Rated 8/10
I’m at a 4.5 that I’ll bump down to a 4.
It’s a good album. It’s extremely technically sound, and the lift in most of the instrumentals here is super appealing to listen to. Brett Anderson’s vocals evoke David Bowie even more here than on their self-titled album, & while his falsettos feel a bit overused, they don’t ever feel too cheesy. Bernard Butler’s guitar / piano work does a hell of a job of setting the mood on these tracks. Their songwriting is a little more cryptically written here, but while it did bother me a little bit, I can’t say it ever really sinks any of the tracks here. I don’t think there’s necessarily a bad one either. I enjoyed each track as they all played out, and I think the album hits an especially nice stride from “New Generation” to “The Asphalt World”. If I don’t really find anything super flawed about the album, why am I bumping it down to a 4?
It’s a little too dense, honestly. It’s not dense in the “this is overstuffed with too many tracks” way, but instead, it’s just dense in terms of an unnatural flow from track to track that’s somehow doing too much & not enough at the same time. Don’t get me wrong, I’m impressed by the album’s scope and I think it deserves some of its acclaim, but this album is trying to pack so much bombast into concepts that are ultimately somewhat mundane. These don’t play out in a way that has me as engaged as the quality of the tracks themselves would suggest, and it just doesn’t leave me fulfilled as I think it wanted me to be. I felt the best ones were the ones that pulled back a bit more & played themselves more straightforward, and the ones that tried really hard with the instrumentation left me at more of an impressed applause for the compositions & less for what the track was intending to do emotionally.
I’m not sure it’s a bad thing at all, but the album seems to live & die by the ethos of self-importance. Rolling Stone called it “pretentious”, but that feels like a flawed misnomer to me. It’s the type of importance that made this album polarizing in the ‘90s, and it’s what had me conflicted for a while. I think I’ve landed on enjoying that self-importance when the tracks have a fruitful story to tell, but feeling more so obligated to simply like them when it doesn’t. That’s a slight overexaggeration, as these tracks are too technically sound to not feel something, but if it’s harder for me to truly maintain the same level of investment from track to track on the album, it probably speaks to something lacking in the album itself that’s worth connecting to.
Hence, a 4.5 that I’ll bump down to a 4, though one I still respect the hell out of & would certainly recommend. I know, I know – another big multiple paragraph fuss about half a percentage point, but it really is the type of thing that could sink this album much lower for other people. It’s probably why this only has an average of 3 on the site. I hesitate to say it’s all in the intangibles, but sometimes it just is. It’s a good album, and it hits all of the right marks. It just doesn’t make me consistently believe in the potency of those marks & a further conviction towards what’s being made. Despite that, it does deserve to be on the list.