Arcade Fire, "Neon Bible"

After writing this, I found myself revisiting the music of the Smiths. I used to go through Smiths phases every couple of years, one of those obsessive two-week long things when I'd feel eighteen again and reaffirm to myself that they really were one of the greatest bands ever. As for the most recent such phase ... I can't even remember when it was, and after listening to them over the past few weeks, it's probably not coincidental that I find their music has lost so much of its luster. I was never even *that* big of a Smiths fan, but the depth to which I embraced their music has been left in the past, likely forever. They'll never affect me that strongly ever again, and I'm perfectly fine with that. On the other hand, Joy Division (whose lyrics also affected me deeply) have a darker, rawer sound that has aged better and remains considerably more immune to my own aging process. But there are obvious elements to the Smiths music (teenage angst, awkwardness, and a million other things that have been written about in a million different ways) that render it best experienced under the age of twenty.

I have come to understand why the profile of "Strangeways Here We Come" keeps rising among Smiths albums -- it's relatively untarnished because the band split up once it released. It was never caned on the radio, never toured live, and didn't produce any of their most well-known singles. For years afterward, fans directed their thoughts toward the disappointment over the band's breakup (and speculation over when they might reunite) instead of on adulation for the album. Today, it's like the long lost Smiths album. One of their most underappreciated songs is "Never Had No One Ever" (even though it appeared on their most appreciated album, "The Queen Is Dead"), probably because it wasn't part of their everyday live set and never had a chance to be canonized as such. That song always felt like a breath of fresh air to me because it wasn't caned to death. "Strangeways" is a whole album of songs like that.

I read far too many breathless claims that such-and-such a band were the "New Smiths" (but I can't recall one involving a Canadian band, can anybody remember an example?), but let's try this on ... Arcade Fire are the new Smiths. "Funeral" effortlessly won over legions of indie hipsters, PFM diehards and NYT espresso sippers. It was hailed as the most gutwrenchingly emotional tour de force since Mozart's last gasps, the best example of the wasted, primal screams of teenaged youth since whoever. A couple of years on, it all feels a bit silly. We feel dumb for taking it all so seriously. Even I fell for the bait and gushed some crazy blubbering crap about teenage myth or whatever (I realized how dorky this sounded and toned it down a little when it came time to submit a blurb to ILM's best of 2004 list, but still). Everything from "Funeral" has been played, replayed, toured, retoured, onstage with Bowie, onstage with Bono, until eventually those same nine songs had been driven into the ground, sullied and smeared, luster forever lost.

So let me put it to you straight -- "Neon Bible" is really, REALLY damn good. Right now, at this very moment, I approach it like it's their "Strangeways Here We Come". It's the lost Arcade Fire album. These songs are all new and with those new songs, their shtick feels fresh again.

I certainly didn't expect this. "Black Mirror" leaked long ago and I wasn't too impressed, but as the slow-burning opener to the album it finally makes sense in context. "Intervention" started showing up in live sets a while back and I wasn't too enthused. It looks like Arcade Fire could be making similarly-themed remakes of "Born To Run" for many years to come. The Smiths work best when you're actually in the lyrical moment of the song -- like when you like some girl and are too shy to approach her. "Neon Bible" (and "Born To Run") succeeds by overcoming your more rational senses and making you long for being in those unenviable, difficult situations. "Windowsill" makes me want to long to move out of my parents' house all over again, but not before shooing away the teenage crush who keeps knocking on my window like something straight out of "Dawson's Creek". Why? We don't really want to return to those times, but the sense of joy and optimism in Arcade Fire songs are addictive. Or maybe it's because our younger selves didn't have lives so exciting. We didn't have the guts to make good on what "No Cars Go" promises, by making our escapist dreams come true and go far away from the safety of our homes.

Since I first heard "Neon Bible" (and started writing this), it has debuted at #2 on both the UK and US album charts, which is a sensational result that I never would have believed if it weren't true. And I'm starting to realize that nobody knows or cares what I'm talking about over here when I try to blab about that and explain why it's such an incomprehensible chart placing. Arcade Fire are a bona fide phenomenon. Say what?

