Stephen Malkmus

and he holds his own so well on the politics thread!

since when do old people know about politics

I've pretty much gone through the same cycle with each Malkmus solo album:

1st phase - "Hey, this is pretty good! This might be his best solo album yet!"
2nd phase - "Yep, still pretty good. I should play this more often."
3rd phase - "It's been a while since I've listened to that. Should I put it on... Nah."

I feel the same as O Nate up there. Heres A review that sums it up for me too. From Collapse Board.

By Scott Creney

Stephen Malkmus’s new album is simply brilliant. Mirror Traffic is boiling over with ideas about 21st Century life. Most of the lyrics examine the collapse of global capitalism through a range of emotions comparable to the stages of grief: ideological denial, explosions of anger and attempts at bargaining, followed by depression and withdrawal. It’s a rollicking soundtrack for the economic Armageddon exploding all around us.
Just kidding. Mirror Traffic isn’t about any of those things. As far as I can tell, it isn’t about anything at all. It’s just one more congested mess of whimsy from the former boy genius.

Oh how we loved Stephen Malkmus in our youth! One of the few indie rock Prime Ministers to ever be elected to a second term. Oh how you dominated the 90s with your style and wit, your passion and melody. But those days are over. Your riddles have run dry. Your mystery is no longer engaging. Your sense of abandon morphed along the way from ‘not giving a fuck’ into ‘not giving a shit’. Even your high-faluting, scrabble-playing, crossword-solving intellect seems to have deserted you (using ‘bourgeoisie’ as an adjective, really Stephen).

Mirror Traffic is stuffed with ideas, but nearly all of them feel half-baked. Songs are crammed with lyrics upon lyrics, multiple chord changes, key changes, varied instrumentation, tempo changes, etc., but for no discernible reason, to no real effect. Only a fool would ask what the songs on Mirror Traffic are about. It’s a 1,000-piece jigsaw puzzle that upon completion reveals a brown wooden duck. ‘Brain Gallop’ has a nice melodic hook, but it’s attached to a lyric — “There’s not that much left inside my tank today/There’s just enough to go and blow you away” — that, in its unearned simplicity, undercuts whatever momentum the song might be building. Then Malkmus shifts into that mocking, half-assed falsetto that suggests he thinks the whole thing is a god-damned joke and you just have to throw your hands up in the air. If you’re smart, you’ll skip ahead before the goofy/silly/tongue-in-cheek guitar solo comes along.

What about that sardonic wit Malkmus is so famous for? Well, I’ve always thought the word ‘witty’ was a word people use to describe someone who isn’t actually funny — the funny person makes you laugh where the witty person makes you smile. I don’t know. Does this make you laugh?
SENATOR VIDEO
I know what the senator wants. What the senator wants is a blowjob.
I know what everyone wants. What everyone wants is a blowjob.

Yowsa! Zing! I mean, as comedy goes, SM was always more Jerry Seinfeld than Bill Hicks, more David Sedaris than Richard Pryor. But ‘Senator’ is probably the high point of this album. You can decide for yourself whether that’s high enough. By the way, How the fuck does something “fade away like a stone”?

It’s hard not to shake the feeling of pointlessness hanging over the album. The songs are stuffed with chords because the songs are stuffed with chords, not because they take the song anywhere. All the fussiness feels like an attempt on SM’s part to try and keep things interesting — not for us, he could care less — but to try and keep things interesting for himself. A heavy weight of obligation hangs all over this album. One pictures SM shrugging his shoulders before mumbling, ‘That’s OK, right? It’s got some okay moments, doesn’t it?’

And one pictures Beck, the (all but invisible, inconsequential) producer of Mirror Traffic, nodding his support.

