― nickn, Friday, 12 April 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link
― Martin Skidmore, Saturday, 13 April 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link
― mark s, Saturday, 13 April 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link
Bob Dylan's music (especially that with the "The Band") has always been rooted in Traditional American music, albeit dressed up for a contemporary era using traditional rock instruments.
On Tour in 1992 Dylan had a slide guitar player replete with country hat and tassles who sat on stage plucking and sliding next to Dylan's maniac drummer who thrased the drums so hard his sticks shattered and flew across the stage.
Eclectic!
― David Butler, Monday, 13 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Dave225, Monday, 13 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-one years ago) link
If it aint country it aint music Have ya see bubba lately?
― Smartasswhiteboy, Friday, 5 December 2003 12:21 (twenty years ago) link
― Geir Hongro (GeirHong), Friday, 5 December 2003 12:30 (twenty years ago) link
Sorry, but this is utter horseshit. And I'm not even gonna get on my why pop-country is so much better than alt-country horse this time; by now, anybody who's still spouting that old purist-assed anti-Garth/Shania line is so clueless they're not worth arguing with.
― chuck, Friday, 5 December 2003 18:13 (twenty years ago) link
― chuck, Friday, 5 December 2003 18:23 (twenty years ago) link
― Haikunym (Haikunym), Friday, 5 December 2003 18:26 (twenty years ago) link
― chuck, Friday, 5 December 2003 18:30 (twenty years ago) link
..And point me to your writings on pop country being better than alt country.. I'm genuinely interested.. I guess it depends on what constitutes "alt".
xpost
― dave225 (Dave225), Friday, 5 December 2003 18:33 (twenty years ago) link
― Haikunym (Haikunym), Friday, 5 December 2003 18:37 (twenty years ago) link
― chuck, Friday, 5 December 2003 18:42 (twenty years ago) link
― chuck, Friday, 5 December 2003 18:48 (twenty years ago) link
Why would you listen to something simply because it's offensive and challenging, other than as an exercise? I mean, I do this, too, and I completely agree with you that Travis Tritt is more challenging to ILM-dom than Merzbow. People don't listen to noisefuck-style music because it actually challenges them; they listen because they think it sounds good or exciting or exhilarating or whatever. I enjoy subjecting myself to stuff that I find aesthetically revolting from time to time, but it's not what I want from music.
― Clarke B., Friday, 5 December 2003 18:52 (twenty years ago) link
Anthony Hamilton'salbum is just as "country"as anything else
― Haikunym (Haikunym), Friday, 5 December 2003 18:54 (twenty years ago) link
It isn't, really. But somehow it's more annoying... Maybe because real twang is slightly annoying in the first place.. ?
how people MAYBE used to talk in the south 40 fucking years agoI'm not sure what you mean there (except maybe Wilco or Gillian Welch, I guess..) I don't see any of the others as trying to imitate the old style (lyrically, that is.) Seems to me that they're trying to be poetic and , OK, maybe a little sappily pessimistic .. but that's artist (or "artist" if you prefer) -vs- popstar, which you'll find in any genre.
Have you been to the rural South lately? SCOTS seems pretty genuine to me, even though they're sort of a novelty act.
― dave225 (Dave225), Friday, 5 December 2003 18:56 (twenty years ago) link
I never said anybody should. (Though sometimes the exercise can be fun, or enlightening, or whatever.)
― chuck, Friday, 5 December 2003 18:58 (twenty years ago) link
well there's your issue right there. argh.
― Haikunym (Haikunym), Friday, 5 December 2003 18:59 (twenty years ago) link
Maybe because real twang is slightly annoying in the first place.. ?
Please tell me you didn't say this.
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 5 December 2003 19:00 (twenty years ago) link
Also, I'm not begrudging country music anything. I'm really trying to examine why I just don't care for it.
Maybe because real twang is slightly annoying in the first place.. ?Oh, I said it! Don't hang me for it.. It's a prejudice I live with every day. I'll try to change, Mr. Raggett - honest.
― dave225 (Dave225), Friday, 5 December 2003 19:02 (twenty years ago) link
― chuck, Friday, 5 December 2003 19:03 (twenty years ago) link
No, they try to do it *musically*, and they fail at it.