Checking In

I haven't been hearing much new music lately, but have been sufficiently busy and entertaining by cycling through the careers of PJ Harvey and Gordon Lightfoot. Fifteen years on, "Dry" sounds positively safe -- not dense enough, fierce enough or angry enough to warrant its reputation. In short, it was a (pardon the pun) dry run for "Rid of Me", which takes everything the debut tried to do and improved on it a hundredfold. Even comparing the bouncy/rave-up singles is a horrible mismatch. I always hated "Sheela Na Gig"'s cringe-worthy "wash that man right out of my hair" line, whereas "50 Foot Queenie"'s ascending, repeated chorus still gets me chanting along without fail (and my pristine memories of the rockabilly versions that were the faraway highlight of her 1995 tour easily seal the deal). I was disappointed when she went soft (or so I thought at the time) with her later albums, but I underrated "To Bring You My Love" for many years ("The Dancer" is unbearably beautiful, a stone cold shoegazer blues/torch classic that may well be her greatest song), while the somewhat patchy "Is This Desire" and "Stories From the City, Stories From the Sea" have held up quite well. Her collaboration with John Parish, "Dance Hall at Louse Point", was lauded critically but was ignored publicly, even by many of her own fans. It's the missing link between "To Bring You My Love" and the more serene "Is This Desire".

Lightfoot is simply The Man. Nuff said.

Anticipating new episodes of American Idol is nearly as exciting as waiting for actual new music. Unlike, say, the thoroughly unimpressive singles from the new Ciara album, a new episode of AI rarely disappoints. I'm still a bit shocked over Antonella's departure, and yes, a large part of me still believes that the fix was in all along. The path is now clear for Sunjaya to become John Stevens 2007 [Aside: think about this for a moment ... John Stevens and his baby fat can always say that once upon a time, America chose him and sent home Academy Award winner Jennifer Hudson ... how cool is that]. Sunjaya is the youngest in the competition and sings in the most old fashioned style (casting him as an "old soul", as Paula Abdul would put it). There's just one problem -- he sucks. He gets filleted every week by the judges, who clearly have to push the "it's a talent competition, not a popularity contest" angle (as always, this is a totally bullshit stance). Nevertheless, he takes his lumps with maturity without breaking down and crying like you might expect. Standing up to this shitstorm only makes him a bigger babyface to the viewers at home, making him easier to root for and vote for. He's cute, he looks and sings differently than anyone else on the show right now, and he appeals to ten-year old girls. His chances of having a music career are virtually zilch, but as a short-term underdog character on a TV show, he's irresistible. Plus, there aren't many "rootable" people left ... Sundance might have filled the role, but his working class screamo act got turfed, surprisingly. As far as poseurs go, I think people will wake up to the fact that the technically sound but boring (and old ... hath not thee remember the fate of Season 4's Nadia Turner, who was praised by the judges in similar terms?) Melinda Doolittle doesn't belong on the program before they realize the same about Sunjaya. Brandon Rogers seems to teeter on the same ledge -- maybe they really were meant to be background singers.

American Idol Season Six, Week Alpha

And what a week it was ... at the conclusion of Hollywood week, it looked like the boys were set to be the class of the show, just like the past two seasons. There's a guy who carries an odd likeness to Jack Osborne*, an incredible R&B/soul crooner who had already sung background for the likes of Christina Aguilera, a guy who calls himself Sundance, an Asian guy, an Indian guy who looks like a lock to play the Anthony Federov cuteboy role (drawing 90% of the 12-and under vote), etc. Twelve fairly distinct characters, all somewhat developed before the show had even properly started. In contrast, the girls' side had a couple of potentially show-stealing divas (shades of Season Three) plus quirky/skinny white girls A through G.

But as everyone now knows, the tables have turned completely ... the boys looked bland, ordinary, and indistinguishable from one another, while the girls were simply sensational in pulling off the best collective round-of-24 performances in the history of the show. Then there's Antonella ... needless to say, when I saw the headline "Racy photos linked to Idol contestant", there was no doubt in my mind who the culprit would be ... and I'm starting to smell a rat. AI is edited with scalpel-like precision. They air exactly what they want us to see and nothing more. Any scene that makes the final broadcast is a measured attempt to manipulate the viewer into forming a specific opinion about a contestant. During the group phase, they made a big deal of showing her flirting with boys instead of rehearsing. They never showed her doing anything remotely remarkable onstage, in fact, they took the opposite tack by showing her forgetting her words (a sin which got about ten others kicked out before her) and generally making her look untalented compared to a more polished singer once it was down to the final two hopefuls from the final forty. FOX has gone out of their way to portray her as the age-old reality show villain/bitch, and now we're supposed to believe that they knew nothing about her racy past despite having done a thorough background check? Many times in past seasons, we've seen AI gauge the internet/gossip page reaction and feed those storylines back into the show itself. In this case, I have a feeling that they're manufacturing their own controversy by trying to stir up a grassroots campaign to get Antonella kicked off the show, only to have her notoriety keep her on air as people flock to their phones in droves to keep the girl they love to hate on their TVs.