Here’s a link to the first video, courtesy of The New York Times. Take the time to read some Paul Krugman while you’re over there, and try not to think too hard about Bobbie Gentry.
The list of songwriters who did their best work after leaving their original band is a short one. There’s Peter Gabriel. [You crazy fool! - Genesis-hating Ed] There’s, um … George Michael? Joe Walsh? There’s probably a reason for this. As long as Paul McCartney was in The Beatles, he had to live up to being a Beatle. But as Paul McCartney? Well shit, anything he recorded would live up to being Paul McCartney. And the same thing’s probably true with Stephen Malkmus. Not to say that a Pavement reunion would produce anything better, I just think an artist’s ‘solo career’ is always going to be underwhelming to some extent.

‘Tune Grief’ has some good energy; in some places it’s almost fun. But it doesn’t move me. Is it my fault? The album goes on for over 50 minutes, most of it wandering from one place to another without ever really accomplishing anything. You need Mirror Traffic the way the ocean needs more salt. It’s about as necessary as a manual typewriter, and every bit as interesting to listen to. It has the same vigor, the same sense of purpose, the missionary zeal, of a grey turd floating in a bathtub.

Look, there’s nothing wrong with ambiguity. I keep listening to Mirror Traffic (decent title, by the way — giving credit where credit is due), but I hear vagueness instead of mystery. Instead of a beguiling labyrinth, I’m simply trapped in a room with too much furniture and not enough art. There’s moments every so often — they last for 15 seconds or so — that make me think Malkmus may have something (ahem) left in the tank, that he may still possess some of the genius he once flung around so casually and endlessly in his youth. Hell, maybe he just needs to go back and listen to The Fall instead of Smog or The Sea And Cake, or whatever the fuck he listens to these days. But this album isn’t even close to genius. Not by a long shot. At its best, the album is pleasant. And there’s too much goddamn great music out there for us to waste our time on things that are merely pleasant.

ugh

ugh

kinda odd the whole band is playing a free show tonight at 6pm in LA with no other tour dates (including later tonight) for another month?

Not feeling that review at all. Mostly because I hate that mislead style, "this is a brilliant album! just kidding, it sucks!". Also, wtf does "in its unearned simplicity" even mean? How does something "earn" simplicity? Either it is, or it isn't.

the real question is does this review earn simplicity

http://www.nerve.com/advice/sex-advice-from/sex-advice-from-stephen-malkmus

I haven't heard anything from the new one yet, but I think the diminishing-returns effect I get from Malkmus's solo output is that he seems to be returning to hoe the same row a few times too many. The amount of stylistic variation seems to be getting vanishingly tiny. He's clearly a guy who knows what he wants to do and just keeps doing it. I think the best thing for him would be a radical departure in style. All said, I still think his solo career has been less disappointing than say Frank Black's.

See I think the new one reminds me the most of his first solo album and branches out in a few playful directions. I don't know just yet how successful those forays are, need to spend more time with it, but it certainly feels like he's having a little more fun this time.

The decision to write and record “Mirror Traffic” before last year’s Pavement reunion tour, Mr. Malkmus acknowledged, was his, though he could not say for certain if that impending commitment had an effect on the album.

“I knew that it was coming,” he said, “so if people try to say it’s somehow Pavement-y, it could be in my mind, that I had to do that tour.” He corrected himself. “Or wanted to do that tour.”

From the NY Times interview linked upthread.

Jon: I think 'unearned simplicity' might mean that sometimes its ok to have a simple, rhyming line "like theres just enough to blow you away" but that the rest of the songs lyrics need to set this up, because are also quite consistently vague so it just isn't necessary and lacks some kind of authenticity. But yep, it is a confusing phrase. Good that you at least gave a reason for your dislike of the review - rather than jsut a straight 'ugh'. Were those ugh remarkers just disagreeing with what the review was saying or the style of the review. Both I guess. Perhaps you could post a review of the record which you think is in a style you prefer or nails the albums worth better or at least explain why you didn't like it. I like a lot of the insights in this review and agree that while the record is pleasant it is also unnecessary. I think the phrase that sums up why i am no longer passionate about SM is "vagueness instead of mystery"- previously there was something mysterious, magical and intense in the songs and now using the same tics and tropes that he created earlier ,it just feels like he is going through the motions.