― chuck, Friday, 5 December 2003 19:05 (twenty years ago) link
in fact I will saythat that is the overalltheme there throughout time
and since hip-hop islargely concerned with that too(not every song)
I submit my theme:country music is hip-hopand vice versa too
― Haikunym (Haikunym), Friday, 5 December 2003 19:06 (twenty years ago) link
― Clarke B., Friday, 5 December 2003 19:09 (twenty years ago) link
I think you do ...! I mean "artist" .. meaning, trying (& sometimes forcing) introspective lyrics, rather than bubbly, happy-go-lucky lyrics. (Not that each don't venture into the other's territory...) You know what I mean, you just don't want to acknowledge it, because it's bullshit. (And I mean bullshit from the lyricists' point of view, not my own.) Morrisey versus Bobby Sherman .. you can't tell me they don't approach songwriting differently.
― dave225 (Dave225), Friday, 5 December 2003 19:11 (twenty years ago) link
Lots of people find Southern suburbanites nauseating, though
Heck, lots of people find suburbanites in general nauseating! But I've always been a suburban person, so I really can't complain much.
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 5 December 2003 19:11 (twenty years ago) link
ha next year when Imove to North CarolinaI'll be one of 'em!
― Haikunym (Haikunym), Friday, 5 December 2003 19:13 (twenty years ago) link
― chuck, Friday, 5 December 2003 19:16 (twenty years ago) link
Which is what is really interesting to me! It's this strange but involving dynamic that you can present yourself as a representative of something 'real' when...well, not fake, just another level of reality, if you like. The reality of a now that is trying to be colored up as a reality of a then.
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 5 December 2003 19:19 (twenty years ago) link
― chuck, Friday, 5 December 2003 19:19 (twenty years ago) link
I remember Tico Ewing saying this somewhere as well. The problem is I don't really hear this danceability in popular country either. And GIllian Welch is a pretty extreme example of alt.country being backward looking. I hear punk and folk and rock in alt. country, meaning I think it can be appreciated on its own terms without being proclaimed as "real country" or some such nonsense.
― bnw (bnw), Friday, 5 December 2003 19:20 (twenty years ago) link
― Clarke B., Friday, 5 December 2003 19:21 (twenty years ago) link
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 5 December 2003 19:22 (twenty years ago) link
― bnw (bnw), Friday, 5 December 2003 19:23 (twenty years ago) link
― chuck, Friday, 5 December 2003 19:25 (twenty years ago) link
― Haikunym (Haikunym), Friday, 5 December 2003 19:26 (twenty years ago) link
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 5 December 2003 19:27 (twenty years ago) link
― Clarke B., Friday, 5 December 2003 19:27 (twenty years ago) link
― Haikunym (Haikunym), Friday, 5 December 2003 19:30 (twenty years ago) link
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 5 December 2003 19:30 (twenty years ago) link
I didn't mean to say it was - I was saying that alt-county ISN'T. and pop (of any genre) tends to be more often (but as I said, they each venture in to the other's territory.) And pop-country seems to me to be a little less than genuine when it tries to be pessimistic. It's either maudlin or a cartoon (as you say) of what country is "supposed to be". Not that alt-country isn't guilty of the same thing.. Getting back to the original question, I don't know why I don't like modern country. I still haven't figured that out.
Regarding Morrisey vs Bobby Sherman... Morrisey always frowns. Bobby always smiles. I didn't mean that one's approach was superior to the other - I meant that one thinks he's a tortured soul and the other is just writing songs that he thinks people will like.
― dave225 (Dave225), Friday, 5 December 2003 19:31 (twenty years ago) link
― chuck, Friday, 5 December 2003 19:32 (twenty years ago) link
i always assumed morrissey was writing songs that he thinks people will like.
― fact checking cuz, Friday, 5 December 2003 19:33 (twenty years ago) link
― chuck, Friday, 5 December 2003 19:34 (twenty years ago) link
As soon as I realized that the main reason for me hating it is because I grew up with a lot of people who loved it uncritically and was being a corny-ass "rebel" for all these years, I opened up to country radio a lot. Just listen to it during drive-time or something. You'll like some stuff and not-like other stuff. It won't have anything to do with fake twang or sociology or anything.
