A pile of prozac with your name on them. A job that eats your life; gives you nightmares and makes you waste your days in stale-smelling offices with paper walls. Relationships made of complaints and excuses; couples who can't love each other but can't live apart, and proceed to tear chunks from themselves 'till there's nothing left. A life that wanders on autopilot, until one day someone asks what you have to show for it, and all you can find is a puddle of debt, some so-called friends and a drinking problem. Then you realise that something's got to change.
Pop music is the art of feeling weightless. It's about shaking yourself free of the burden, the obligation, the ball-and-chain boredom of modern life. About how three-chords and a melody can make the bad stuff seem less real. Less powerful. Less likely to swallow you up. It's made for drunken dancing, slurred singing, being with your friends and enjoying life despite what it does to you.
But why The Strokes? Why should you let a group of arty, rich-boy prep-school posers force their hyped-up, rip-off rock on you? Surely they're just a bad joke; a style-mag stunt; a group of trust-fund delinquents who dropped into music to avoid working on Wall Street. If they don’t 'get' your pain, what chance do they have of making it better?
"I'm not your friend. I never was."
It's true that 'Room on Fire' doesn't deserve the hype it's been lumbered with; judged alongside the wealth of bold, boundary-breaking albums released this year, The Strokes' second sounds like a timid, attention-seeking gimmick based on lightweight tunes and a good record collection. But albums should never be judged solely on what else is out there, and those with the knives out are ignoring one inescapable fact: their songs are fantastic.
Bursting from the blocks with a 'Flashdance' bassline, yapping guitars and Julian's playboy sneer, 'What Ever Happened?' reminds us what we've been missing; the coke-addict energy; the drop-out chic; the sheer life-sick cynicism that emanates from his Lou Reed ramblings. Everything that made the world fall for 'Is This It' not only remains in its successor; it shines even brighter.
The proof is in the swooning white-reggae of 'Automatic Stop,' the mod-ish 'give-a-shit' stomp of 'I Can't Win,' and the stage-trashing, spite-spewing put-downs of 'You Talk Way Too Much;' this isn't the sound of a band departing from their debut; but one who've refined their songs into the kind of perfect sleaze-pop missives we were always promised.
The joyous, jagged romp-pop of '12.51' is a case in point; an arsenal of nagging guitar lines that mimic Casablancas’ nursery-rhyme melody before Fab's drumkit explodes into a giddy mess of trashed high-hats and Blondie-esque brilliance. Then there's the plodding street-swagger of 'Between Love and Hate,' which meanders harmlessly before a fantastic, out-of-nowhere chorus line arrives, transforming it into a piece of stadium-swelling wonder.
But the undoubted highlight here is the astounding 'Under Control;' a gorgeous silk-clad slow-dance of Sam Cooke soul, with Casablancas' rasps of despair and regret adding real emotional weight to the shoulder-shrugging nonchalance we've been used to. While the lyrics still amount to 'Fear and Loathing in East-Side Apartments,' the down-the-line directness of words such as 'I just want to watch you go by' add a sincerity that make his songs all the more believable.
Sure, lots of people will hate it, and those sad, pallid indiesnobs who creep around crappy Camden pubs lamenting the demise of Mansun will certainly find it hard to take. But we'll let them argue amongst themselves. In truth, if you can recognize its limitations and understand that far better records have been made this year, then it's possible to enjoy 'Room On Fire' for what it really is; an adrenaline-fuelled head-rush of precision-perfect pop tunes about modern life – about sex and cynicism, love, despair and the art of feeling weightless.
"I'm not your friend. I never was."
The Strokes don't 'get' your pain. But they will make it better.
fantastic
it's becoming a horribly addictive album.
help.
Re: fantastic
Re: fantastic
You crashing bore.
Re: fantastic
Re: fantastic
Personally, I like The Strokes, because I happen to enjoy listening to their records. Fancy that.
Re: fantastic
fair point with who that criticism applies to though
doesnt change the fact that theyre so woefully mediocre the majority of the time. that's my problem with them (well one of the main ones), hacks' hyperbolic droolings just exasserbate the whole situation further. and christ, anyway, if mediocrity was what i wanted then i'd be happy as a pig in shit with some of the stuff currently around, especially with reminders of the strokes' supposed 'genius' thrust in my face with nauseating regularity for the past 2 and a half years now, ever since the days after that static, chronically boring Brats show down the bill at the astoria
im not gonna stop you listening to yr strokes records tho :) but i aint holding my tongue..
Re: fantastic
The actual problem some people have with the strokes is in admitting they like something populist. The fact is it's a great album - insidious and addictive.
There are much better bands out there but there's no denying it's great the strokes are around. Bands like this encourage people to go looking for music.