As always, I'm amazed that people are stupid enough to sing dreary ballads in their first week on the show, but what about those who get their song selection exactly right? Antonella somehow succeeded at this task -- one that many other Idol contestants consistently fail to do properly. "I Don't Want to Miss a Thing" is perfect for this stage of the competition**. 1) everybody knows the song, 2) it's a sweeping power ballad with a huge chorus that you can really belt out, 3) it was originally sung by Stephen Tyler, who can be easily outsung. Many contestants appreciate #1 and #2, but #3 is always overlooked, as evidenced by the number of Stevie Wonder and Aretha Franklin songs that are performed each and every season. A good performance of a song by an average singer will almost always sound more impressive than a very good-to-great performance by an outstanding singer -- for example, look at the guys' side, where Blake sang Keane, barely broke a sweat, and still smoked the rest of his field (I doubt we've seen 1/3rd of his potential thus far ... there's little doubt that he's going deep this season).

* wait a minute, did Chris Sligh really leave a comment here: http://diaryofmusicalthoughts.blogspot.com/2006/05/american-idol-gala-extravaganza.html

** as is "Brass In Pocket" ... which turned out to be another lost opportunity

Surprises and disappointments, starring Jesu and Explosions in the Sky

There are two kinds of music fans -- people who treat their favourite bands like their favourite sports teams, and those that don't*. Both groups root for their bands to keep releasing great albums, but the differences arise when they fail to do so. Let's say you root for a band and then one day they spit out the musical equivalent of signing Gil Meche for 50 million dollars. What do you do? If you're a Kansas City Royals fan, you have to convince yourself that it's OK, they're still your team and you love them no matter what. But as a music fan, you're not obligated to continue your support.

Take Jesu. I was never a big Justin Broadrick fan. The next thing I knew, he was blowing me away with a brilliant album ("Jesu") and an even better EP ("Silver"). On the latter release, he perfected the industrial-shoegaze-metal genre, which we all agree has the potential to be the greatest genre in the history of music. The man was on a serious roll and making the best music of his career, so of course I had high hopes for the quick follow-up "Conqueror". But what's this? Decipherable lyrics? Decidedly un-dense guitar lines? Quicker, non-sludgy tempos? "Conqueror" sounds like a more ordinary brand of doom-metal -- certainly not a bad thing in and of itself, but not what I'd come to expect and hope for from a new Jesu album.

Concerning Explosions in the Sky, it really didn't matter to me at all if they put out good music at this point. I'm rarely in the mood for extended post rock symphonies these days (Godspeed burnout, or something) so their ability or lack thereof to create listenable music is a non issue for me now. But I'll be damned -- "All of a Sudden I Miss Everyone" is sensational stuff, like the first triumphant fifteen minutes of the aforementioned GYBE's "Levez Vos Skinny Fists ..." (the best 15 minutes of their career on record), complete with celebratory, almost cheery, major key melodies. Naturally, the usual quiet/loud pattern is featured here, but they made the album short enough (just over 40 minutes) to say what they needed to say before the shtick gets boring. After skimping on the uber-depressive clangs of imminent doom and lightening the mood considerably, I find myself wanting to hear the album again and again, as opposed to their other records where I feel I've gotten the point after one or two listens.

* yes, I know that lots of people exhibit traits of both groups, depending on which band they're dealing with. I'm writing something here.

Everybody reunites

The Police are engaging on a world tour beginning later this spring, and used their prime performance spot on the Grammys to unofficially announce that they are back together for the time being. I admire these guys (and must avoid being cynical) because I assume they're doing this for fun and enjoyment because they certainly don't need to do this for the money. Sting has been doing just fine on his own for a long time and doesn't need to lasso himself back into his old group unless he really wanted to strike a return to old friends and simpler times (you know, the days of power trios rather than 15-piece ensembles complete with African drummers). Copeland and Summers obviously have long gotten over the "I'm too good for you two guys" snub from 20 years ago (not to mention that they've been plenty busy since then as well) and are back on board looking for adventure, cash, and musical fulfillment. All three have looked past all the old hurtful feelings. Everybody does. Everybody reunites.

