The Flaming Lips are Go Manifesto

Well Ben (and Phasecorrect), I couldn't disagree with you more about The Lips simply being a flavor of the moment. It seems as if my passing comment about the critical reaction to them has been misinterpreted. I personally don't give a care about what critics say - I couldn't even name you one critic anymore whose writing or opinions I turn to. I'm old enough, have heard enough (my personal music collection runs over 10,000 pieces), and am certainly opinionated enough to figure shit out for myself. Ben, disregarding the Lips issue for a sec, I don't know whether I ought to be more concerned by the fact that you may have actually read what I've written before coming to the bizzare conclusion that I'm some kind of trendinista, or that my writing might be so obtuse that all my readers can do is throw up their hands, glance at the words "international rock press" or "Alex Chilton", and jump to an easy and cynical conclusion. The reason I brought up critical reaction at all was to draw some possible inferences about The Lips' chances to really break through in the public consciousness. Yours is certainly a strange attitude for a Springsteen fan to take, considering that his was one of most extreme examples of being the instant beneficiary of becoming a critical darling in the whole history of rock and what is written about it (leaving to the side the question of whether or not he may have been entirely deserving of this, and also the strong possibility IMO that he may still be, 25 years later, getting more than a little of an easy ride from the rock press generally). Ditto for the Alex Chilton/Nick Drake juxtaposition - their stories of critical resurrection and new-found veneration are actually quite similar.

It was not my intention to get into some kind of pissing match about what's good and what's overrated. None of the artists I listed were supposed to constitute some kind of pantheon of greatness or anything. Basically, I was trying to drop some clues that a reader might employ to help figure out where I'm coming from, so my Lips ravings might be put into some kind of context about just who the hell I am. My list of artists with true individuality could never have been complete anyway - that wasn't the point. Of course I love Miles and Dylan, and of course they fit that description. Maybe I've just taken the wrong approach in trying to talk to you, Ben; maybe I just should have said that my all-time favorite bands are The Beatles and The Rolling Stones (and the critics didn't exactly hate them), or that much of my collection consists of older music so obscure and forgotten that it's never been critically considered, or that I love quite a few bands that the critics have always hated or ignored in their day. I mean, c'mon now - give me some credit, will ya?! Almost the whole point of my posting this thread in first place was to celebrate the fact that there is finally a band who is on the periphery of the radar screen these days who I actually can and do love - 99% of what the media has promoted as being important in rock during the last 15 years I feel has been way overblown. I'm excited because people may actually be getting it right for once, and noticing one of the only bands today I can listen to without getting depressed for the state of the music. You may disagree about The Lips (although I'm not convinced you're speaking from enough experience there to be taken too awfully seriously), and I may disagree about Springsteen's later efforts, but I think it's a shame you seem to be letting that degree of difference persuade you to take an attitude of superiority and condescension in dealing with me or what I have to say. You and I would agree about a lot more than you obviously suppose. The fact that you insist on continuing to try and draw some kind of superficial parallel between Styx and The Flaming Lips, despite my making clear in no uncertain terms that I dislike Styx at least as much as you do (and yet giving your criticism the due consideration and reasoned response you deserve for taking the time to offer it), lets me know that you appparently are not interested in taking me seriously or having an open-minded exchange. In the case of The Lips, if not my own, I'll just say that it's your loss.

