I think this can be seen as both a positive and negative way to consume art. On the one hand, it indicates an extreme intimacy with and love for a band's work to be able to say, "No, it should have been done this way," and mess with an album that a band has worked on, approved of, and tried to sell. On the other hand, it could be seen as insulting to all the effort that went into the group's art. Either way, it's a very interesting topic that I really hadn't considered before, except for the occasional "best-of" compilations I would make for myself.
Luckily, I happened upon one of the better entries first: Nick Southall's reworking of The Verve's breakthrough third album, Urban Hymns. I have always enjoyed this album, but something about it irked me. The flow of the record is awkward to say the least, starting off with their only hit in the states, the sweeping "Bittersweet Symphony", and barely transitioning into the slower "Sonnet". The album is somewhat frontloaded with singles, while the last two thirds are full of long, murky tracks. I liked what I was hearing but didn't really enjoy listening to the record as a whole.
This is where Playing God comes in. Southall deftly rearranges the tracklist, shortening the record, adding b-sides, and changing the entire experience of listening to the album. Instead of plodding through "Sonnet", the album goes from "Bittersweet Symphony" to the driving, bass-driven b-side "Three Steps", then continues onto the now-moving "Weeping Willow", and then really opens the record up with b-side "Country Song". While he took off some tracks that I really liked from the original, including single "The Drugs Don't Work", the result is an album made much more visceral and meaningful.
Since this reworking of the tracklist, I've been listening to the Playing God version of the album a lot over the past few weeks, and it has really changed my opinion of the album. I've been a bit hesitant to mess with other albums though, either ones I don't like so much or records that I know and love. I am working on a version of Yeah Yeah Yeahs' Fever to Tell, which I have always been disappointed with when comparing it to the various b-sides and live tracks the band had in its repetoire during that period of time. I'll let you know when I finish that. In the meantime, here are a few of the more interesting articles from Stylus' archives, very few of which I've actually tried out:
The Joshua Tree, U2 - I guess I barely even realized U2 had b-sides... even though I own a b-sides CD of theirs... d'oh.
Mellon Collie and the Infinte Sadness, The Smashing Pumpkins - This double-album was just begging to be pared down, wasn't it?
Homework, Daft Punk - At first I was extremely opposed to the idea of messing with a fucking classic, but the writer makes a point in that the really good shit can seem buried in a record this long. All in all though, it's unnecessary.
Echoes, The Rapture - Another album that really asks for this treatment, but I think it could have been done better than this.
lcd soundsytem, lcd soundsystem - It's interesting to play with the idea of how lcd's hit singles would fit on the album if they were included, but the entire concept really falls apart here. For some reason, the writer is PISSED at James Murphy for writing a record about records, and I don't understand why. The subject matter obviously works for the band, so he should get over the fact that it doesn't fit his idea of what it should be. Incorporating the singles misses the point of the album, or at least a good deal of it, in which the tracks seep into your consciousness until its grooves are worn into your brain, as opposed to the singles which outright floor you with bombastic sounds.
No comments:
Post a Comment