― Haikunym (Haikunym), Friday, 5 December 2003 19:36 (twenty years ago) link
― dave225 (Dave225), Friday, 5 December 2003 19:40 (twenty years ago) link
― Broheems (diamond), Friday, 5 December 2003 19:40 (twenty years ago) link
HOW does the kind of lyrical imagery you're referring to challenge you.. I don't like it just for the sake of it being there - I like it because if you have to think about the lyrics a little bit, you can interpret the lyrics to mean different things, many things. Sometimes that's not a good thing, if the artist wants to convey something specific - but most of the time, I get more out of a song where I'm able to personalize it to the way I visualize it.
Dissonance is hardly the point..By dissonance, I mean (mostly) cognitive dissonance - i.e. something unexpected or unnatural.. but also musically dissonant - but that's just my personal preference.. That doesn't mean Slipknot...? (The chords in Louie Louie seem pretty dissonant to me.)
― dave225 (Dave225), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 12:29 (twenty years ago) link
>i coulda explained that being tracky is something music DOES.<<
Yeah, Sterl, but it's something ALL music does. That was my point!!
― This geezer chuck, Tuesday, 9 December 2003 18:56 (twenty years ago) link
the beatles may not have been palling around with george jones, but they were much much much into the everly brothers and carl perkins, both of whom had a lot of country running through their veins.
― fact checking cuz (fcc), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 19:24 (twenty years ago) link
Obviously a lot of people seem to go for it. I just don't demand that much creativity from a critic.)
― Rockist Scientist (rockistscientist), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 20:30 (twenty years ago) link
― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 20:34 (twenty years ago) link
― chuck, Tuesday, 9 December 2003 20:42 (twenty years ago) link
(Though I guess railroads are kinda tracky in the first place, maybe.)
― chuck, Tuesday, 9 December 2003 20:44 (twenty years ago) link
― chuck, Tuesday, 9 December 2003 20:47 (twenty years ago) link
― Haikunym (Haikunym), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 20:49 (twenty years ago) link
Hardest rocking tracky country song ever:"Train Kept a Rollin," Johnny Burnette and the Rock 'n' Roll Trio
― chuck, Tuesday, 9 December 2003 20:51 (twenty years ago) link
But that's obviously because everybody traded in their copies for this album, which has all the dance mixes!:
http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&uid=UIDCASS80311061622542118&sql=Awt9fs33la39g
― chuck, Tuesday, 9 December 2003 20:54 (twenty years ago) link
― Haikunym (Haikunym), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 20:58 (twenty years ago) link
So for an alt-country example.. I hate to use it because I'm not really a fan of Gillian Welch .. But the first time I heard "Paper Wings" the guitar verse caught my ear...
..And I kind of hate to use the term alt-country - because, honestly, I'm not really a fan of alt-country so much.. I mean, it isn't a genre I usually seek.. But this thread started because I find it more listenable than Garth Brooks. My original thinking/point was going to be that Lloyd Cole and Robert Forster write some great country songs, but they don't really conform to all of the traditional or modern country aspects and would not make it on country radio unless they were remade by Travis Tritt or Clint Black.
hmmm... I think I just talked in circles ..
― dave225 (Dave225), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 21:04 (twenty years ago) link
― Jole, Saturday, 13 December 2003 15:22 (twenty years ago) link
When I go out, I'm gonna go out shooting.
I don't mean when I die, I mean when I go out to the club, stupid.
I have some opinions on how y'all could have avoided fighting, but you'll have to work it out for yourselves. Suggestion, though: Don't assume that the other guy is trying to say something stupid.
Haikunym wrote (in reference to the latest Montgomery Gentry single): "'Hell Yeah' is one of the best rap records of the year." Well, if it's rap, it's rap that's absorbed nothing from any hip-hop of the last 30 years - which is to say that it's absorbed nothing from the rap/hip-hop genre, even if it shares some ancestry with hip-hop, and has some similarities. (FYI, "Hell Yeah" is the latest single from Montgomery Gentry.)
