Riddle of Steel's Myspace blog is an amusing read for a variety of reasons, most notably the October 12, 2007, entry. While he'll probably never come out and say it, lead singer/guitarist Andrew Elstner would love to kick Radiohead's asses. His frustration (or jealousy) is somewhat understandable and very human, as it's likely that pure egotism would allow the acclaimed art-rockers to be able to release an album via allowing fans to pay whatever they want for it. Riddle of Steel has never had and will likely never have that luxury. The band's new album, 1985, isn't going to change that.
However, what's baffling about these statements is just how the heck a can band craft such stylish, straightforward rock and roll with rarely matched lyrical intellectualism and in turn have a frontman that makes Jonathan Davis-esque statements? The next thing you know, he'll be calling My Chemical Romance a "gay ass emo band." With new songs like "This Van Burns Love" and "John Frum" now in the Riddle of Steel catalogue, comments like these just don't add up
or Elstner was just that pissed off at the time. Come on now, Drew. After all, Radiohead is the one band that's holding back the amazing music you and your crew creates. Never mind payola scams, perpetuating gimmicky trends, and major labels like Virgin Records spending over 100 million dollars to sign artists like Mariah Carey to deals that go completely bust. Yep, Radiohead represents all that is evil in the music industry.
Sarcasm aside, 1985 is still an excellent effort worth every bit of the measly ten to twelve plus dollars that the band wants you to pay for it. Probably not the best of their three LPs, but quality like this is very difficult to completely rewrite with each new release. It's that, or the simple fact that the group's formula for no-frills jamming is far from being broken. So why bother tinkering with it and potentially making it some annoying experience in self-indulgence?
No, the trio is at their best when writing simply structured pop-rock songs with subtle progressive complexities and verses that always make you take immediate notice and then linger in your mind for hours, days, and weeks later. As mentioned earlier, "John Frum" is a prime example of that very prowess. As catchy as an opening track needs to be, this tune charades as a wishy-washy satire of that strange island born cult, but probably truly masquerades as a sonnet on damaged relationships between loved ones. Either way, it will keep you wondering.
The rest of the album's work clearly has the same voice with very few of the tracks squeezing out ahead of the others. And yet, it's certainly not a bad thing that the opus works better as a whole rather than relying on a few blowaways and a whole lot of, in their case, "upper echelon" filler. In the end, this is the type of album where individual favorites will differ vastly from listener to listener. Personally, this reviewer absolutely loves the snappy, firecracker rhythms of "Underwater" and the humorous "Plenty of Satisfaction."
While 1985 most likely won't bring Riddle of Steel to Radiohead-level fame, their small contingent of fans are sure going to appreciate it and continue to expand the band's legend by simple word of mouth. But as a final note to Drew: You're awesome, remember that. Don't ever break character again, buddy.
----------------------
(Update: 03/22/2008 -A small note from Andrew Elstner about this review)
Hey dude! Thanks a million for the review. It's very much appreciated, sincerely.
And for clarity's sake, ... I'm not sure I ever said that Radiohead represents "all that is evil" within the music industry. The contents of your review aside, I have no problem with bands making music, major corporate record companies doing whatever they want with their money, giving it to whomever they choose, and trying to make as much money as possible. The point of my rant, which I still stand firmly behind (even if people took it more seriously than I had originally intended), is that music is worth your money, art is worth your money. If it was free all the time, it would be crap.
The hype surrounding Radiohead's last release, eg: "they've created this new paradigm in retail! In the future, we'll see more things being given away for free!" Sounds like a bunch of hippie nonsense to me.
I'm a huge fan of Radiohead, and the last thing I'd want to do is "kick their asses." Hell, I'm a peaceful man! ;) I've got front row seats to their show in April, which will be my second time seeing them. To continue my point though, I think Radiohead and similarly successful bands, both deserve and have earned the right to do whatever they wish with their music. I happen to disagree with Thom Yorke's sentiments regarding his band, ie: "look, we're just some regular dudes who never intended to make all this money. We don't know what to do with it. It's so foreign to us,.." etc., etc. Puuhlllleeeeze. Cry me a river, Thom.
If I was Thom Yorke, here's what I'd say: "Y'know, we were thinking about giving this cd away for free, or letting people pay what they want for the disc (basically free). But then I realized, hey, we worked hard on this record. A lot of people collaborated on this project to bring it to light. It wasn't free to make the record, so should we feel obligated to give it away for free? Y'know, I'm not trying to brag here, but, our music is known all over the world, and has made countless millions of people's lives that much happier and more enriched. It makes me unimaginably happy to know that. That's what art does, art is extremely important to human existence, and in fact, a human life without art and music is not a human life at all. Am I supposed to feel bad that we've been wildly successful at what we do? No, actually, I feel wonderful that I've been able to make this kind of a go at a musical career, and I'm forever grateful to our millions upon millions of dedicated fans. If we ever arrived at a point where I could give a shit less about how much people payed for our work, or for any artist's work, it'd probably be time for me to throw in the towel. By continuing to charge a fair price for our music, I'm assuring that ALL musicians and ALL artists will continue to be able to charge a fair price for their hard work.
Because a person enjoys the work that they do, or because they're successful is no reason for them to not get paid what is fair. A customer does not HAVE to buy a record. They can choose not to if they think it's too expensive or not worth their money at all. But the fact remains that if we had been giving our music away for free from the beginning there is absolutely no way we could've continued on as a band. Let me say this: if a band really has balls, they should allow people into all their gigs for free, then we'll see what really shakes out. Any artist who works for free is setting a horribly immoral precedent: that a) a person who deeply enjoys their work does not really deserve to get paid, and b) that true happiness is an impossibility, and the most you can hope for is some limping compromise since all life is suffering. I'm incredibly happy and successful, so naturally, I do not support this view."
How's that for a long-winded reply! ;) So yeah, I'm obviously not Thom Yorke, who actually is a man unfortunately battling depression. And who am I to comment on the man anyway since, hell man, I don't know the dude. I'm sure he'd likely have a boatload to tell me if I ever met the guy, though I'd likely be too starstruck to say anything at all.
cheers,
Andrew
