Radiohead In Not-A-Bunch-Of-Black-Guys Shocker!

Because Kurt taught us how to feel, man. *sob*

and why shouldn't emotional range be important? there would be just as much of a problem if the Ramones had been the biggest band in the world, too--as in, gee, how does something with such preconceived limits reach so many people? (and haha Ned but get real, that's not what he's saying at all)

Dan: I dunno, you can list, I guess, but I never hear anything really cut through. I'm not asking for "happy," obviously, since I'm counting "True Love Waits" as part of what I'm looking for; it just all feels a bit like watching Sisyphus push the boulder up the hill, except without the part where it rolls back down, or like watching Prometheus chained to the rock, except the birds never come. That's just me.

Also, Michaelangelo - who do you think out there has a wide emotional range?

ams: "moldova"?

How many people realistically expect one artist to cover all of their listening needs in terms of emotional range? I guess if you're only going to listen to one artist it'll get tedious very quickly, but if you've got anything even close to a well rounded record collection (which I think most people do, in their own way), you're probably going to go to different artists for different emotions, different ideas, different occasions. So it really doesn't matter if one artist only is good at covering three or four basic emotions. Someone else will compensate.

part of what i'm saying is rather simplye: it's disingenuous to say "africa" when he means "rhythm and blues"! if he actually means "africa" then it is simply not germane. (saying "rhythm and blues" isn't terribly germane either, but it's not risible.)

So is he invoking r&b, or african music, or what?

I can't see why Christgau would mention Africa if he simply meant that Yorke's voice had little mbalax (or juju, or Afrobeat) in it? And this is different from Cobainbuckleyknowlesdioncreedaguilera how? I get the sense that "Africa" is meant to invoke some tradition which includes r&b and leaves out guys like Yorke.... which I think is misguided and disingenuous.

I hope this doesn't turn ugly because I'm not trying to make fun of you or anything, Matos, I'm honestly a bit confused at this point.

xpost

(don't we all wish we could describe music in terms that are more vivid and concrete!!)

but there's no dichotomy being set up! he's using lack-of-Africa as a description of Yorke's vocal style--it's a parenthetical comment, used to shade the comment. he's referred to De La Soul as pretentious college boys too and you won't see him refusing to say they're African.

Change "Xgau" to "pretty much every writer for the Village Voice except for sometimes Douglas Wolk" and you're OTM. Really, if anything is manifesting itself in my posts in this thread, it is just a full-on disgust with the writing/critique style typical of the Village Voice music section. It's a philosophical difference in how art and music should be discussed.

So, I've got a question. What about all the other white Europeans and Americans who don't have any trace of "Africa" in their singing voice and in their music. What about them? How is observing that Thom Yorke's voice isn't at all like an African's a unique thing about his music compared to loads of other musicians? It's hardly like he's alone in being a popular white singer who doesn't affect mannerisms that people would normally associate with black singers of any nationality.