A point that Chuck was making, and that got lost in the hubbub, is that not very much contemporary country music is using black dance rhythms from beyond the '70s, whereas previous country music used rhythms from their r&b contemporaries.
(Question for the musicologically inclined: Are there any rhythmic developments in today's country that don't come from previous developments in some other genre? Is country still evolving its own rhythms, or is it all hand-me-downs? LeAnn Rimes and Brooks & Dunn might be test cases, in different ways.)
This fits in with Amateurist's point (which isn't a huge exaggeration):
i love how half the country is like "i like everything but country and rap", a quarter is like "i like country fuck rap" and the last quarter is like "i like rap fuck country" (cf. de la soul track where rednecks talk stupid shit as george jones plays in the background)...
And Chuck's question doesn't really challenge it:
But where does that leave Bubbba Sparxxx, David Banner, Kid Rock, Nappy Roots, Toby Keith, and all of those kind of people who do both?
As far as social signifiers go, it leaves Banner clearly in hip-hop, Keith clearly in country, I haven't heard the new Nappy Roots, but I'd say clearly in hip-hop on the basis of their previous LP, Kid Rock jumping from hip-hop to country (and I haven't heard his latest either, so I don't know if he's mixing the signifiers anymore or not), and Sparxxx conducting an interesting social experiment if - but only if - "Comin' Round" becomes a huge pop hit. And even then, I predict the result will be that he doesn't get played on country radio.
One might want to confute or defy the social map, but a feature of the map is that, no matter what the contortions and convolutions of the use of the word "country" and "rap," or the battles over whether Shania or Clouddead or Jay-Z or Sage Francis is really real, there's a barrier that says that if a song is in country it's not in hip-hop, and if it's in hip-hop it's not country. And we have no choice but to perceive this barrier (whether or not we buy into it), no more than we have a choice not to perceive gender. (And we don't perceive gender with 100% agreement, but nonetheless we almost always perceive it.) Play "Hell Yeah" and Jay-Z's "Takeover" (chosen because they each not only rock, but because each moves me in an emotionally similar way), and 100 out of 100 know which one is classed as country and which as hip-hop.
Maybe not all Toby fans think that hip-hop sucks; nonetheless, Toby doesn't play hip-hop (as his fans would perceive it) and wouldn't be allowed to - wouldn't even be allowed to incorporate any particular feature that signified hip-hop. Whereas Bubba can be perceived as hip-hop as long as he incorporates some feature that signifies hip-hop strongly, even if he incorporates lots of country features. And the fact that David Banner's black southern drawl resembles white southern drawls, and the fact that "Cadillac on 22's" uses the chords to "Lay Lady Lay," justify my voting for it in the country music poll, but these facts don't put him in "country" on most people's social maps.
Anyway, that there's a barrier between hip-hop and country raises lots of questions, since there's no comparable barrier between pop and country, and rock sounds have been pouring into country wholesale (yet the rock and country audiences remain distinct, whereas the "adult" pop and the country audiences don't).
So you could start the discussion from here. (I don't see where any of the fighting actually addressed the issues.)
― Frank Kogan (Frank Kogan), Monday, 22 December 2003 01:43 (twenty years ago) link
With genre terms, the phrase "what they normally mean" is problematic, since using such a term in the way that other people use it does not necessarily entail using it to designate the same things that other people use it to designate. In fact, such terms demand that you sometimes use them to designate something different from what at least some other people designate by it.
This is because genre names do double duty as both value judgments and descriptions. No one who knows how to speak expects everyone to agree on what movies the term "good movie" refers to. That's because the term not only differentiates movies from other movies, it differentiates your tastes and your values from other people's. On the other hand, most people who use the word "tree" don't expect a lot of disagreement over what's a tree and what isn't (and don't get worked up on the subject in any case: "What! You call 'elms' trees? Come look at my oaks! I'll show you some real trees").
So anyway, "country" and "hip-hop" and "pop" and so on are battle words because they're value judgments that we use to differentiate ourselves from some of our fellows and identify with others, and our differing usages and designations move us around in relation to each other. Yet we also believe in our social maps, believe that they're right, or at least good in some socioemotional way.
