Mopaga

As pleasant as the track is, the feeling of déjà entendu that accompanies Post Break-Up Sex is quite awkward. I can hear the Interpol of "C'mere" and other influences that are now slipping my mind. I thought the Brits were already saturated with this indie (at least the British variety) that seems increasingly standardized. Apparently, that's not the case; good for them...

I dare it a 5 because some tracks on this album moved me. Most of the time, despite the endless mental gymnastics one can go through when listening to an album to review it, that's enough for me. Comprehensive review.

I don't want to say it's a masterpiece, but I justify the rating by saying it's a record that I'm literally consuming and that has grown on me with each listen. At first, it settled at a decent level, but now I consider it almost superior to their first album. Tracks like "Go To Hell" and "Zigota" are proof that even pop, in its broadest sense, can be art.

Review that I completely agree with! The only thing that brings a bit of "sadness" (which faded as soon as I read the joke about the League) is the fact that one has to apologize here on Debaser for having listened to Tizio or for speaking well (but not too much) of Caio, as if they were heresies to be renounced in order to avoid condemnation from the Inquisition. Obviously, it's not your fault, but rather the attitude that has become an unspoken custom among some past, present, and future users who believe that their criteria for musical evaluation are beyond question and should be adopted by everyone. As for Nathalie's single, I won't comment yet because I've only listened to it distractedly once.

Yes, the cover of The Holy Bible is also a painting, it's called Strategy. As for Journal, it definitely seems to me like a young boy, at most androgynous. And considering that it's an album centered around Richey Edwards, the choice doesn't seem so random to me. Anyway, if I find any more detailed info, I'll let you know :)

He's not a clown, just a kid. Still, federock is right; Autumnsong is a very radio-friendly track, but it absolutely doesn't hold up against 80% of the Manics' repertoire.

It is established that the beauty of Debaser lies precisely in the absence of standards (I wish I could say the same about Rai), and I share the style of the review especially because dwelling on technical and conceptual details regarding this album would definitely be boring. It's a liberating album, in some ways, considering that "Journal For Plague Lovers" came from completely different premises. At the very least, the Manics have the honesty to say six months before the release what to expect from their albums, and it seems to me that this is no exception, for better or for worse. I understand that those who appreciated The Holy Bible and Richey's persona might turn their noses up at songs with such a different mood, but in their own way, the Manics have always challenged themselves with every album. And I like them also for this.

As a seasoned Debaseriano, it doesn’t reflect well on you not to know David Gray or to "judge him" based on a greatest hits album, which, by the way, isn't bad at all as a compilation of hits. Regarding the technical notes, I seem to recall that White Ladder (his most famous album) was recorded practically at home. This would justify the "defects" in production. In any case, a harsh and somewhat biased review.

If I understood correctly and the work on the facade of the building that started at 8 this morning hasn't completely confused me, I would say that the reviewer and I are on the same wavelength. Just to be clear, I want to express my opinion by paraphrasing De Crescenzo, who once said that both the atheist and the believer are essentially two presumptuous individuals, as it is impossible to assert with certainty whether God exists or not. In my view, criticizing religion (whether it is of Christian, Muslim, or polytheistic origin) as a human institution that, legitimized by the thirst for power or some mental disturbance passed off as a kind of "enlightenment," influences millions of people and the political and social life of a country is one thing; providing the unrefutable proof of God’s non-existence as mere fanaticism and the series of contradictions surrounding religion is another. I don’t think the idea of divinity is biologically determined, but I do believe it somehow is part of human nature. Just to remain "on the surface," it could be the mortal nature of man, his vulnerability, the inevitability of his fate that makes the need to turn in prayer to a supernatural entity necessary or even justifiable, or the hope (I quote De Crescenzo again) that there might indeed be a condition that redeems us from the sufferings endured in life, and not just an eternal rest, however rational that latter conclusion may be. To come out with statements like "In 2010 there are still people who believe in God," as if those who believe, or at least "hope," are nothing but gullible, naive, and ignorant (in contrast to the non-believer who is enlightened, has understood everything about life, and can empirically demonstrate the truth of his claims) is a sterile and arrogant way to reduce the entire issue to something intrinsically anti-intellectual, which wouldn’t even be worth discussing. Therefore, neither the book nor the review would make sense. I repeat, if there is anything deplorable, it is religion with all its fanaticism and its nefarious ability to influence the free will of people, not spirituality, whether it is a form of asceticism or moral rectitude, which is something that man can and should (if he wants to, of course) cultivate as he sees fit. Lived in this way, it could even be fulfilling. After all, what do we have to lose?

I also prefer it to Love. And the latest single looks promising!