Beatles, on the other hand, start and end with melody, enriched each time by different aesthetic gimmicks, which, as such, are simply aesthetic. They use the sitar for mere formal addition; without it, the substance would be the same (just a bit more sparse aesthetically, precisely). In MBV, if you take away the feedback, it becomes a completely different band, evoking entirely different sensations. In other words, the Beatles have always thrived on contours; their approach was that of more classical melody, which justified melody as such. MBV used melody (they didn’t just place it before your eyes); they gave it a function to reach something else, to a synthesis that no longer recognized the individual elements as such but saw them as a new product. It’s a matter of how, not of what. Because it’s the method that gives dignity to the content, but above all, allows it to exist as such (you can’t do something unless necessarily in a certain concrete way, also because pure substance without form is substance only in potential, and therefore doesn’t yet exist...). Sorry for the casual Aristotelian references, I hope I’ve been clear anyway.

David, write "V E L V E T U N D E R G R O U N D" on Google, and see what comes up and how they talk about it, since you’re pointing fingers at what you want. As for the Rolling Stone charts (without the S), I think they matter as much as the MTV charts, or thereabouts. "And as Lennon said: We are bigger than Christ"------- yes, indeed, even Vasco Rossi at a concert shouted "Welcome To The Rock!", that doesn’t make Vasco Rossi a good rocker. I've already told you about the Floyd (but even the pigs know), that they have a career that can be divided into three periods: the first excellent, the second at most decent, the third unlistenable. "sunday morning could be fine as a b-side of Luna Pop songs"---------- ahah, speaks the one who praises the most overrated pop group (or pop rock if you prefer, it changes little eh) of Pineta, but just walk on.