easycure

I have always been very curious about this album… now I’m even more so.

Actually, it is precisely this aspect that drives my insistence. So much pointless waste of talent for a final product that is utterly useless... There have been artists who are completely incompetent who have created things immensely superior to what can be heard from Dream Theater... My analysis doesn’t concern technique because I don’t consider that a fundamental concept, and if you remove that from DT, little remains... Scaruffi has relatively another standard of evaluation... Whether he is impartial is very, very debatable... for him, anything that is pop is already contemptible because it is not sufficiently sacrilegious; perhaps he often forgets, as a NON musician, that you don’t need much to be original... Scaruffi doesn’t like humility.

Well... Head on the Door is the most anonymous of that period in my opinion... too inconsistent... much more inconsistent than The Top, which is underrated and beautiful... take tracks like "Screw" or the incredibly boring "Sinking," nonsensical, leftovers from the leftovers of the worst pieces of The Cure from other albums. There are great songs, like "Push," but never real examples of pure genius as found in many tracks of Kiss Me or The Top. Too purely pop and not psychedelic enough, evocative... it feels like a collection of jingles, not even a real album...

All grades aside, Train of Thought ; ) ..anyway, of course I know it, but apart from its incredibly vast and truly useful database, and some excellent tips it gives you, it’s definitely too snobbish, and often quite biased as well... when you get to read quite a few of its reviews and get an overall view, you'll notice it.. it’s certainly not Lester Bangs...

Well, okay, sorry to you too! If I've often used strong tones, it's usually in response to equally strong tones, or outright insults. Bye!

Never endured. Empty like an empty glass, they can do everything and for this reason, they do nothing.

Fantastic

Originality is being personal, finding new languages that don't necessarily INNOVATE upon those that already exist. Innovativeness is, upon closer inspection, a more limited concept than originality. And it’s not true, I repeat (I also expressed myself poorly), that every theme is comparable.. you're once again falling into the mistake of considering art as pure language, as a mere means; without delving into philosophical or aesthetic discussions, if art is something more than simple language, it is inadmissible to consider that all themes are comparable. It's not just a matter of what meaning to give to a theme; it’s a question of SUBSTANCE, not form. It’s about finding unusual, non-trivial themes; and in this, the Dream Theater completely fails, beyond their formal complexities (which are trivial as well); the fact that Wyatt creates accessible melodies means he is communicative, but an accessible melody doesn't have to be a given; it shouldn't rely on banal chord progressions, maintaining a standard typical of countless pop songs that evoke emotions in a completely standardized way.. Wyatt creates melodies that are also absolutely atypical, and I really don’t understand how one could compare his themes to those of any other artist. It’s quite challenging, if you try, because Wyatt is unique.

No, for me it does not exist. Originality is a fundamental concept not so much in art, but at a much more primary level of creativity in the strict sense (and this will be the third time I repeat this here, forgive me those who read it again :D). In psychology (which I study), creativity is defined, in very brief terms, as DIVERGENT thinking, that is, the kind of thinking that in solving a problem (note: problem in a broad sense, primarily meaning "creation problem") chooses not the most logical solution, but the most original, personal, new, strange one. If this is creativity, I cannot help but think that in fact it is also the most important concept underlying art, whatever form of art we are talking about. It is indeed impossible not to acknowledge that art is, first and foremost, an expression of human creativity, which may also have a communicative purpose, I completely agree, but communicativeness, like any other constitutive element of art including execution, cannot disregard the primary and most important element, which is CREATIVITY. And then be careful, you like many others before you tend to confuse originality with innovation. But they are two very different concepts; if originality can exist without innovation, innovation cannot exist without originality...

Now, x anon: please don't drag me into nonsense like "aren't you ashamed?" or even worse nonsense like "slimy and cowardly statements." You're sick, kid; I can't think otherwise. Of course, I have nothing to be ashamed of for expressing an opinion about a group. Please, always assign the right weight to things. Moreover, you’re digging your own grave (besides not authenticating yourself, speaking of style, huh?) by spewing nonsense about how I diverted the discussion when you practically said NOTHING; you've only raised exaggerated objections to my statements without even minimally explaining WHY I should have a different opinion or make less extreme statements about the group in question. We're just not on the same page.