Re: fantastic
Re: fantastic
Re: fantastic
there are possibly others, but i couldn't tell you without staring at my record collection. none of those are as fun as 'Room on Fire' though...
Re: fantastic
c'mon!
but this is a really good album, hell yeah, but i also agree strokes are seriously overrated, and so is this album. nme is almost gonna have sex with these guys. i mean, they were fucking awesome when they started with is this it, 'coz before them it looked like that if you wanted to listen to rock music, if you were a fan, it was just better to be complacent with it. the strokes changed it and - at least for me - rock became interesting again. so i started to find others bands, way much better than 'em. there are lots of bands that are just better than them, but i think we all agree that strokes opened their doors. just for this fact they have my respect, and i do enjoy them. the hype is too much for them, but i don't think we can just deny that they are a really really good band. room on fire is a great record, is this it was really 'it', no matter how much i preffer hellacopters, the libertines, the hiss or d4.
Re: c'mon!
"before them it looked like that if you wanted to listen to rock music, if you were a fan, it was just better to be complacent with it. the strokes changed it and - at least for me - rock became interesting again."
is one of the best comments I've heard about a band in a LONG time. I don't particularly like the strokes--but that was a great way to express how you feel about them. :)
Re: c'mon!
Somethingroundbrownandchocolatey
see...
This one at least has some melody that doesnt need you to be obsessed with the smell of mothballs to love. The worst you can be is indifferent to it surely? I'd agree with that mark 100%, for once!
Inconsistent
The Strokes are masters of illusion. They've sold two million records, but that's not a massive amount when you look at the hype they've had and consider that international artists like 50 Cent who've been around in the mainstream for half that time have done 5 times that.
It's pop music, true, in the same way that Oasis, The Smiths, Velvets, Buzzcocks or Beatles were. But the difference is they're time defying bands whose records will live on. Do any of you seriously think you'll be singing the likes of 'Reptillia' come 2005?
Re: Inconsistent
so what i tried to do with the review was isolate it from all the crap that was surrounding it, and judge it on its own merits as a truly great guitar-pop record. and on that basis, it deserves the mark i gave.
thanks for the comments though
unoriginal yet definitive
even nme have addmitted they could have stepped out of the garage rock scene back in the 70's.
but they have changed the rock scene and defined and captured a certain mood that many people are obviously sympathising with.
personally id rather hear rehashed retro than nu-metal.
its like a generation has decided to re-interpret what they heard as kids.
but good things will come to those who wait.....
in a time so fucked in bullshit politics....there will be a band that will change the world again ...big style.....i have faith
roll deep
Re: unoriginal yet definitive
Addled clumpings from gates anew
It's very simple to separate the album from the hype. All you do is take it home, slip on some headphones and listen to it for the sheer fun of listening to music. The shitty element is that it isn't fun to listen to. If the record has limitations, surely the major limitation is that none of the songs are even close to those on Is This It. How can it be held up as being 'truly great' in one breath and then 'not the best album released this year' in the next? C’mon, give us the names of the albums that are better than this 'truly great' new Strokes ouevre for any record that is better than a truly great record must be covered in golden showers of magical brilliance semen ejaculated by the great god Genius himself and probably has the ability to induce orgasm on first aural content.
"In truth, if you can recognize its limitations and understand that far better records have been made this year, then it's possible to enjoy 'Room On Fire' for what it really is; an adrenaline-fuelled head-rush of precision-perfect pop tunes about modern life – about sex and cynicism, love, despair and the art of feeling weightless."
Making allowances for it? What sort of pisspoor standard is that? Sit around, make allowances for the fact that it's nowhere near as good as the first LP (we're not talking one more bad song, we're talking releasing a follow-up album that doesn't rank halfway to the first) and then praise it? Why not just write 'Well, I'll just let them release any old crap and make allowances for releasing that bilious filth?' And quit the idea that the Strokes write about modern life as if they’re orators of history. They’re residents of NYC and America, both having been hit hard by upheaval and conflict, both socially and politically, the shadows of 9/11 still out there, a right wing cad in charge of the White House, and all you can release is an album of songs about fucking, love and cynicism that don’t come anywhere near to your first effort? I don’t want some deep Radiohead rant about politics, I don’t want to sit down for two hours and listen to some whiny neurotic spad arcing onwards but the effect is as retarded as a band singing songs about the wonder of the summer of love right now.
As for there being fuck all good out in 1999... using the ever-convenient NME critics poll for that year, shall we mention some albums that were either very popular or, in the case of Mr Wayne Coyne and others, simply fantastic?