Phasecorrect, I couldn't agree with you more about some of the other bands you mention getting undeserved critical hosannas, or at least being overrated. Radiohead in particular, but I should also admit that their whole bag is not to my taste. Beck and especially Mercury Rev have intimate Flaming Lips connections, as I'm sure you know (and I assume that's why you brought them up), but just to give you some perspective on me, I wouldn't buy anything of theirs, though some stuff is OK, just nothing special. Beck is the kind of performer who I might want to like in theory more than I actually do. I find it mildly encouraging that he's moving away from 'rap', but still am not that interested, depite his latest touring band's being the subject of this thread. As for The Strokes, The Vines, The Hives, et al, nobody who wasn't born in the 90's is in any need of this stuff (although I have to say that even I think The Strokes are getting a bit of a bum rap being constantly mentioned in the same breath as the others - they do have a sound and can write hooks, and aren't just trying to get by on phony bluster, though they're about as derivative). I suppose I should appreciate the spirit or something, but really, you and I both know that it's such an uninpsired retread as to actually verge on some kind of insult to the real thing (and also that there are and always have been underground bands doing this kind of stuff for 20 years now, many of whom are/were much better). I also agree with your assessment of the Brit press (doesn't everybody?). But the press liked The Smithereens a lot too, and that doesn't make either them or you wrong about that band, even though I had to dissent somewhat. (And it also doesn't mean I consider you to be any more influenced by the "hip" factor than I am - sometimes the critics and you will just like the same thing.) Anyway, you think there's any chance our friend Ben here could grow to like some of the older Lips stuff that you (and I) dig so much?

P.S. - BTW Phasecorrect, are you a Redd Kross fan? I briefly had hopes for those guys in the 90's too, before grunge snowed everything under, but after their last record stiffed (deservedly so I'm afraid) and the death of their lead guitarist, I don't know if they'll ever get it back together again now.

Zaikesman I think you've taken me slightly wrong-I do think my criticism of the Lips is justified,the fact it's not the reason you like them then I accept that.
The list you mentioned seemed to indicate to me you were maybe brought up in that Punk/NME/no hippies/John Peel attitude that still prevails.
Your list of artists seemed to fall into this category to some extent in my mind-not to dismiss some of the great artists you mentioned-but there is a "critical" snobbery which pisses me off-especially here in the UK.
Actually we agree on a lot I 'm very close to your opinions in a positive on Radiohead and The Strokes who are way above their contempories imho.
Likewise I respect and admire Beck rather than love his music.
Sure their was even bigger hyperbole surrounding Springsteen my very simple point is that he pretty much deserved it -his style was pretty simple but direct and again imho he represented in his day a new link in the chain of contemporary songwriters.
He has made clunkers over his career but my point is that at the core of his work is pure art based on a tradition not (imho) music trying hard to be art.
I think it's much harder to do the crafted,direct and "simple" type of music he does.
I give you lots of credit Zaikesman because you are clearly very passionate about music just like myself.
We simply disagree on this band but you put a good argument forward for them.

Zaikesman...I appreciate your maturity level in posting a thread and letting others respond honestly...in this case disagreeing at times...without having to resort to childish bantering and rebuttles...this is afterall a forum...lets not take things too seriously...although with music...at times...this can be inevitable...in regards to Ben and the Lips...Ben likes what he likes...everyone to an extent is that way...myself included...as I get older...my record collection grows smaller...I have less time and energy to "find" new music...and more often than not...find little new music that stimulates me...predictable as it may be...I prefer something that has stood the test of time...be it the Stones,Kinks,Hendrix,etc...Im afraid Im turning into the classic rock "meathead" everyone makes fun of!...at any rate...going from singer songwriter types such as the Boss to even early Lips is probably a bit of a stretch...the early recordings are raw and kind of sloppy in the classic garage way...but their humour,creativity,and energy set them apart from the pack in this regard...just for the record...not a huge Boss fan...but "Nebraska" has to be one of the darkest, hearfelt, dissections of the small midwestern town gone bad...a very underated and uncommercial Boss record...and a very good one..happy

Hey guys, great posts! (and yes...big bonus points for no bitch fights)

I think I fall somewhere in the middle on the Lips. I've never really thought they were as good as their press, but I've always enjoyed them to some extent. I can listen to them objectively and agree with much of Zaikesman's praise, but at the same time they often fail to connect with me emotionally. There are definitely FL's songs that do, and I like them very much, but others blur together and lack the distinctiveness that made a group like The Beatles extra special (at least to me...they're my benchmark of quality). I do agree that they have the drive and creative restlessness that great bands share, and I really respect them artistically. Musically, I kinda tend to lump them together with Radiohead (and others) and label them as "Pink Floyd" for the new millenium. I do enjoy both groups, but not as much as an other artists that connect with me emotionally. Of course, that connection is completely subjective and individual. I know Zaikesman must have made that connection, or he couldn't feel the way he feels about them. I know many others that have made that same connection with the Lip's music. I understand it completely, but I don't happen to share those same feelings quite as often.

