Irving likes the album more now, which if anything, is a really awesome thing. Forget professionalism-- it makes sense for him to enjoy it more, after all this discussion. I know I'll definitely give it more of a chance.
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.7
I'd be lying if I said the rating switch was completely unrelated to the thread than transpired after I wrote this review...but it certainly isn't a result of a desire for "appeasement" or anything of the sort. I realized - in part due to your and Robin's comments - that I had been approaching the whole thing wrong. I had been evaluating the entire album purely on its merits of sonic entertainment, which while still a legitimate rubric of evaluation, probably isn't the best to use in a case of an artist like Hval. I'm not sure how to fit in the next two observations, but I would like to note that Pitchfork appear to have followed my initial method of appraisal (and rated the album a 7.3 or something) and Aids mentioned that he couldn't appreciate Hval's work for what it was because it would require intense, acute listening (I can't remember his exact wording). I may have fallen somewhere in between.
But in attempting to rewrite the review, I realized that "Mephisto in the Water"'s stark beauty had gone completely unappreciated, as did "Renee Falconetti of Orleans", which now terrifies me for some reason (I keep thinking back to those hushed whispers of "Renee, Renee" now o.O). Elsewhere, I'm starting to see the lyrical prose on songs like "Death of the Author" and "Is There Anything On Me That Doesn't Speak", for instance, in a new light. I ultimately settled on a 4.7 because that was the highest rating I had awarded for an album so far this year (to m b v and The 20/20 Experience) and I, in all conscience, could not call Innocence is Kinky a worse album than either two. I don't know if I shall still be feeling this way a year or even two days hence, but I suppose that holds for just about any album that one might care to name.
Don't get me wrong - I am still very sorry for my oversight the other day, and always do wish to make more friends - but that 4.7 is the result of sincere re-evaluation, nothing more.
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.7
Holy crap Irving, wall of text much???
(and yours looks like hairs standing on end now Lewis ahahah)
"I imagine all your hairs are fingers/
And it makes me cum"
|
| |
i've never gotten that into this person for some reason idk : (
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.0
So glad you reviewed this, Irving. Was about to write one myself, but there's no way this is getting topped, despite me having a few disagreements on some points.
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.7
Man I love how this review is totally resurrecting Sputnik Staffers/Emeriti from generations past.
Ohaider joshuatree! =)
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.7
@ hamid95: Would those disagreements have anything to do with my Zola Jesus-Grimes-tUnE-yArDs holy triumvirate? Hahaha!
|
| |
the rating switch isn't so abnormal. i originally had this at about a 4 until just recently when i played it again and again and focused on the lyrical content. that said, the timing for you is a little... convenient
|
| |
As if those four paragraphs weren't an adequate explanation!
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.7
AHA! 4.1 TO A 4.3 JOHN HANSON!!
Kindly state your reasons for the rating increment now.
|
| |
john hanson #thuglife
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.7
...
AHAHAHAHAHAH sorry Lewis XD
yeah i listened to this twice this morning before i got sidetracked on a dumb punk marathon
I went to listen to Gish =S
|
| |
"Aids mentioned that he couldn't appreciate Hval's work for what it was because it would require intense, acute listening"
Does this mean you have to stare at the wall for 40 minutes while listening to this?
|
| |
I'd be lying if I said the rating switch was completely unrelated to the thread than transpired after I wrote this review...but it certainly isn't a result of a desire for "appeasement" or anything of the sort. I realized - in part due to your and Robin's comments - that I had been approaching the whole thing wrong.
I don't know, but to me this reads as being just the tiniest bit hollow (sorry Simba). I get that perhaps you were focusing more on the musicality of the album than its theme, or the underlying points of the album (not to mention the ones that are on display even more explicitly than the cover of the album itself), but could a change in heart really be that simple because of theme alone? Music can be tricky sometimes; albums can be "growers" and need time to "click", we all know and get this, but you're still listening to the same album, and while you might be a little more educated in regards to the dialogue that Hval is trying to engage the listener in, is that really enough to explain away that much of a ratings increase that quickly? It's like staring at a revered painting and not getting its merits until you realise you need to look at it on a 45° angle. Suddenly you realise that fuck me, it's a sail boat
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.7
Suddenly you realise that fuck me, it's a sail boat
AHAHAHAHAHAH
(sorry Simba)
It's cool Rafiki, and I totally get where you're coming from. There's really not much I can say on the subject (at least, not in a manner which is advantageous to my "credibility") apart from the fact that I think a broader understanding of Hval's purpose in creating such an album was absolutely necessary for a greater appreciation of it. There are many parallels in entertainment - take something like, Idk, Star Trek (wtf), for example. A plot twist in one of the franchise' movies that hinged upon a lot of backstory from the TV series would probably be appreciated more by a moviegoer who was familiar with said backstory. She or he is essentially watching the exact same film as an uninitiated moviegoer, but the "impact" (assuming we can even measure such things) would have been worth more on her or his side. That's the only distinction I can honestly claim to make between the two Irvings on either side of this review's publication.
|
| |
it really makes it as though the review was written too hastily and that the reviewer didn't give it
enough of a chance when he/she first reviewed it.
but on another hand, maybe Irving really suddenly "getting" this album is a direct result of the
discussion that occurred only after the review. different people introducing different perspectives
and angles to analyze the album allowed him to enjoy and or understand it more than he could ever do
by himself.
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.5
it's not like there's some formula Irving has violated
"a 0.9 increase in sputnik rating over a 12 hour period is mathematically impossible. I call shenanigans!!"
|
| |
fuck me, it's a sail boat
please tell me this is a Mallrats reference
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.7
but on another hand, maybe Irving really suddenly "getting" this album is a direct result of
the discussion that occurred only after the review. different people introducing different
perspectives and angles to analyze the album allowed him to enjoy and or understand it more than he
could ever do by himself.
This explanation makes me seem quite imbecilic but it's probably closest to what happened here. Simply
put, my initial angle of approach got it all wrong.
Also lol @ Aids.
|
| |
I dunno if I'll check this out
As heralded as Viscera is by my colleagues, it's still an album I've never been able to dissolve
|
| |
|
|