The Flaming Lips – The Soft Bulletin
Shack – HMS Fable
Super Furry Animals – Guerrilla
The Charlatans – Us And Us Only
Leftfield – Rhythm And Stealth
Gorky’s Zygotic Mynci – Spanish Dance Troupe
...And You Will Know Us By The Trail of Dead... Madonna
Travis' 'The Man Who' also sold a fair bit...
I really wanted to like Room On Fire. I’ve been waiting patiently for it. I moved from London to Toronto in February and saw firsthand that the cool kids around Toronto were slating the Strokes, all the fashionable kids were placing other bands higher that sounded way inferior. Fuck knows how many drunken arguments I’ve had in this city over the Strokes. Now I’m in the position of disappointment and waiting for the fingers to point and say ‘We told you they were shit’. The sad thing is that, with regard to Room on Fire, I can only agree with them. The Stooges got better with each album. Television’s second album is barely known but is at least as good as Marquee Moon. Here’s hoping that the third Strokes LP brings them back to former glories.
Re: Addled clumpings from gates anew
if you're going to form an argument, please don't quote me out of context to make it stand up. i said that 'Room on Fire' was a 'truly great guitar-pop record;' thrilling, fun and enjoyable, yet ultimately limited and disposeable. I did not say that it's a 'truly great' record like the Velvet's debut or 'Strangeways, Here We Come,' or whatever else.
also, i'm not a musical historian; i used the example of 1999 to point out that it is foolhardy to judge a record solely on the basis of what else is around at that time. records have to be judged on their own merits, and that's what i did with 'Room on Fire.' you can disaggree with that approach if you like, but it's a bit late now, isn't it? oh and by the way, out of that list, only 'The Soft Bulletin is even worth mentioning...
if you don't like 'Room on Fire,' then that's fine; I've already written a perfectly adequate review stating why I think it's great, and i'm not going to keep treading over old ground because i've moved on. however, misquoting and misunderstanding things i've said in that review just to help your argument doesn't make you right... it makes you seem ignorant.
Bring it on Sherlock
"In truth, if you can recognize its limitations and understand that far better records have been made this year, then it's possible to enjoy 'Room On Fire' for what it really is… "
Now then, how is that not making allowances? Recognize its limitations, understand that better records have been made this year... and only then you might think it’s great? How is that not making an allowance for it? Once you’ve done that, you can give it 4/5 out of 5 because it’s quite good if you ignore their better stuff and just take it as an plain old album. Lawksamercy, this record reviewing is simple isn't it? If you do take it as a plain old album then it’s fine. If The Strokes were unknown and had just surfaced out of a dark puddle in Cambridge and presented this to the world then it’s a good record. But they didn’t. They’ve come into the world with a fabulous debut single, played some incendiary gigs, released a brilliant album and have had the music to go with the image. We waited, we expected and they come back with this? An album that critics have not damned but do use words like ‘derivative’, ‘slower’, ‘musically limited’… Oasis followed the first two albums with utter pish and got blasted for it. The Strokes seem to be getting an easier ticket.
You keep using this word ‘great’ in conjunction with this album. Is it going out of fashion? A ‘truly great’ album is apparently a masterpiece but a ‘truly great guitar pop album’ is not a masterpiece? Is ‘Strangeways..’ not a truly great guitar pop album? By you saying that, it seems like you’re demeaning guitar pop as something disposable and forgettable. Room on Fire is ‘thrilling, fun and enjoyable, yet ultimately limited and disposeable’… something so great should never be disposable, it should make you want to have more and more of it, like the first album. Disposable indicates it’s easy to throw away and forget about it. Hardly the hallmark of a great record, yes?
So I haven’t misquoted you. Nope. I haven’t misunderstood you, there were no essays about Descartes’ Third Meditation in there. I don’t even disagree with your view. If you love the album then I’m happy for you, I don’t wish to change your view or encourage you to burn your copy. That’s nonsensical. But it seems like people are almost afraid to bitch this record out and you’re one of those people. Giving it credits like ‘derivative’ and ‘limited’ is a major problem. I’ve seen other reviews you’ve done and I liked them, especially the A Silver Mount Zion review. It seems curious to praise them, bands with a real sound of their own, and then give the Strokes the same number of stars whilst damning them with the derivative-limited agenda.
Disagreed somewhat
Compared to "Is This It?", the band has improved in almost every way. The songs are at least as catchy - there are more potential singles here than in "Is This It?". There are a lot of new sounds. And for any of those people that have really listened to "Is This it?" many times and know it well, you can't deny that it's a noticeble change, and a step forward.
What I disagree with the most is the notion that basic guitar-bass-drums bands might be limited or automatically derivative. And I can't believe the reviewer feels like he has to apologize for liking it:
"In truth, if you can recognize its limitations and understand that far better records have been made this year, then it's possible to enjoy 'Room On Fire' for what it really is..."