Thats kind of why I am persisting with this thread when most people seem to think I am some kind of annoying buzzing fly. I think its interestng how precious a lot of the Malkmus fanbase are- and as I have already said i was one of thiose slavishly devoted quite a few years ago. Which is fine but not many people are really prepared to explain comments beyond 'ugh' etc... Its ok to like the album but why don't you explain why?

Like I said, I've only heard it once via the NPR stream so I'm trying to withhold final judgement until I spend more time with it. But, based on that one listen, it sounds really promising! And hits at a lot of what I like about Malkmus. My "ugh" was referring to the tone and style of the review, as I said, I don't like those headfake reviews - just be straight up with me.

I'm definitely not a Malkmus apologist, by any means, but I don't see how we have to be slavishly devoted to like this album? I mean, the funny thing is, I was all set to NOT like it because of the Beck production. I think he's got a little bit too heavy of a hand sometimes (see the overwhelming string arrangements on the Thurston Moore record) and I didn't think he'd at all be a good fit for Malkmus. But he surprised me.

Oh how we loved Stephen Malkmus in our youth! One of the few indie rock Prime Ministers to ever be elected to a second term. Oh how you dominated the 90s with your style and wit, your passion and melody. But those days are over. Your riddles have run dry. Your mystery is no longer engaging. Your sense of abandon morphed along the way from ‘not giving a fuck’ into ‘not giving a shit’. Even your high-faluting, scrabble-playing, crossword-solving intellect seems to have deserted you (using ‘bourgeoisie’ as an adjective, really Stephen).

i think this is awful. that is what made me say "ugh." how old is this writer, 20? i just think it's nonsense, a refusal to take a record on its own terms, instead trotting out tired cliches about the guy.

dusted review: http://www.dustedmagazine.com/reviews/6637

He has revealed himself to be kind of a sphinx without a secret, no? And I like him!

Yeah, I really like that Dusted review.

i think this is awful. that is what made me say "ugh." how old is this writer, 20? i just think it's nonsense, a refusal to take a record on its own terms, instead trotting out tired cliches about the guy.

Even the Pitchfork review pulled a similar line out of the stable -- something about how we thirtysomethings have all longed for dear Stephen to make a solo album as good as a Pavement record. I don't care if he ever does! Why hold on to an illusion?

because you're a dumbass music writer for pitchfork and you cant think of anything decent to say about Malkmus

kidding! i love pitchfork! it's a wonderful website!

but yeah i hate how his stuff is always compared to pavement. i read an interview with joanna, the bass player of his band, and she pointed out she's played with SM as long as anyone from pavement now.

Thanks for engaging people! I like that Dusted review too. It too leans heavily on referencing Pavement and his legacy but goes for a mostly positive spin - but still an interesting take.

"Oh how we loved Stephen Malkmus in our youth! One of the few indie rock Prime Ministers to ever be elected to a second term. Oh how you dominated the 90s with your style and wit, your passion and melody. But those days are over. Your riddles have run dry. Your mystery is no longer engaging. Your sense of abandon morphed along the way from ‘not giving a fuck’ into ‘not giving a shit’. Even your high-faluting, scrabble-playing, crossword-solving intellect seems to have deserted you (using ‘bourgeoisie’ as an adjective, really Stephen)."

Tyler :I guess this just points to the fact that the writer is struggling to overcome the Malkmus past- his 'legacy' etc. Isn't that just being honest about where he is coming from and why?

Does he want a cookie as a reward for his honesty?

