although admittedly, they have a great name

[]
posted by tom / July 16, 2004 /

An article on Slate yesterday set me off. The basic premise: Wilco ain't so hot. Let's break things down: author Chris Metcalfe says that Wilco's music has been shaped by those who came before them, and that their frontman is a headcase. Clearly, then, they are unworthy of sitting at the table with history's other great rock acts.

Alright, so maybe Metcalfe slept through the predictable process of backlash, anti-backlash, and shutting up that accompanies any record that achieves both indie cred and mainstream success. It's like the rotation of the earth: you're powerless to avoid being swept along by it, but effort is required to even be able to observe it. His is a boring but forgivable sin.

But Metcalfe can't resist signing off without dropping a few names:

The best and most original rock musicians of the '90s embraced this marginalization by cheerfully casting off all of rock's old pretense to grandiosity. I'm thinking now of Stephin Merrit, Elliott Smith, Sam Beam, Chan Marshall, and Stuart Murdoch, all of whom hide behind aliases or their fellow band-mates, or record out of their own bedrooms.

I won't pretend I know all of these folks' music, although -- much as I love the music -- claiming that Elliott Smith's sound was original seems like a stretch, and Chan Marshall's output is so uneven that I'm amazed he included her.

But Stephin Merrit? Stephen fucking Merrit is being held up as an example of a lack of pretension? A guy whose four-piece band include a cellist isn't grandiose? I'm sorry, but anyone who legally changes their name so as to include fewer e's is pretentious. I believe that's the legal litmus test, actually. Mark, can you provide a case reference?

It's been a while since I bought i. And I must confess, I've never listened to 69 Love Songs in its entirety. But the tracks I've heard, combined with i, were enough for me to develop a grudge. I get the distinct feeling that if I were at a party with Mr. Merrit, it would be difficult to resist punching him in the nose. I just have a suspicion that I would not get along well with a guy who says things like, "the field of music is so vast—and, not to be immodest, but my abilities are such that I don't know where to start." Plus, you know, he was a rock critic.

Maybe I'm falling into the same trap as Metcalfe, attempting to establish my indie poseur bona fides with a vigorous denunciation of a well-regarded artist. But I promise I'll at least try not to do it quite as ham-handedly. So -- among i's musical transgressions:

1. I DieContains the lyric "having forgotten how to cry / I die". In the chorus, no less.
4. I Looked All Over TownThis song is about being an unloved circus clown. I wish I could say it's just a terrible metaphor, but repeated references to "crazy hair", a "painted frown" and the circus point in the other direction. Do people really throw rocks at clowns? Catherine, what have I told you about doing that?
5. I Thought You Were My BoyfriendThis is a pretty good song. But then, if you or I brazenly ripped off New Order's biggest hit we could probably produce something halfway decent, too.
7. I Wish I Had An Evil TwinA two note hook? A fucking TWO NOTE HOOK? That is 33% short of even the barest rock & roll standards. Musical genius my ass.
11. I'm an OperettaPlease, please refrain from trying to rhyme things with "operetta". Also note: using a harpsichord as the dominant instrument on a track that prominently features the words "operetta" and "violetta" doesn't do much to make it seem less precious.

I will grudgingly admit that there are a few standout tracks -- I Don't Believe You is a pretty inarguably great song, from instrumentation to lyrics to melody. But in my opinion those bright spots are not enough to absolve Merrit of the aforementioned grievous errors in musical judgment. Besides, it's really the overall MF sound that grates. The Magnetic Fields suffer from the same problems as classic They Might Be Giants: songwriting that's too clever for its own good, more cute flourishes than is probably wise, and unfortunately thin production. The difference is that TMBG has a sense of humor, and can occasionally wring some frantic human emotion out of their limited range of sounds (witness Ana Ng). Merrit's stuck producing oddly mechanical renditions of what sound like forgotten solo numbers from musicals nobody bothered to put on DVD.

Comments

An insane genius who has stood on the shoulders of giants to achieve fortune and glory? Yes, Wilco truly deserves our carefully-measured disdain.

Posted by: jon on July 19, 2004 08:38 AM

Despite my earlier plea for i being reevaluated, you really can't measure the genius of Merritt based on the new album. As a whole, your analysis is pretty dead-on and it really doesn't stand up to repeat listenings, although I Thought You Were My Boyfriend is a definite triumph. 69 Love Songs, on the other hand, has approximately 22 amazing songs on it, and if you combine these with two or three from i, you have seriously one of the best full-length CD's of recent years.

Posted by: Scott on July 22, 2004 09:42 AM

Post A Comment

Name


Email Address


URL


Comments


Remember info?



Google Analytics