I probably said this better on other threads, about sociology of pop and controversy words/Superwords, but don't have time right now to look for the links.
Anyway, ignoring the sociology - of who is using the term to designate what - is not an option, not a possibility; nor is failing to defy (some) other people's designations. You do both, just by speaking.
The appeal of your style of writing is not that it merely observes the sloppiness of genre boundaries, but that it *forces* such sloppiness, and in so doing it shows the fragility and arbitrariness of those boundaries. In that sense you're a sci-fi/fantasy critic, when most critics want to be realists or Romantics.
Well, what I'm saying is that we're all such sci-fi'ers, simply by using the language normally. (So it's not sci-fi.) But Clarke, I don't think I agree with your four major terms here: sloppiness, fragility, arbitrariness, and boundaries. But I don't have time to go into this. Another facet of genre titles is that they not only designate genres but sounds. So an alternative-rock song can have a pop melody without being a pop song, but sometimes having such a melody might make it "pop," even if it doesn't make it popular.
― Frank Kogan (Frank Kogan), Monday, 22 December 2003 02:25 (twenty years ago) link
― Frank Kogan (Frank Kogan), Monday, 22 December 2003 02:28 (twenty years ago) link
As a possible counterexample to the point that hip hop that borrows from country will be identified as hip hop not country, what about Velvet Crush's version of 'Why Not Your Baby' by Gene Clark? I think the drumming borrows from hip hop and the background singers sound like rhythm and blues, but as a whole the song still sounds country/folk to me. Of course, Velvet Crush is not hip hop.
― youn, Monday, 22 December 2003 02:33 (twenty years ago) link
― youn, Monday, 22 December 2003 02:36 (twenty years ago) link
OK, one more shot at this:
If you were to ask me "What's your favorite punk album of 2003?" I could give you four different answers.
(1) Transplants Transplants (because it's the best of the albums that sound stereotypically "punk rock," especially after the hardcore punks hijacked the term and restricted it to themselves).
(2) Clone Defects Shapes of Venus (because it's the postpunk/alternative-rock album, and is messy and gung-ho and all those punk things) (also because it sounds like the music I was making in 1982).
(3) David Banner Mississippi (because it's ferocious and destructive and self-destructive and idealistic and can run at you and smash you [when it isn't crashing over its own heaviness], as punk use to do).
(4) There were no punk albums in 2003 (because so far the only punk album this decade has been The Marshall Mathers LP, and if you don't have the brains and the self-challenge of that album, you're just not doing it).
I'm perfectly capable of resorting to all four usages (as well as others) in close proximity. And the usages aren't unrelated - 1 and 2 are musical vocabularies/traditions, 3 is effect, 4 is an ideal of what I want the music to do; obviously, those vocabularies had helped produce those effects and create those ideals, though they rarely do now, which doesn't necessarily mean they fail to do something else worthwhile. But my heart is with usage 4.
I wonder what equivalent usages you guys use with country. My intuition is to look down on the purists, but that's because if I were a country musician chafing at the genre's limits, I wouldn't do so in the name of "real country" but in the name of better music that didn't give a fuck about being country. But I'd never be a country musician in the first place.
Yet purism isn't reactionary by definition. It depends on how it's used. (Just as I don't think I'm reactionary for thinking that hardcore punk isn't real punk, since it's about group solidarity and my punk isn't.) (Of course, I've also written that punk is better as a tendency than a genre, and better as an impulse than as an identity.)
No one is consistent in how they use genre terms, but people will frequently try to lay down narrow rules for how other people should use terms, though this laying down is usually ad hoc, mainly to discredit someone else and to win arguments.
― Frank Kogan (Frank Kogan), Monday, 22 December 2003 03:09 (twenty years ago) link
Hm, I always knew I wasn't punk!
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 22 December 2003 03:11 (twenty years ago) link
And Shapes of Venus was the best postpunk/alternative album of the year. (There were a number of good ones. If you just take the albums I heard from Detroit, for instance, possible-P&J-winner Elephant was the fourth-best. And there must have been scores of such albums from Detroit that I didn't hear.)
Yeah, Ned, you're about the last person I'd call a punk. (And don't be offended by that.)