As far as the new Wilco goes, I think Zaikesman should check it out. I know where you're coming from as far as the No Depression backlash is concerned. It's not completely unjustified, but I do think you're missing some amazing music that has been labeled (correctly, or not) "No Depression" . Wilco is another band that has yet to live up to it's unbelievable press, but I think "Yankee Hotel Foxtrot" brings them one step closer. Like someone mentioned earlier, everything new is derivative to some extent. YHF is no exception, but I do think it may be Wilco's most original album to date. It seems like Jim O'Rourke was able to help them make the album they tried to make on their own with Summerteeth. I actually think YHF might have more in common with a Flaming Lips album than it does most No Depression albums. It's an atmospheric, laid-back, headphone listen...not country rock.

And Zaikesman...it's about time someone mentioned the Young Fresh Fellows on this forum! Not very hi-fi, but one of my all time faves. As a matter of fact, I honestly believe that Scott McCaughey's (of the YFF) Minus 5 album, "Old Liquidator" is somewhat responsible for Wilco's non-"New Depression" direction that began on "Being There". "Being There " was recorded soon after Old Liquidator was released (and after Jeff Tweedy played bass with Scott and the Minus 5 at a show in Chicago). The YFF and Scott McCaughey are also Jeff Tweedy's wife's favorites, which also plays into my crackpot theory. :-)

And Springsteen! Yes Zaikesman...I understand where you're coming from and I agree (I read "Mansion On The Hill"). I wrote Springsteen off ten years ago, but his new album makes me think I wrote him off too early. I haven't heard it more than a few times, but it's sincere in a way that he hasn't been since "Tunnel Of Love" (his divorce album), and I don't *think* Jon Landau was involved. Both are good things in my book. I've always felt that his Woody Guthrie-like image was fairly calculated, but I can't deny the fact that he wrote some amazing songs. I happen to be one of the few who thinks none of those songs were on "Born To Run" or "Born In The USA", but that's just me...I prefer his first two albums. "The Rising" doesn't sound like his earliest work, but it does seem to avoid some of the grandstanding that bothered me since the late 70s. I look forward to listening to it more, and I never thought I'd say that about a Springsteen album again.

Phil

Thanks for the Wilco imput Phil (the rest too :-). I'll have to make an effort to give them a listen (unfortunately for me, my ability to preliminarily audition stuff online is about nil, due to my relatively ancient computer, which just can't deal well with a streaming feed). My aversion to the "Alt-Country" tag doesn't have so much to do with not being a huge country fan (I'm not in the sense of knowing a lot about it or owning much of it, but I can greatly enjoy vintage country from the 50's and 60's [such as DC's WAMU carries on Saturday afternoons with the Eddie Stubbs show broadcast from Nashville - don't know if this is syndicated], and also like acoustic bluegrass), or even not caring for the original wave of country-rock (I'm a big fan of stuff such as Gene Clark's collaborations with Doug Dillard, The Band, Neil Young, Dylan, The Stones' country flirtations, and even some Flying Burrito Brothers and (gasp) Dead, but am not as attracted to later Byrds, Gram Parsons solo, or the artists that followed them with greater commercial success such as The Eagles, Poco, or Emmylou Harris), but rather what I perceive as the mannered and stilted approach characteristic of just about all self-conscious attempts at 'revival' or 'genre' music, combined with a tendency in this case toward the boring, songwriting-wise. I also found "No Depression" to be kind of presumptuous in a way that reminds me of the hype surrounding "The Year That Punk Broke", since both those phenomena were essentially media and commercial trend-hopping of movements that had really begun at least a decade before they were promoted as the latest thing. But as you say, the newer Wilco work may not be explicitly derived from this school.