The Pixies hated each other for 15 years and still reunited. They had every right to be cynical and do the whole thing for the money, considering how much of it was out there for the taking. Dinosaur Jr REALLY hated each other for 15 years -- see nearly every Lou Barlow interview ever -- and still got back together. The Velvet Underground REALLY hated each other and were led by legendarily stubborn assholes and THEY still got back together. If these bands (and countless others ... Culture Club?!?) could do it, then everybody can. It's practically a law of nature.

People have been waiting for the Smiths to reunite practically from the day they broke up. Each band member is on record (multiple times) saying that it won't happen. That it will never happen. Trust me, IT WILL HAPPEN. Bank on it. Too much money, too much of a legacy, too much of an oppurtunity to return to the headlines. Wait, you say, what about the bitter lawsuits, the Johnny Rogan book, Moz's new Latino fanbase, Marr's arrogance, the ego clashes, everything. Fuck that shit. Smiths reunion. It will happen. Probably within five years. Everybody reunites.

The only band I'm worried about is Spacemen 3. Jason and Sonic not only hate each other's guys but literally haven't spoken a word to each other since 1990 or so. Even Reed and Cale used to speak once in a while, perform together onstage once in a blue moon as a favour to friends, and go right back to hating each other, "Sam and Ralph"-style. Also, reunited bands tend to do so because they had better financial or creative/critical success with their old bandmates, whereas I believe both Jason and Sonic have done better separately, on both counts. Fans can continue to hope and dream, and S3 look cooler and more ahead of their time with each passing year, so who knows ... but it really doesn't look good.

News of the Police and the Grammys (which I unfortunately didn't see this year) reminded me of how out of touch with parts of the real world one can get when caught up in stuff like Pazz and Jop madness. Stuff that 99% of music consumers couldn't care less about. I'd forgotten that the Dixie Chicks had such a great year, and hadn't fully grasped the feelgood aspect behind MJB's latest comeback (aren't all of her albums hailed as "finally, the return of a true original, the #1 R&B diva goddess"? Never mind). However, the logic and sense-defying continual popularity of Red Hot Chili Peppers has NOT been lost on me, and yes, the mind still boggles. How? Why? Just break up and reunite in ten years already, like you should have ten years ago (just like Jane's Addiction ... no, I didn't just say that ...)

Prince and the Superbowl Halftime Show

The praise keeps rolling in for Prince's performance, and although I can see where these accolades are coming from (Prince certainly kills live), I can't say I enjoyed it much more than any other halftime show of recent memory. The Superbowl Halftime Show, like the Royal Rumble, is really tough to screw up. The game happens only once per year, even fairweather fans get pumped up for the event and it would take an unmitigated disaster to ruin that mood. The star plays three or four hit songs that everyone in the country knows and loves, and all of the usual concert quibbles go out the window. Are you really going to complain about the setlist ... for a 15-minute set? Complain that Prince didn't have time to let that guitar solo breathe? Like the Stones closing with "Satisfaction" last year, can you really argue over the choice of "Purple Rain" as the closer, regardless of whether you're bored* shitless by that song by now? The amount of money (enough to send a man to the moon), preparation time (ditto), and gimmicks (lights, fireworks, wacky camera angles) see to it that all the stops are pulled out in order to ensure that everyone watching at home thinks to themselves "wow, that was a good show". I think the halftime show gets as much pre-event advertising time as the game itself, and is probably the most watched portion of the entire broadcast.

Unlike, say U2, Prince strongly unites both the fan and critical spheres (devoted and casual people in both cases). In other words, so many people are praising the show because nobody hates Prince. And for his biggest devotees, the importance and success of the event is a vindication of his under-appreciated talent as an incendiary concert performer (AKA everybody enjoys being correct). Professionally, it's great to be Prince these days. He looks fantastic for Age 48, he can still play the shit out of the guitar and bring the goods onstage, he's come out of the shell that consumed him for most of the 1990's and has helped rescue his legacy with several outstanding TV performances (Grammys 2004, American Idol 2006, Brit Awards 2006, now the Superbowl), looking proud to be playing his biggest hits again (after shying away from them for many years) and armed with solid newer songs to boot.

