easycure

I think they are truly one of the ugliest bands of all time.

Hi Orion! Sorry for responding only now, but I was lost in a bunch of reviews to comment on :-) I find your speech very on point (and also quite reassuring in the end!) ...when I get there, I'll let you know ;-)

comment above not for marco, sorry. X Abyss :-)

x Marco: it's not that I don't care about knowing the release date of an album per se, but I certainly find it fundamental because I believe it's crucial to contextualize any album and/or period we're discussing. Look, it's true that this approach is somewhat similar to a "critical" one in general, but in reality, it's not at all shared by most critics. Like you and many DT fans, they get lost in the pure contingency of what an album represents in its simple existence. This, in itself, is rather "dangerous," artistically speaking, because it ultimately justifies everything and everyone solely based on their existence. For instance, this is used to justify the horrible rock'n roll revival that is today shoved down our throats with constant and pointless pseudo "new revelations" and other similar sterile nonsense. More deeply, I will never accept your logic for the simple reason that for me art, quite obviously, is based on creativity. And since creativity is an effort towards divergence, that is, towards originality, I certainly couldn't conceive of something that is "already said" as something that makes sense. In fact, for this reason, I have never claimed that the groups I've mentioned had historical awareness. What matters to me is that they were original, even more so modern. You consider my approach too historical, but as I explained to you, historical reasons are a posteriori and logically come after a priori aesthetic reasons: that is, originality, personality, ultimately creativity. With this, if DT moves you, that's perfectly fine with me. However, I care very little about it. If there exists someone who did before them what they, with few and irrelevant variations, do, it’s clear that their creative effort is zero, and thus it's clear that they are a mediocre band (from my point of view). Whether they move people is another matter. As I've said many times, no one can deny that Ramazzotti or Pausini move their fans. Therefore, the "emotionality" of a band is an absolutely relative discourse. However, the quality of a band is not, an issue that cannot disregard historical reasons; historical reasons that, I repeat, are essential for the pure functional question of understanding how truly creative a band has been.

I don't understand the reason for this review. Even more so if you liked Warehouse. Maybe this should be put into context. And since the context is completely lacking, the review is rather poor.

But the fact that it is made with great class, that it deals with culturally relevant themes, and that it is a product of 20th-century literature (nice one. and why not) why should that make it a work of art? And especially, what exactly distinguishes it from entertainment music? ... anyway, even the cover clearly references Dostoevsky, look at that taste :-D ..I think you might be missing a bit of Red Crayola, Popol Vuh, Pere Ubu, Captain Beefheart on your nightstand.. maybe at that point the distinction between work of art and "entertainment music" would make sense.

It's not that it doesn't add up, but it doesn't mean that other arguments can't exist as well. It depends on each person, on the approach that each has to music: you can't turn it into a theorem about musical perception; do you know how many times I've changed my listening habits in a year? In 2003, after listening to "is this it" by the Strokes, I got caught up in the new rock'n roll trend... which I abandoned four or five months later when every album I listened to began to sound worse and worse; my epiphany after that period was "loveless" by My Bloody Valentine... but even shoegaze eventually wore off for me... and now, when it comes to shoegaze itself, I don't save that many albums. I think instead that lux has been very consistent: if he liked Sonic Youth so much, well, they are so antithetical to DT that it would have probably been much more inconsistent to keep saying "what a masterpiece I&W," "what a masterpiece awake," etc. right?

But why should I have changed it? We discussed, exchanged opinions, and obviously listened to each other. I also listened to the Ayreon he recommended (they were a bit disappointing, to be honest).. however, he listened to stuff he had never tried before, like Sonic Youth, and that changed his perspective. It doesn't take much to imagine it; it's something that happens to many :-D ..for me, hearing SY was a revelation, just as it was for hundreds of bands that, post-Sonic Youth, have been heavily influenced in one way or another.. because whether you like it or not, SY has been one of the most important and influential bands of the last 25 years.. it seems to me that a thing like this is simply unacceptable to you; I can imagine the reaction: "WHAT, YOU USED TO LISTEN TO DT AND NOW SONIC YOUTH"? :-D ..the fact is that it’s a perfectly plausible equation. But not necessarily for the greater quality of one over the other; much more simply because once you listen to SY, a world opens up to you, I repeat once again for their undeniable importance and influence.. it will be hard to accept, given how much of a joke SY can be :-D ..but it is so.. P.S. Jamal, just so you know, Sonic Youth didn’t come from punk rock, but from avant-garde music and Glenn Branca's experiments. They are musically much more intellectual and "cultured" than Dream Theater, and I say this simply based on their biographies :-)

Beautiful! And beautiful cover and beautiful name.

hahah, but then it’s beautiful: “lux, easycure and your friends” AHAHAHAH genius.. he made the lists of proscription :-D