Good album. Spot on review, for the most part.

Having just seen the gang at Red Rocks, if you were there you would understand, this band is at a really great point in their career and there is definitely more unexpected gems to come. I’ll echo this sentence… “if the sound of six of the world’s best musicians banging out spangled and bejeweled pop-rock doesn’t get you off, then you may want to reconsider your record collection.”

M

I wasn’t offended by anything that you wrote. No apologies are needed. As you state, your review was a response to people who dislike the recent Wilco albums for not being intellectual or experimental enough, which I would agree is a weak criticism. I was just trying to give the perspective of someone who doesn’t care about experimentation or intellectualism and who was just left cold by the new albums.

Your criticism of the term “Dad Rock” is well-taken. (I’m not sure if you’ve read the Tweedy interview in the most recent NY Times Magazine, but he makes a similar point. Here’s the link in case anyone is interested: http://tinyurl.com/kpjl2a )

Your review and follow-up raised some really interesting questions about why people like the kind of music that they like. I am not so naive to think that people do not factor in the social cachet of a particular artist when they are determining whether or not to leave a catty comment on a blog post. Having said that, I think that people generally listen to albums that they like. If people are not responding to the new Wilco albums, I think that the likeliest explanation is that they just don’t like the songs. There are probably people who are ripping Wilco on message boards and then listening to SBS on headphones when no one is looking, but it can’t be that many people, can it?

I think that the reaction of fans to the most recent Radiohead album proves my point. There seems to be a consensus that it was Radiohead’s least experimental album since OK Computer. I think that Thom even referenced human beings on a couple of songs. As we know, “In Rainbows” was lauded by the press and loved by most of their fans. I would argue that that reception was due to the fact that the songs were really really good. If Radiohead released its version of SBS or Wilco (The Album), the critics and fans would complain about it and say that the new record sucks because Radiohead aren’t being experimental and they are in a holding pattern or whatever. If Wilco had released its version of “In Rainbows”, then critics and fans would say that sobriety has made Tweedy into a songwriting force, that the band doesn’t feel the need to prove itself by being weird anymore, etc.

Anyway, I appreciate your post and response.

Thanks for the crits (seriously). I should begin by saying that I am operating from a defensive position. SBS was dismissed quickly and shunted by the people who made Wilco rich in 2002/4 (hipsters and P4K, yes, and I count myself among the first and sometimes wish I could among the second).

I’m not saying that people who don’t like Wilco (The Album) are paranoid, or hipsters, or immature idiots. I’m answering what I think is the common contemporary bash against Wilco: namely, that they’re not intellectual and experimental enough anymore, that they’re not taking things seriously, and that they’re making something called “Dad Rock.” (I’ll explain my feelings on that term in a bit). As someone who adores YHF, I find myself wanting to listen to it less these days. A few key tracks aside (Man Who Loves You, Kamera), it’s simply not a very “fun” record. “Fun” is something that most indie rockers (i.e., the one-time majority of people buying Wilco records) are any good at. Myself included. And so my point is, Wilco (The Album) is bound to be dismissed by the “mainstream” indie media/zeitgeist/comments sections of most blogs as too simple, too quotidian, and Dad Rock. And I say there’s nothing wrong with simple or quotidian. It didn’t bother the Replacements or the Beatles, and it doesn’t bother me.

There is, however, something wrong with the term “Dad Rock.” In my view, it’s a culturally insensitive/hateful term which implies that “Dads” listen to weak, lame, or otherwise square music. As someone whose Dad raised him on WIllie Nelson, Neil Young, Bruce Springsteen, etc, I find the notion that Dads automatically have poor/easily defined taste to be more than a little simplistic and foolish. Further, it implies that YHF/Animal Collective/anything cool exists on “our” plane, the level of 20somethings which is inherently cooler, more interesting, and more relevant than anything our Dads could possibly be into. Additionally, its usage shows that the user is more interested in the cultural cachet attached to music than the music itself. I.e., when dismissing SBS or (The Album) because they’re “Dad Rock,” you’re essentially saying, “I don’t like music that dads like, I like music that 20somethings like.” And when you say that, it’s not too far a jump to say that you don’t like music, you like the cachet that music provides you. Again, I’m extremely guilty of this, as many of my past reviews will tell you, but that doesn’t make it any less childish.

Hence the closing point of my review. Music can be fun. If you only listen to music because it’s “challenging,” or because it’s different from whatever your mainstream is, then you’re only liking things based on an inverse of what other people like. You don’t actually like “something,” (note: I’m not assuming anything about you, personally, Shake, I’m speaking in the Royal You), you like “not something.” And so this mindset builds record collections that are overinterested in pithy emotions and short on songs about love, hope, and fun, because that’s what the overwhelming majority of pop songs are about. And there’s a good reason for that.

Now, all of that being said, I do want to apologize if my tone or words offended you. It’s my intention only to provoke, not to wound, and to challenge people to let themselves have fun listening to a record. It’s been my experience that “challenge” is the correct word here, because allowing oneself to have fun is an oddly tough thing to do without disguising anything; it makes you very naked, and that’s a scary place for anyone to be.

So, if you simply don’t dig on Wilco (The Album) because you don’t feel the songs, that’s fine, and I apologize for making such sweeping generalities. But my suspicion, Shake, is that the vast majority of people who visit music blogs are not in your position. This review was written both for them and to affirm those who are on the other side. I, personally, fall somewhere between.

Cheers,
M

In my opinion, people have focused to much on the lack of experimentation on the recent albums. My enjoyment of a Wilco song varies independently of the amount of experimentation on it. There are some simple Wilco songs that are among my favorite ever written (Far, Far Away, Jesus &c, Outta Sight Outta Mind and others). The problem isn’t that the new records lack experimentation, it is that (again, to me) they lack some ineffable quality that makes a great pop song. But writing a review that says “”Hate it Here” just didn’t grab me. I can’t explain why.”, isn’t very interesting to read so people start talking about addiction, migranes, yuppies staring into buildings, experimentation, Jay Bennett, and, I guess, Dad Rock.

What I really don’t understand is the confrontational tone of the review. Why can’t you just explain why you like the album, instead of making ad hom attacks on everyone who doesn’t? The following line galls: “And if the sound of six of the world’s best musicians banging out spangled and bejeweled pop-rock doesn’t get you off, then you may want to reconsider your record collection.”

So Wilco (The Album) doesn’t get me off. When I reconsider my record collection, what is it that I am supposed to be thinking about? What record am I lacking that would make me appreciate this album more?

I still consider myself a pretty big Wilco fan, and I’m happy for everyone who loves this record. I wish that it made me feel the same way that YHF does, but it doesn’t. I really don’t see the need to call out people who don’t like it as “hipsters”, “paranoid yuppies”, or immature idiots.

As an aside, I really love this site. I have been reading it for a while and it rarely disappoints.

Pitchfork doesn’t need anyone to defend them, but @romeo — Spoon’s 4th album got Best New Music. Animal Collective’s 5th album got Best New Music. Dirty Projector’s 6th album got Best New Music. Bill Callahan, Radiohead, Bonnie “Prince” Billy, The Walkmen, Okkervil River all received the same grade with recent albums.