To contextualize the "best halftime show ever" proclamations, take a look at all the past SB halftime show performers. No wonder I can't remember any of the shows from when I was a kid -- the NFL didn't pull in A-list entertainers until the early-90's. This not-coincidentally happened around the time FOX started broadcasting games, NFL TV contracts became stratospherically more valuable than those in any other American sport, and football tightened its stranglehold on the title of America's #1 sport. I vividly remember the hype leading up to Michael Jackson's performance -- bringing him in felt like a huge coup on the part of the NFL and they haven't looked back since, consistently attracting the biggest names in music to play at the halfway point of football's biggest game.

* I will never get bored of hearing "Purple Rain", and I realized it when he used it to close his 2006 Brit Award performance with a rendition that nearly stopped my heart.

American Idol Season Six -- First Thoughts

My mom watches the audition episodes religiously, mainly to laugh her ass off at the putzes that audition despite lacking any semblance of talent. I hesitate to call them "unfortunate putzes" because most of them are hamming it up in order to get on TV, so they simultaneously get exactly what they want AND what is coming to them, so everybody wins. Distinguishing the genuinely crazy people from the "look at me, I'm on AI" crazies would make for a fun drinking game if anyone out there wants to invent one. Or even the simpler "Simon makes incredulous bug eyes: One Drink; Randy laughs and hides his face behind a piece of paper: Two Drinks" kind of drinking game.

I watch these episodes, uh, "distractingly" (not always catching every episode, making dinner or talking or reading while they're on, etc.) and mainly to get a first look at future stars. It's a near certainty that one of the top three or four contestants, if not the eventual American Idol, will appear on our TVs during the audition episodes ... can YOU spot a breakout star amidst hundreds of pretenders? It brings out the closet talent scout in all of us. Here's where I conceitedly point out that I flipped out over Taylor Hicks right off the bat*, as opposed to svengali-man Simon "Westlife" Cowell who passed on both Hicks and Clay Aiken for the trip to Hollywood. Besides duping the no-talents into singing bonus songs for the show-ending clip chorus (e.g. Lionel Richie's "All Night Long" from last week) and rolling the cameras on their semi-deranged auditions for far longer than in past seasons (let's pass this car crash at 20 km/h instead of 30 km/h), this season hasn't distinguished itself from the others yet. After a dull Season 3, Seasons 4 and 5 rejuvenated the show by infusing it with country, rock, and blues Idol wannabes. This year, they're back to cycling through R&B melisma-obsessives as their bread and butter. We've seen all this before, but next week they travel to Alabama so maybe there's still hope.

* Kat too!

Low, "Drums and Guns"

First of all, it's a crap title (Meatloaf's "sex and drums and rock n roll" line, anyone?).

Second, it seems we have another mixing/mastering controversy on our hands, as rumours swirl as to whether or not the iffy mix currently making the rounds (in which nearly all vocals appear in one channel) is the final version or not. A lot of people complained about the fuzzy mastering of "The Great Destroyer", but I had it on vinyl and heard nothing wrong with it, so I'll let the CD owners argue about that ... the stereo separation on "Drums and Guns" is very difficult to ignore, and I sway between annoyance and obliviousness depending on the day.

Third, "Violent Past" is an ear-bleeding masterpiece -- one of the best five or six songs they've ever recorded.

Overall, this album sounds too much like a band trying to distance themselves from every inch of how they sounded up to "Things We Lost in the Fire", and not enough like a band writing the great songs they're capable of. They're pushing this sonic departure down our throats -- I believe it's no coincidence that the most "90's Low"-ish track is only one minute long, cutting itself off just as it begins blossoming into something memorable. The ongoing guns + violence theme wears thin once you get past the best three or four songs on here, and although some tracks have really grown on me (especially "In Silence" and "Dragonfly"), I think "Drums and Guns" is a curio at worst (hey! watch them use drum machines and beats and shit!) and a creative mis-step at best.

Jackin' Pop Results (from Idolator)

I was a bit disappointed with the results of this poll, mainly due to the utter predicabilty of the results, which carried a frightening ressemblance to Pitchfork's poll except with bonus Dylan, because that's what happens when people over 40 years old are participating. The entire top 50 was so ... expected, with not a single album or placing that could be considered truly suprising (in either a good or a bad way). Exceptions ... maybe the low placing for the Liars? Arctic Monkeys nearly cracking the top ten? The wonderfully bizarre 23-24-25 triplet of Scott Walker, Mastodon, and Tom Waits?

