From: pkang@acsu.buffalo.edu (Pablo Kang)
Newsgroups: alt.music.alternative
Subject: Re: Cure: I Wish...
Date: 15 Oct 92 05:40:25 GMT
Organization: UB

In article <u882517.719045441@bruny> u882517@bruny.cc.utas.edu.au (Blos!) writes:
>	My point is that it's not just one song that's the problem.  It's
>easy to focus on "Friday" and "Doing the Unstuck" as horrifying, but when
>the rest of the album was just stale and did nothing different (and DON'T
>try to argue against my point of view by saying that they change all the time-
>it's precisely because there was such a dearth of fresh ideas on _Wish_
>that I was so disillusioned) then I was forced to conclude that there just
>isn't much more left in them, at least for me.  The new guard have taken
>over, and the Cure just can't keep pace.  Sad, but true...even Robert says
>Ride is his favourite band.  (Need I say more?)

  What do you mean the "rest" of the album was horrible? I quite enjoyed
  the "rest" of the album. You're being subjective, as far as you calling
  it stale. It's what _YOU_ think...so don't push it on people to believe
  that it was a bad album. It's _YOUR_ opinion. I didn't say you were
  wrong, just adding a few facts. I didn't only point out "Friday" and
  "Doing the Unstuck" (which by the way I don't think their really bad),
  but showed a few good examples of other good songs in the album. Go back
  to previous articles for that. (Need I say more?)

  By the way, you don't like Ride? 

>	The Cure have always made poppish tunes which were the fun side
>of the albums, but the side that was worthwhile was the constant reinvention
>with the unmistakeable stamp of genius on it.  There's just nothing new:
>they're caught between two stools and it shows dreadfully.

  What do _YOU_ define as "genius?" I'm sure there are people out there
  that believe that have never treated the Cure as "geniuses." There
  are people out there that have recently called them "geniuses." You just
  happen to believe that they stopped...and that's your opinion. Nothing
  more, nothing less.

  Sure, I didn't think the pop songs in _Wish_ were works of art...but
  they were nice to listen to.

>>  I don't think any "intelligent" person would assume this. First, not
>>  _all_ music sucks (though I'll admit most of it does stink), and second
>>  you can't assume just because the Cure get play time for _one_ song that
>>  that's proof enough for you that they are in a state of demise.
>
>	Emotive argument, perhaps, but it makes me cringe to hear that
>song when I'm subjected to shit mainstream radio.

  After being overplayed about 5 billion times on the radio, who wouldn't?
  But what point does that make about the Cure's demise? 

>>Remember, their popularity is probably, if not most likely, not due to the
>>fact that they conformed, but rather their longevity, conformity _by the
>>public_ to let the Cure be as they are, and/or a few tunes (emphasis on the
>>few). If the few songs catch people to listen to the Cure, and then go on to 
>>keep on listening to the Cure even further, great.
>
>	Yeah, it's just a shame that the record people are hearing first is
>one of their poor efforts.  I suppose the "Pornography" era fans thought the
>same thing about "Japanese Whispers", but at least that had "La Ment"...

  True. You hear no argument from me.

>	I DON'T LIKE U2 AT ALL.

  Who told you to anyway? It's your loss...but my U2 and REM examples were
  there to show that popularity does not equal sell out.

>>  _Disintegration_ was not really a return to the 'original sound' of the
>>  Cure. Listen to early Cure for reference. I agree though,
>>  _Disintegration_ was beautiful. I found it to be very dramatic, very 
>>  opus-like. The ethereal synthesizers blasting fully in the background
>>  adding power to the voice of a single guitar note.
>
>	Friend, I have been listening to "early Cure" since it was "new
>Cure" for YEARS.  Please don't assume these things.  I did not say that
>it was a return to the same sound (as anyone with half an ear could tell)
>but that it was a return to BEAUTY after the soullessness of "Kiss Me...",
>reminding me of the "Faith" and "Seventeen Seconds" (now THERE'S a Cure 
>album) era.

  Note on the half-an-ear later. If I assumed wrongly on what you said
  before, sorry, but not every album has to be _full of soul_...just full
  of love and dedication. _Disintegration_ was full of emotions, and sure
  _Wish_ wasn't totally an epic album, but I found it nice to listen to. 

>	How could you say that releasing radically different mixes of
>old songs (including one new one and two re-recordings, mind you) was not
>part of the band's musical progress?  I suppose that was just done without
>their knowledge?  Huh!  The singles collection was merely symptomatic of
>a band that felt the need to sum up their careers because they felt the
>end approaching.  (Yes, yes, the record company probably thought of it.
>It's still symptomatic.)

  Those mixes were there to give the songs more of a dance feel.
  Personally, I like dancing to their originals. In any case, mixing and
  writing are totally different things. That's why you always have other
  people mixing songs, instead of the original artist. Maybe RS just isn't
  a good remixer?

  As far as your argument for the singles collection goes, what does that
  have to do with their music progression?

>>  The Cure signature is still there if you listen. A paradigm of this is
>>  "Open" ala "One Hundred Years." Not as emotional, but the central gut
>>  grunge is there. 
>
>	My tenet is that all of it is a rehash of old stuff.  Pointing out
>similarities doesn't exactly disprove it.

