Zarathustra

3 reviews, now I understand...

Well, yes, but what kind of review is this? I agree with the rating; this is the masterpiece of the Red Hot. An album that oozes primitive joy from every pore, with that dirty funk dominating most of the tracks. You’ve shamefully left out the legendary Sir Pysco Sexw and Apache Rose Peacok, which are two absolutely amazing songs, simply legendary. And Frusciante is stunning, with an incredibly unique style (which, to be honest, owes more than a little to Slovack). Magical.

Perhaps, in hindsight, I wouldn't even use the adjective artistic next to musical. I did it lightly, not anticipating that the discussion would take this (more than welcome to me) direction... :-) Hello everyone.

Well, in my opinion, there are different types of artists. Or rather, artists of different "weights," just like in boxing, where there are featherweights, middleweights, heavyweights, and so on, and no one would dream of putting them in direct comparison. It doesn’t mean that welterweights are less boxers than heavyweights. They just have a different weight class, but no less sporting dignity. The same goes for music. After all, how could we refer to an artist like Leonardo da Vinci, Salvador Dalí, Caravaggio, Bernini, Mozart, Wagner, Strauss, Verdi, and at the same time use the same label for The Beatles, The Stones, The Velvet Underground, The Doors, The Floyd, The Zep, and then, descending in line, Pearl Jam or Nirvana, and even Norah Jones, and so on?
In general, I would uphold the definition of artist given by De Mauro Paravia: an artist is "one who practices an art professionally or dedicates themselves habitually to it, especially excelling." Now, given that I believe popular music is a distinct form of art from classical music, in some respects even superior (for example, when it manages to merge with the poetry of the lyrics, see De André), while for many others it is decidedly inferior, Povia absolutely does not fall into this category. Does anyone really have the courage to say that Povia excels in the art of popular music? And if Povia excels, what would we say about Pink Floyd or Genesis? As for Cammariere, I refrained from calling him an artist; I simply placed his music in the melting pot of "artistic-musical forms that are exponentially more evolved and interesting" than those developed by Povia and similar people. With this, I wanted to say first of all that Cammariere is an excellent musician and composer and secondly that he operates on a different plane than musically vulgar people like Povia. But I haven't discussed his music as art, not even with the "distinctions" presented above.

Anyway, I refuse to consider Povia a musician. I'm sorry, I have a different conception of the figure of a musician, leaving aside the Big names of classical music.

Great band, their music was explosive. I don't know the album.

This is one of his best albums. Actually, the best in my opinion. However, it doesn't communicate many emotions to me...

@raf: well, what you’re saying leaves me quite baffled. Indeed, if what you’re saying is true, I’m at a loss for words.

I have a lot of respect for them as a group; they made great pop music.

Well, I've never liked them much, due to the stage presence and the voice of the singer, both of which I find too overwhelming.