dera - correct una - well said antistar - don't like your continual anti-frames stance but you weren't a million miles off the mark with this thread

One of the other moderators once said to me that if you want to start a fight on cluas, all you have to do is mention Damien Rice or The Frames; maybe listening to all the anguished fragile stuff leaves you with a very thin skin and constantly on the verge of a nervous breakdown, whereas listening to, say, AC/DC gives you a more robust outlook on life? For the record I hate damien rice and his latest single 9 crimes sounds like a drunk pissing in a goldfish bowl whilst his girlfriend whimpers for some unspecified reason, maybe because she cant deal with his oversensitive nature anymore. That said I wouldnt vote to review one of his records because that is not playing fair, life is far too short, and he's not good enough to make my eat my words, if he was then he would be Prince (who is a genius). Although I did once get sent to review an erin mckeon gig on the basis that I might revise my opinion of her, I did, downwards. I suspect though that Lauren was given the now disputed CD and told to review it in the line of duty and that is just the luck of the draw because lets face it very few reviewers get to only review artists they like and many of the most entertaining reviews are bad ones. As for the Frames, I appear to have bought most of their albums over the years which surprises me as I dont listen to them and dont remember buying them, but I did buy The Cost after seeing them in Vicar street and, for what its worth, thought they were very fine live and that 'People All Get Ready' is a brilliant reworking of a ton of classic soul songs such as 'People Get Ready (theres a train coming) and 'This Train is Bound for Glory' with a violin section reminiscent of John Cale's work on the original VUs recording of Venus in Furs, in other words it is the only song they have produced that I can relate to. Frank Zappa once said that music journalism was created by people who cant write for people who cant read, but I think you have to separate the opinion from the ability to express it and usually its people who cant really express their opinions who get most angry when they read stuff by people who can, I saw this review by chance when I was checking out movie times and thought it was well written and amusing, but I think Frames fans have an almost religious attachment to the band so for them it was a bit like reading The Satanic Verses. Since I have never followed a band in this manner, I cant really empathise with their pain but the world would be a very dull place if we have to kowtow to such sensitivities.

The Frames need to be forgotten about

Originally posted by dera

quote:

---

You've missed the point. When she says evolving and experimenting with new ideas she doesn't mean new ideas for the Frames - she means new ideas in the context of modern alternative music.

---

i don't think i've missed the point. she says that: the frames are not one of a 'small number of Irish bands who are constantly evolving, challenging both themselves and their listeners...' ; that 'the cost' is 'indistinguishable from any other Frames album since the dawn of time'; and even songs she describes as slightly better than most 'say nothing they haven't said before'. i think that listening to the albums provides plenty evidence to the contrary. as for services to music in general, well, no band has a duty to use their recordings to redefine the landscape of any musical genre. the frames presumably make the music they want to make. if in doing so they push back boundaries then that's great, but i wouldn't say that setting out with such a goal in mind is something that each and every band should do, or that failing to do so is grounds for criticism.

quote:

---

When she says 'doing something for Irish music' she doesn't mean giving stage time to irrelevant, derivative songwriters like Rice.

---

that's just one example of a way in which the frames have 'done something' for the irish music scene. taking damien rice or mark geary on tour with them helps some of the musicians that make up that scene in a real and practical way. incidentally, fionn regan has recently signed to damien rice's label drm, now called 'heffa'. whether it's the frames helping damien rice, or rice returning the favour by inviting the frames to tour with him, or a successful irish musician using his position to support someone at the beginning of their career, musicians helping musicians in this way can only be good for the irish music scene. the frames have also, as i pointed out, earned quite a lot of positive international press both for their live shows and for their albums - i remember seeing a very positive review of 'burn the maps', for example, in the new york times. this raises the profile of the irish music scene, whether lauren murphy likes it or not. it's also worth mentioning that the frames have proved that it's possible to survive for a decade and a half (and still counting) by building a strong fanbase in ireland, and that you don't need a record label behind you to make music, you can do it yourself. lauren murphy chooses to see this as negative, whereas i would see it as an achievement, at best a model for other musicians to get their music out there, at the very least a kind of inspiration. you may not like them, but they've survived. like cockroaches surviving a nuclear holocaust, surely that is worthy of some respect, however reluctantly it might be felt. there's far more to a music scene than boundaries, and if murphy can't see beyond them, perhaps she start writing something else. obituaries, maybe.

quote:

---

I don't know why you continue on with this rather meaningless accusation of unprofessionalism. What does it matter if she doesn't like the people involved? All that's of interest to you the reader is the depth of the critical points made. The rest is fluff - entertaining or not. And there are critical points made - with regard to the lyricism and arrangements, for instance. Do you think those points are without merit?

---

i'm 'continuing' because that's the nature of a discussion. i have an opinion - it is that lauren murphy was unprofessional in her approach to this review because she allowed personal prejudices, which are relevant only to herself, to completely dominate a piece of writing intended to be accessible to everyone. you disagree, at least in part, i would suggest, because you share her opinion of the band/hansard. i don't see the point of your question. as for the reviews critical points, they amount, basically, to saying that this album sounds like the frames, that it is boring, and that some of the lyrics are weak. her dismissal of 'for the birds' and 'dance the devil' is criminal, but begs the question: how can 'the cost' sound just like two albums the reviewer found (semi-) enjoyable, yet at the same time be declared bland, boring, monotonous, piteous and even at times embarassing? her critical points, such as they are, are too weak to support the overall tone of the piece, which is hardly surprising, since the tone has nothing to do with the new album, and everything to do with her old preconceptions. if you were new to the frames, maybe even a tourist looking to check out the local scene, that review would be useless. actually, it would only be useless if you knew that frames-baiting is a local hobby of certain music-journalists, if you didn't know that it would be less than useless, it would be misleading. and unprofessional.

Not exactly sure where you are getting "unprofessional" here? It is a scathing review alright, pure and simple but the no reviewer has a 'professional' responsibility not to be trite or off hand. I'm equally baffled that you can't bring pre-conceived notions when the band have another 6 (or so) albums. I do that every time I buy an album. Should an album be reviewed scientifically as a unit? I don't think so. I don't need to listen to any new Stereophonics album to decide that I will not like it. That said, if I read some glowing reviews of same, I might dabble. Reviewing by it's very nature is subjective. The IMHO is implicit. For me, I read the review, laughed and took it with a grain of salt which I generally do with any review either kicking or overly praising anything. But it certainly doesn't make it any less valid an opinion.

get. over. it. EVERYONE.

I know, it's just a bit pedandic, don't you think? Maybe if it wasn't so predictable - THE FRAMES - it would be more interestlng. I'll just stop reading the thread then**

I don't mean to be pedantic but 'pedantic' is spelled P E D A N T I C not 'pedandic', Yours, A. Pedant

Have to say, I don't mind "The Frames" but Glen Hansard makes my bowels move. I think the review is excellent, i burned a copy off my mate Dave and it's the same ol predictable, monotonous rubbish. Lyrics are very poor this time around which is unusual. Well done reviewer, your article has captured the imaginations of many and managed to piss a lot of people off at the same time...nice one!

"Captured the imaginations of many" lol

Sorry, was just trying to be dramatic! Please forgive me...

El Duderino, your grasp of the english language is mind-boggling, very concise and intricate. How the hell has this article been "downright offensive on a very personal level"? Are you Glen Hansard or another scruffy member of The Frames? If not, then shut up! If so, then shut up and take the criticism.