Doesn't make him the right guy for the piece & doesn't make it a well-constructed piece. xp

After a listen and a half, I think the record's solid. I know what I like about Malkmus, and a lot of what I like is here. Sometimes I wish he would aim a little higher or step out of his comfort zone or whatever, but I'll take it for what it is - aiming for significance has never been his metier, and he was already a pretty mellow guy at 26. He still writes good songs, but because he's mellowed out even more since Pavement split he'll probably never write anything major again. Just keep cranking out dependable, crafty records. In the context of his solo oeuvre, this is one of the craftiest. And that's OK - I don't need it to *matter*. Anyway, Beck is a fresh and receptive pair of ears - the thing sounds great. Even the throwaways have a flourish here or a guitar line there to recommend them.

He can't aim higher or step out of his comfort zone cuz he's a fortysomething who probably can't, especially after he already recorded Pavement albums that aimed pretty high.

one thing about that dusted review -- "on Mirror Traffic, there’s a recapturing of the joy he clearly felt on Pavement’s final full-length, Terror Twilight."
joy? man, that's not what i hear happening on that record at all. he sounds like he's having a LOT more fun on his first solo rec.

when is he not having fun? Whatever else, the dude likes to sing wacky lyrics and play guitar.

pig lib was not much fun

oh if I have to judge Mr. Malkmus' idea of fun on top of mine I wouldn't have time to eat.

OK, as the Pavement poll thread is dormant here might be the place to ask the stans to recommend some really great writing about the band. I was always a casual fan (though somehow I was at the 1992 show that's preserved on the Slanted & Enchanted deluxe edition) and didn't vote in the poll but I have most of the albums so I created a poll results playlist and was surprised how much of it I loved and how hard I found it to put why I loved it into words given that so many of their signature qualities are, on paper, incredibly aggravating. There was much more emotion beneath the smartassery than I remembered and it doesn't derive from obvious emotional triggers in the lyrics. I feel in need of some smart writing about what made them great.

why do people feel the need to read about bands so much? what are you going to get from a piece of writing that you don't get from the music? serious question.

Christgau's essay-review of BTC contributed to my developing passion. I'll post it in a sec.

what are you going to get from a piece of writing that you don't get from the music?

Seriously? Insights ("I never listened to this song this way") and good turns of phrase.

and a paycheck, xxp

Thanks Alfred.

xp Well I'm a music critic who studied English Literature so this is what I do. I always get something out of good criticism - fresh insights, different angles, sharp observations, clarity of thought. If you don't get why reading criticism is pleasurable fair enough.

i get criticism of English Lit, totally. but even that is ridiculous at times.

I get weary of criticism when it's written badly.

Good criticism is good. Bad criticism is bad.

Malkmus was a hero to most but he never meant shit to me

Reading about music is great, for a ton of reasons. Great understanding of context, culture, etc - especially important when reading about a band or scene from before your time. Lots of funny, interesting studio stories.

Does he want a cookie as a reward for his honesty?

A few problems with this Alfred.
1.He has not stated what his favourite cookies are. We could choose oat and it might be chocolate chip. Therefore the recipient might actually just feel as though we didn't really want want our gift to be seen as sincere.
2.Who would send the cookies? Would this be every person who appreciated his honesty- like me? Or just those who are annoyed by it- like you?
3. There is also a risk that the mail service would crumble parts of the cookie in handling and processing the mail, therefore making the cookie somthing of a 'claytons' gift. Who would want a crumbly mess for a reward?

Malk's lyrics really rub me wrong nowadays. Not sure if my taste has changed or they've actually gotten worse. I think it's the latter.

"will come back to bite you in the rearest of ends"?

groan

"too busy putzin' 'round the Internet"

this album seems ok. definitely picks up steam in the second half.

andrew beckerman is the most tediously self-indulgent dusted reviewer. can't think of a single review where he's so much as mentioned a song title

Malkmus shreds on a few of these tunes.

musical ideas in half?

Despite everything my relationship with the rcord is growing stronger. Catchy bits running round in my head at starnge moments . I like what Beck has done with the vocals - using echo occasionally etc.... I also think the bits where Malk (generally to conclude a song) cranks up the guitar are more interesting, succinct than previously. His best solo record I think.