On Bruce's Newest
Stephen Metcalf in Slate has a really confused (and, of course, confusing) review of Springsteen's new album and his career. He likes the album but really doesn't - Springsteen lost his authenticity with Darkness on the Edge of Town (!?) - and of course we get take 10,001 of the old rock-critic-snob routine of only praising the albums (Nebraska, Ghost of Tom Joad) that his fans don't like and dismissing the ones they do. But really, when you get down to it, who gives a crap - how less significant could something be these days than a new Springsteen album.
posted by ziel | 5/02/2005 10:00:00 PM
3 Comments:
Well, I saw Bruce in Montreal (78?) after the DOTEOT album, and I don´t know if it was one of his best albums, but I can´t imagine anyone else nearly as hot as he was at that time. I personally feel that Nebraska is his best album, but that´s because I like that dark brooding shit. His last album (The Rising) exploited 911 to resuscitate his career and was just a ripoff of his own old worn out licks and riffs. Maybe this one will be better. But I agree, who gives a shit?
With Bruce there really is no point in discussing which is his "best" album - there are merely favorite albums - each person has his own personal favorite. His songs are too personal, his music too raw, to justify any objective measurement.
Well, sure that can apply to any prolific artist. Everything is subjective. But, in relation to his own career as a songwriter, I prefer Nebraska because I think his strongest suit (of many strong ones) is his lyric writing. There aren´t many who can write lyrics like that and still sell.
Post a Comment
<< Home