  I said signature...not rehash. The Cure is the Cure because they have a 
  certain style. Taking bits and pieces of your style and using it on
  another song, is not using it again. Taking a whole page of music and
  re-writing it is rehashing (see Cure Mixed Up and Vanilla Ice).

>	What are all these references to MIDI power?  I'll EAT my entire
>Cure collection AND my guitar if you can find me one SHRED of evidence
>that the Cure have ever used MIDI equipment apart from standalone synths.
>MIDI has about as much to do with the Cure's sound as VT100 terminals...
>not very much AT ALL.

  You're right...just different pedals. Aside: how well do you play the 
  guitar...and do you have any tabs?

>>  How can anyone say the Cure has lost it just because of _one_ song?
>>  That's beyond any intelligent argument. 
>
>	Never did.  Next?

  Okay, not one song...two songs and you've concluded that. I'll paste it 
  here if you'd like to see words that you NEVER DID write. 

 "Enough said.  See above.  _Wish_ is a lame rehash of previous work
 and contains two absolute DOGS of songs, which is more than enough reason
 for me to conclude that the Cure are finished as a creative force."

  What was that you said again? 

>>  I don't know how it's for everybody, but every album by the Cure took
>>  some getting used to by me...I think that goes for every band. Sure,
>>  there are the songs that catch you immediately, but it takes a while to
>>  get used to a whole album. Same goes for _Wish_. How long has it been
>>  since the Cure came out with an original album? In that span of time,
>>  I'm sure that their music has changed a bit...which is what I love
>>  about the Cure. Again, again I have said it. I'll say it again.
>>  Listen to all the albums by the Cure, they're all different music-wise.
>
>	Yes, except this one.

  For you. Subjectivity and opinion.

>>  If you're bothered by Robert Smith's happy lyrics, well I think it's
>>  about time. Why not? He deserves it. Kicked the old 'drug' habit.
>>  He's married, has two children, has success, and knows he can write 
>>  music. After all the Hell's he's been through, why not?
>
>	TWO CHILDREN?  I think Robert would be pretty surprised to hear
>about that!  In-depth knowledge, eh?

  Sorry, one "wrong" thing and jumping all over me. Needed all the come
  back you could get eh? In any case, the case remains intact. Why not?

>>  In addition, change is not always bad...just different. The Cure's music
>>  is surely a bit different today, but to survive so many years, you have
>>  to change. Come on now, you don't expect to listen to the same old album
>>  every time they come out with a new album, right? Give the boys a break.
>>  I think they did a good job on _Wish_ and I'm looking forward to many
>>  others. 
>
>	Enough said.  See above.  _Wish_ is a lame rehash of previous work
>and contains two absolute DOGS of songs, which is more than enough reason
>for me to conclude that the Cure are finished as a creative force.  I know
>you will all rush to defend them, and I'm sad that it's so because I have
>loved them for years (and still will love most of their previous work), but
>the problem is that any defence of such a poor album is wrong.  This is
>my final opinion and will remain unchanged.

  Enough said. See above. _Wish_ is another album which shows the different
  road has taken in writing songs, still keeping the signature (I know
  you don't agree with me Matthew, but it's my opinion right? Just as much
  as you have an opinion). I'm not defending the Cure because they are
  the Cure, I'm defending the album...see all previous article citing
  good things about the _Wish_ album. Since when does your opinion of an
  album become everyone elses? Since never.

  I'm not telling you to change your opinion, I'm just here to add on to
  what you've said. I'm not just flaming or saying anything without
  substantial evidence, see all that I've written. If you notice, you did
  say you love _most_ of their previous work. Well, maybe you can just
  treat _Wish_ as part of their previous work now, and hope they come out
  with an album slanted more towards what you're looking for (and who knows
  I may end up being on your side of the argument when that new album comes
  out...).

  Remember, I _actually_ do like the _Wish_ LP. I really do. It's not 
  unbelievable...many others do too. I actually listen to it alot.
  Why would I listen to an album I didn't like? I wouldn't and that's my
  point in showing you that it isn't the name, it's the music. 

  I'm glad that you do show your true colors by telling us that you don't
  like _Wish_. But don't tell me not to like it because you don't, I like
  it and they haven't lost an edge.
  
>PS: Why do some people see it as a VIRTUE to love all of a band's output
>	uncritically?  I'd regard it as an insult, to know that I could do
>	anything and people would still love it for the name alone.
>	It implies that the music will bear no criticism...hardly a great
>	tribute.

  See previous paragraph. That PS wasn't meant for me Matt--sadly for
  others though. But do remember, name alone won't carry a band. In the
  end, it's always the music...and you're right music without criticism
  is hardly a great tribute, but I really don't believe my opinion of
  _Wish_ falls under this category (I find "Wendy Time" to be horrible).
  Overall, for me, _Wish_ scores.

pablo

PS If you finish reading this far...if you do have any Cure tabs, please 
   e-mail.
  







-- 
___________________________-_ computer science _-______________________________
 v052t9tt@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu    | I just can't stay here every yesterday
 c052t9tt@ubvm7171.cc.buffalo.edu | and keep on acting out the same old way
 pkang@acsu.buffalo.edu           | we act out. - A Letter to Elise <the Cure>