I fully sympathize with The Beatles being your "benchmark of quality". I've been afflicted with the same expectation level ever since they became my favorite band when I was given the "Rubber Soul" album at age six, and this can make it hard for a rock fan to ever really give full marks to any other group or artist pursuing an original, non-genre, songwriting-oriented and impressionistic-in-execution approach to the music (artists not attempting to do anything other than entertain are, perhaps unfairly, given somewhat of a pass in this regard, but neither are they loved as much as The Beatles, while practicioners of traditional forms are exempt from having to compete). Part of the way I've reconciled this is to accept the realization that both the state of the art form, and the state of our society today generally, will never again allow for such a level of greatness to be achieved as The Beatles represent no matter what level of genius is brought to bear. Next taking into account the fact that almost universally, you are not actually going to find an equivalent level of genius anyway, I look to the hope of finding a different kind of genius, which is thankfully infinite in possibility. But the one thing that I really really look for, and get very high about when I think I may have found it, is an artist who, despite their limitations of ability or contextual serendipity (which may be severe compared to The Beatles), tries their very hardest, and brings all of their individual genius to bear, on attempting to achieve their own personal version of what The Beatles pointed the way toward in terms of what is ventured and gained artistically. Most artists lack both the genius and the effort required, and the rest generally lack one or the other. But when you can find an artist of considerable unique genius, who undertakes the difficult attempt to go beyond their own preconceptions of their art and reach for a new synthesis which might recall the creative spirit of The Beatles in their own small way, then you may have found an artist who successfully expresses what I have always identified as the key quality inherent in any work that can begin to satisfy in a way that even remotely recalls The Beatles: Generosity. It is the sharing of that personal artistic exploration in a way that tries to reach out to the audience unselfishly and give something that no one else could create, which is special. Most artists either don't possess something which goes beyond in order to give, or they end up taking from their audience rather than giving to it by not pushing themselves into so vulnerable and unknown an area of personal expression, instead working in a safe place where they are sure not to fail. If you can find that spirit of unguarded artistic generosity, even if the genius attempting to give it represents merely one which is different from what has come before, rather than one which is (impossibly) equal to what has come before, then you have found something which is worthy of the continuation of the art form's heritage of new creation.

I believe when you hear that spirit of generosity in an artist's work, you receive a spark of recognition that tells you: pay attention, this is different, this is real. Worlds can only open up for the listener if the artist is willing to go naked before them and share their unique creation despite the risk. I value receiving this spark into my heart even if the artistic genius in question is only a minor genius, relatively speaking. I can hear it and appreciate it in the case of Joey Ramone just as much as I can with John Lennon, just as much in the case of Gene Vincent as with Bob Dylan. Without all the reaching of all the minor geniuses, when it comes to rock, you might as well just listen to The Beatles and nothing else, but that would be a much less interesting and stimulating life. Which is, sadly, just about the state of the music as I hear it today. Most artists nowadays possess little to no creative genius, and are content to merely exploit their audience, essentially holding it in contempt. This might be okay for the industry (although not in the long run, I think) and for fans who have little in the way of artistic sensitivity, but it gets really depressing after a while for people like you or me, who grew up on something better. Rock is a pop art form, and though I can always listen to older material again, or tell myself that I can enjoy music that remains in the underground even though most people have never heard of it, I guess there is still a strong psychological need to be a part of something new which is much larger than yourself, and which has been going unfulfilled for quite some time now. I mean, I can barely recall the last time that I was totally into something that made much of a dent on the popular consciousness. There used to be a viable substitute for this in the underground rock community that existed when I was younger, but that was blown up and fragmented by the time of the Lollapalooza generation, and totally subsumed as everything became the oxymoronic "alternative". Of course, there will never again exist a day when the most popular artist in the world is also the best, as in the case of The Beatles. And in this post-regional, internet and video age, I don't even think there are going to be any more vital underground scenes in the way there were in the 70's and 80's. But I suppose that it is still just a simple hope of mine that someday, there will again be an artist who simultaneously sparks that recognition of artistic generosity within me, and also has it embraced by the larger world around me. Are The Flaming Lips it? If I'm being realisitc I think "No way it could happen, they're too weird, they're not what people want", but then there are times when I think that just maybe, enough other people might recognize in them the same thing that I do.