Organizationally speaking, Idolator did a fantastic job. Browsing the results is simple, intuitive, and they put the whole ensemble together in a very timely fashion. For statheads, there are options for sorting the data by age, race, region, or primary writing outlet (but unfortunately not by gender -- this yielded intriguing results in past P&J polls). As a card-carrying stathead, I really enjoyed Maura Johnston's essay, which listed all thirty albums that received only one #1 vote but not a single other vote from any other contributor. Out of 497 contributors, it means that a full 6% of #1 album votes fell into that category, which to me is a startlingly high number. Album winners TV on the Radio drew a little over 25% support (comparable to what P&J winners have gotten in recent years), but only three albums earned 100 votes, and only four others earned over 60 (12%), indicating a distinct lack of consensus among the contributors.

I nearly figured into Maura's essay (only one other vote -- for 6th place -- was submitted for "Ticket Crystals"), and would have qualified if she'd done the same for the singles list, as I was the only person to cast a vote for Jesu's "Silver". A comparable list for top singles would likely comprise more than thirty entries (or perhaps not, considering the degree to which the top four singles dominated the competition and particularly the astounding amount of consensus around the #1 pick) but strangely enough (taking non-consensus to the next level), nobody else cast a single vote for my top three singles (along with my #6, #9, and #10 singles). I must continue to state my surprise at the complete anonymity of "Mighty Girl", which, considering the generally high profile of DFA/LCD Soundsystem clones these days, is looking like one of the great forgotten singles of the past few years. And I continue to be baffled by the never-ending stream of accolades for "Return to Cookie Mountain", which is choked with the exact same faults as their debut (most notably that every track is two minutes longer than it needs to be) but I don't remember anybody lauding "Desperate Youth Blood Thirsty Babes" as an album of the year contender. Unabashed love for American indie rock somehow came back into crit-fashion this year, but that genre has always fallen on the outskirts of my personal taste, so it's no shock that I mostly ignored it yet again this year (stay tuned for the ongoing chinstroking of YEAR-END LIST REVIEW MANIA and you will note the decade-plus pattern).

Finally, Glenn Mcdonald's alignment rankings are now available (see here) and I'm in the bottom 9th percentile, which is more or less where I figured I'd be. This number stands to get even lower for P&J, unless perhaps there's a massive deluge of Yo La Tengo votes.

Pazz and Jop Comments

The contents of my ballot were never in doubt (exactly as they appeared in last week's posts), but there was still the matter of assigning points to albums. I went with a fairly unconventional ranking system this year: 25, 20, 13, 12, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5. Normally I would strongly object to six-way ties, since it's supposed to be a ranked list and all, but it's a transitional year for P&J so I figured I'd break away from my normal habits. Most years, the top four or five albums rank far ahead of the pack, and in turn, the top one or two albums crush the rest of the top five. This year was no exception and I decided to reflect it in the rankings. In 2005 I finished in the bottom 25% in Glenn McDonald's critical alignment ratings and this year I'm probably looking at single digits, so in some sense the only intelligent thing for me to do is to vote strategically if I want my ballot to have any impact. Lord only knows who is planning to vote this year, so why not throw some large numbers at the records at the top of my list?

Boris' votes will probably go to "Pink", but I thought the world of "Altar", so sue me. Charalambides' "A Vintage Burden" will get a handful of Keith's votes ("those who like it, like it a lot"), such as mine. Bardo Pond will be nowhere -- perhaps I can have pride in being the only person in the history of P&J to award 25 points to Bardo Pond? Yo La Tengo should easily land in the top 30-40 overall, outpacing every other album on my list by at least 100 spots, by my estimate. "Orchestra of Bubbles" might have an outside shot at a surprise top 100 finish, but it really depends who bothers to vote this year.

I considered reneging on my promise to not submit comments this year, and ended up musing over three options. 1) No comments. 2) One short blurb about Jesu's "Silver". 3) Submitting a slate of comments at a grade two writing level, in order to poke fun at the VV's new editorial direction, i.e. "'Maneater' is a fun song and I like it a lot. It's good for dancing. My friends also like it. We also like 'Fizheuer Zieheuer'. It's got a cool beat and stuff. Everybody loves it, even my dad."

Option 3 would actually require attention on my part. Same goes for Option 2, which would also go against some of the principles I laid out in my earlier post. Option 1 allows me to write and think about the myriad of other things I have on my mind, and therefore appears to be my most likely choice, not the mention the one that requires the least amount of effort.