― Frank Kogan (Frank Kogan), Monday, 22 December 2003 03:18 (twenty years ago) link
better than Groovski? say it ain't so. i quite enjoyed that clone defects album though.
― scott seward (scott seward), Monday, 22 December 2003 03:25 (twenty years ago) link
I'm not! :-)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 22 December 2003 03:25 (twenty years ago) link
But anyway, there's enough interesting tension in country for it to fling itself to unexpected territory. And the rap barrier may break.
― Frank Kogan (Frank Kogan), Monday, 22 December 2003 03:37 (twenty years ago) link
Well, first off, even thinking of just commercial country, it does claim a lot of sounds that it wouldn't have in years past (loud guitar rock is one of its options; death metal singing isn't). And it's not just incorporating pop, it's helping to shape it, albeit in the "adult contemporary" category.
And it's too big to call "marginalized." But it tends to be left out of the general cultural discussion. That is, the people who don't listen to it barely know it's there (except in the way that they know that, say, Mexican music is there), and few feel the need to educate themselves in it. Not only does it tend to be absent in Pazz and Jop, its absence isn't even an issue. (And Wilco and Lucinda Williams and Magnetic Fields are never discussed there in relation to country.) Whereas the people who listen to country sure know that rock and hip-hop are there.
But I wouldn't say it's more left out now than in 1948 (for instance). But it defines itself differently from how it did in 1948. Christianity and social conservativism weren't absent from the music in 1948, but they weren't defining characteristics in the way that they are now (not that the genre is locked into those characteristics, or that all the performers promulgate them, but they're in your face a lot, aggressive rather than matter of fact). And this will have some effect on what signifiers it's willing to take in. It won't think of itself as containing vanguard elements, or musical innovation, even when it does.
― Frank Kogan (Frank Kogan), Monday, 22 December 2003 04:32 (twenty years ago) link
― Frank Kogan (Frank Kogan), Monday, 22 December 2003 04:38 (twenty years ago) link
― gary l. clarkson, Monday, 21 June 2004 21:18 (nineteen years ago) link
― gary l. clarkson, Monday, 21 June 2004 21:20 (nineteen years ago) link
― Daniel_Rf (Daniel_Rf), Friday, 24 March 2006 16:40 (eighteen years ago) link
― The Day The World Turned Dayglo Redd (Ken L), Friday, 24 March 2006 17:02 (eighteen years ago) link
― The Day The World Turned Dayglo Redd (Ken L), Friday, 24 March 2006 17:19 (eighteen years ago) link
― Sundar (sundar), Friday, 24 March 2006 17:51 (eighteen years ago) link
― timmy tannin (pompous), Friday, 24 March 2006 17:55 (eighteen years ago) link
― Dave AKA Dave (dave225.3), Friday, 24 March 2006 18:16 (eighteen years ago) link
The last time I was in Knoxville I got my hair cut in Vestal, and the TV was on and it was some kind of "my boyfriend got a sex change" show ... inbetwee segments, the ads came on, and of cours they're basically the same ads I get in New York. I was struck by how loud, how abrasive, and how alien to the pace and feel of that barber shop the TV was (though I may have felt the same way at a sleepy barbership in Midwood, Brooklyn, too) and it came home to me - again - how television lays this vast same-ing blanket over the country, where what goes in New York and L.A. is what goes for everybody, and a lot of that shit is scary and not that pleasant and is liable to give you the feeling that things are frankly a little out of control, that the freaks are multiplying. I think there is plenty of country that very consciously sets out to counteract that feeling of anxiety and insecurity, and I don't see anything wrong with that per se.
― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Friday, 24 March 2006 18:42 (eighteen years ago) link
― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Friday, 24 March 2006 18:43 (eighteen years ago) link
Rolling Country 2006 Thread
― xhuxk, Friday, 24 March 2006 19:01 (eighteen years ago) link
― Dave AKA Dave (dave225.3), Friday, 24 March 2006 19:18 (eighteen years ago) link
― M@tt He1geson (Matt Helgeson), Friday, 24 March 2006 20:24 (eighteen years ago) link
― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Friday, 24 March 2006 20:27 (eighteen years ago) link