Mercury Rev, Wilco, The Shins, The National, Midlake, Wilco, Iron and Wine, Fleet Foxes, Lambchop et cetera et cetera all the way to beardy, worthy heaven. And so, within this large family is a band called the Decemberists.
I first heard them in 2005, via their song 'The Engine Driver', told they were a little bit like the Shins, which back then had an element of truth. Tuneful, whiny, slightly camp, erudite vocals. More folky, more rustic than many, also notably impersonal, steeped in Anglicisms and lore and tall tales.
To be honest, of all the Americanians, it's not really them I'd have picked for the big time, a cult concern if ever there was one. And so they probably remain, but it's a pretty big cult, which propelled this, their last album, to Number 1 in the US album chart.
Perhaps I dwell on charts a bit too much, but they do help to establish context sometimes, and ... well I just like numbers and competitions and all that.
The biggest crossover "indie" band of recent times is Vampire Weekend, who likewise I might not have initially picked for the big time but have a fair bit in common with the Decemberists.
Both bands seem like an almost academic study of another culture's music, both write clever, as well as clever-clever songs, both are tight, and rarely get stuck in a downbeat rut, and both put on a damn good show. They seem like they're having fun and treat their audiences with respect, encourage participation, make it all seem a hoot. Makes me realise where so many of those meaningful bands I love so much go wrong.
This album is a bit sniffed at by Decemberists devotees - it's a straight collection of 10 normal-sized songs rather than an epic concept album based around a Japanese folk tale or a song suite full of different characters and leitmotif. Perhaps it was a calculated attempt to hit the big time, perhaps band leader Colin Meloy tired of too much artifice.
Also, I don't think their previous work, 'The Hazards of Love' (epic song cycle) quite worked. It lacked variety. It seemed to have only one tune which ran all the way through it.
'The King is Dead' has more tunes. Not that they're necessarily the Decemberists' best tunes. I'm a little bit with the doubters on this one. It's a good album but not a great one. It stomps along pleasingly enough, but there are a few standout moments.
The main one for me is perhaps the Decemberists' most personal ever song, 'Rise to Me', an ode to Meloy's autistic son. It's real pretty, and up there with my favourite songs by the band.
There probably isn't a dud on the album, but not really anything else of that power - 'Down by the Water' is a straight-up stomp, while 'This is Why We Fight' is perhaps the closest to an epic, but not epic like they have been epic.
Truthfully, I'm not sure the Decemberists have done a great album, perhaps they've always been a little bit too far one way or the other, perhaps it does sound a little bit too much like a lesson, albeit a very fun lesson.
Their two best are probably the third and fourth, 'Picaresque' and 'The Crane Wife' - my guess is that the latter will be the one most likely to go down as a classic (its being based on a Japanese folk tale does not get in the way of many cracking tunes).
So, I suppose this album represents my non-stop Americana phase, my heavy gig-going phase, it represents how much better the American music scene is than the British. This is the Decemberists' sixth album, the first to reach the US Top 10. Would such a slow-burning success be possible for a Brits? Our good bands need to succeed in the first two and then get slowly forgotten then are utterly on the heap by the time they are the Decemberists' age.
Here would be my compilation
The Engine Driver
Billy Liar
O Valencia
We Both Go Down Together
This Sporting Life
The Crane Life 1 and 2
The Rake's Song
Rise to Me
Yankee Bayonet
This is Why We Fight
January Hymn
16 Military Wives
The Wanting Comes In Waves/Repaid
Sons and Daughters
Yup, those are the best songs from the two albums I know. I should keep up with this group.
ReplyDeleteI continue to be curious as to what draws me to half of your list of Americana - Decembrists, Shins, Midlake, and what pushes me away - Wilco, Fleet Foxes, Iron & Wine. It's not that I actively dislike these bands, it's just that the others have an especially strong appeal for me. Perhaps it's the distinctive voices of the lead singers? (Although Lambchop's singer is pretty amazing, but for whatever reason even Nixon never rises above being a pleasant listen to my ears, as opposed to a heartbreaking epic of staggering beauty or what have you (such as 'Picaresque' or 'Chutes too narrow'). Why do people have different tastes David, tell me WHY.
I think you're more fixated on the reasons behind taste than I am, and likewise more inclined to put people's taste in boxes. I'm not sure I care why people have different tastes. It's worth little more than a passing thought to me. Sometimes we hate a band because of their name, sometimes because of their chord progressions, sometimes because they think they're better than they are, sometimes because we don't like their sound, sometimes because someone else has persuaded us too hard to love them, sometimes because the lead singer's a prick. I think the lead singer from Midlake has a completely undistinctive voice (proved somewhat by the fact he's actually left the band and they've carried on regardless) while Jeff Tweedy has one of the most beautiful, distinctive, archetypal voices in rock. There we go. It's all good. Here's a question ... if it was possible to love every single song, would that be better, or is having discretion and judgement and instinctive loathing for some shit what makes being a music fan so much fun
ReplyDeleteYou've got me there. I basically like and don't dislike any particular piece of classical music - and as a result, I don't really care to choose to listen to it much at all. No fun to be had in that world for me. Which is a pretty absurd stance to take with 500 years worth of art, including inarguably the greatest pieces of music ever composed/performed. I guess you've got to know what you hate to better appreciate what you love, or something.
ReplyDeleteI apologise for putting bands (and listeners) in boxes.
How can you say "inarguably the greatest pieces of music ever composed/performed"? How is there not an argument to be had there? I argue. It is not inarguable.
ReplyDeleteOK, so the word 'inarguable' is, in this context, absurd in its literal sense. But words cannot and should not alwys be taken literally. Perhaps it'd be better if I claimed it was uncontroversial - boring, even - to suggest that the works of, say, Bach, Beethoven and Tchaikovsky are considered by a majority of musicians (of all backgrounds) to include some of the best/most beautfiul/most technically accomplished/most recognised pieces of music ever composed.
ReplyDeleteHmphhnhnf ... it's ok if you like that kind of thing. But it's time that popular music gave up its inferiority complex. If classical music was all that, more people would actually listen to it and know about it, rather than silently bow to its inherent superiority because they're told to by people who have a vested interest in telling us it's better. OK, try this. Is there anything "high culture" you're really knowledgeable about, to high degree of learning? For me, it's only the classical (as in Roman and Greek) world. Right, so i'm used to clever classicists telling me how awesome and amazing the great works of the classics are and I'm just about qualified to understand that and pass judgement on it. And i know it's no better than Films or TV or pop music. I know Bob Dylan's way better than Catullus, David Simon's way better than Sophocles, Steve Coogan's way better than Aristophanes. Fuck high culture. If that's people's taste, that's their taste, but it's not "best". And I do take issue with your use of recognisable. Trust me (from my job), these days the vast majority of people under the age of 50 can't even recognise some of the most famous and renowned pieces of classical music, even the super famous tunes which are actually quite good amidst the mountains of mountains of orchestrated boredom
ReplyDeleteYou know what, I do trust you. And, to my meagre knowledge of both, your comparisons are very apt. Just to be dickish, I'd import a lot of Coogan's brilliance to his collaboration with Iannucci in partiuclar, (But I've no doubt a fair amount of Aristophanes' reputation was in part a resposne to good work by the directors and actors he worked with, too).
ReplyDeleteIt's hard to give up on an inferiority complex as one always likes to back the underdog. (Interesting for me to live in a time when comics are becoming more widely read/recognised than literary classics, to the point that it feels as if more people on the train think I'm a weirdo for reading an Austen novel than when I pull out an Avengers comic).