What? "far better records"??? WTF? Why the disclaimer man? Have some balls.
Re: Disagreed somewhat
Arab Strap's "Monday at the Hug and Pint"
Explosions in the Sky's "The Earth is Not a Cold Dead Place"
Delightful.
Re: Disagreed somewhat
and they're just a few things off the top of my head, and just albums. + the new missy and kelis ones arent even out yet...
I'm assuming neil's list of far better records included these and more and just got far too long when he thought about it and had to edit it out.......
Re: Disagreed somewhat
Re: Disagreed somewhat
music has never been worse.
Re: Disagreed somewhat
Re: Disagreed somewhat
I guess I was referring to expecting particiular albums to be great and they turn out to be mediocre-poor in my opinion. e.g. Room on Fire, Hail to the Thief, Happy Songs For Happy People....
Maybe I should check out some stuff on your list!
Mediocre
Re: Mediocre
Thank you
come ON...
I recommend every take a look at The Fiery Furnace's "Gallowsbird's Bark"... now theres expert songcraft and a highly tuneful album that isn't grating on the ears! and HEY, you don't even have to pretend to like because its "trendy"...
Re: come ON...
Re: come ON...
Re: come ON...
Re: come ON...
put it this way, they weren't atop of my list when i was talking about how there'd be better albums released this year, but each to their own...
Re: come ON...
Please enlighten me!
Re: come ON...
Re: come ON...
On first listen I was really disappointed and thought it was a poor.
I've now listened to it a few times and am liking it more and more as the melodies seep into my brain. And the melodies keep returning to me when I'm doing the most mundane and unusal things. To me, it really shows the sound of a band who are under massive pressure and the songs feel very sorrowful to me - sort of like the sound of a band trying really hard to match the hype they've had heaped on them. Of course, this is an impossible task and J Casablancas has turned out some really sad songs here I think.
I'm seeing it as kind of a Pinkerton type effect (although admittedly, I thought Pinkerton was genius upon first listen).
Basically I say persevere with this one and the rewards are there in a different way.
Easypeasyflingling
Odd theory: could the reason that Room on Fire hasn't gotten one slating in any major review I've seen actually be because it isn't as pop as the first effort and, as most reviewers are white males who understand the joy of searching for limited release of 40 singles on pink vinyl, the indier than thou element enjoys Room on Fire much more because it is less straightforward? I mention this after reading the review in Toronto's 'eye' newspaper (free every Thursday, very arty) where the reviewer claimed that the stint the Strokes had with Guided by Voices as their tour partners has had an effect:"...while the band's Guided by Voices mentorship has taught Casablancas how to really nail a teary, beery chorus..."
Now I have nothing against Guided by Voices, they're decent in their own way despite frequent claims from certain fields that they are some of the most genius songwriters on the planet, and three of their albums sits in my cupboard o' music. But christ, comparing the Strokes to GBV?!? Compare Christina Aguilera to Sepultura and I'll get back to you. What sort of person thinks 'Hurrah. the Strokes now sound a bit more like Guided by Voices'? Indier-than-thou in excelsis. Selah.
http://eye.net/eye/issue/issue_10.23.03/music/ondisc.html
Re: Easypeasyflingling
Guardian too: http://www.guardian.co.uk/arts/reviews/story/0,11712,1064268,00.html
and I think Blender gave it an average review...
these people obviously made up their minds after hearing the album
Re: Easypeasyflingling
and as for the playlouder review... well, i'm pretty sure you can't trust anything that concludes by including the words "this isn't it." it sounds like it was created in a primary school pun factory...
Re: Easypeasyflingling
as for playlouder, they appear to be one of the only sites to actually stand up and criticise The Strokes... because in all, Room On Fire isn't that grand, its not going to be remembered for much because the tunes simply aren't there! simple as...
oh and at least PL manage to be consistent with reviews, instead of this place where you are consistently off the mark and give people albums to review who are obviously unqualified to do so...
Re: Easypeasyflingling
listen...there's nothing wrong at all with people criticising 'Room On Fire;' it's what happens when people have opinions. but it's one thing making an intelligent case against the record (see the posts above by Dr Furry), and another thing to pass off a clumsy, ill-informed hodgepodge of misdirected cynicism as a competent review - something Playlouder seem to have done with their article. i'm not saying that makes mine a glowing example of cultural criticism (because to be honest, i've written better), but at least, no matter how odious you may think my opinions are, i'm able to back them up...
oh, and yes, Drowned In Sound's reviews may be inconsistent, but that's because they're written by honest individuals and not a team of like-minded indie clones...
i'm feeling even better now. drunken rants are almost better than prozac. almost...