Jump to content
Greasy Lake Community

How to annoy Springsteen fans by Rod Liddle (the Spectator)


Recommended Posts

https://t.co/tT1Dcihdnr

I am not quite sure why they asked this man to review Western Stars, but it made my blood boil since is critcisms are from someone who clearly is not a Springsteen fan but does not have the bollocks to go all in and so sugars the pill by giving it a 'B-' after putting the boot in to virtually the whole album- 'monotone and monochrome songs'. Ask me to review a The Spice Girls and even if they produce Girl Power's answer to DarkSide of the Moon I would struggle to find any redeeming moments.

At least pick someone who respects Springsteen and can give a balanced review of the album than someone who starts his review with stating  Born to run as being 'over wrought self mythologizing with no chorus' , the only decent Springsteen album is Born in the USA,  sums up his career as 'good but more often less than good'and finishes with 'he needs to stop moaning' .

GRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Telecaster King said:

Can't read it without a subscription, but would be interested in Liddle's perspective. 

it arrived on my news feed all on its own

its just some arsehole trying to be clever

your not missing anything

i did try to find it again for you but its dissapaired back into cybersoace

my when you do a google search so much hate comes up :(

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a shame that someone who criticises Bruce gets a thread dedicated to giving him a kicking. He's paid to review stuff and that's what he's done. Besides, a B- is a good result. I wish all my O Level results had been that good.

Lots of times, GL can be too snobby in their defence of our hero. There have been scores of amazing reviews for this record, so let the others have their opinion without slagging them out.

:P

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Promise61 said:

It's a shame that someone who criticises Bruce gets a thread dedicated to giving him a kicking. He's paid to review stuff and that's what he's done. Besides, a B- is a good result. I wish all my O Level results had been that good.

Lots of times, GL can be too snobby in their defence of our hero. There have been scores of amazing reviews for this record, so let the others have their opinion without slagging them out.

:P

Agree with this. Despite personally loving this album.... my view from day one of hearing it was that it would not be for everyone. Some fans would find the strings, huge orchestrations, and the early 70's west coast pop element too much to take and would just not like it. It is a bleak record but the theme of the album...characters having reached a certain stage of life and running away from bad situations sometimes of their own making, and trying to find sanctuary and hope in the alluring American west...is not exactly a laugh a minute scenario, and I feel the record reflects this beautifully and in a very powerful and emotional way . I think the songs are fantastic, but some fans don't like them at all. That's fair enough. As you say the guy in the Spectator ( a very right-wing publication) is paid to review the record and he has given his honest opinion. It's not one that I share at all, but that's the beauty of being a music fan. We all have our own tastes in a wonderful art form.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Promise61 said:

It's a shame that someone who criticises Bruce gets a thread dedicated to giving him a kicking. He's paid to review stuff and that's what he's done. Besides, a B- is a good result. I wish all my O Level results had been that good.

Lots of times, GL can be too snobby in their defence of our hero. There have been scores of amazing reviews for this record, so let the others have their opinion without slagging them out.

:P

Couldn't agree more.

I mean, I just got a good laugh out of that. I don't know if the reviewer genuinely thinks that way about the album, just dislikes Bruce, is taking the piss, or is just trying to rile some people up in cyberspace. Maybe a bit of all those. 

If I was given a hip hop album to review, I'd write a lot about how everything sounds the same, why can't someone write an original chorus or hook instead of sampling etc etc because that's all I hear. So what.

I don't agree with the review, instead of getting upset I just went and streamed the album again and gave Bruce another sales stat. Job done

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't get it. There are quite some people on this forum who don't like the new album. Which means they would -maybe - write a negative review about it if they were a music journalist. And you can't say they are not diehard fans. So what is the probleem?

It is different when there are errors in a review, when the facts are not right.

Or something like the infamous reviews in Melody Maker and -especially-NME in 1992 about Human Touch and Lucky Town which had nothing to do with a serious music review.

But you can also say the fact Rolling Stone never writes something bad about Bruce can not be taken seriously.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Promise61 said:

It's a shame that someone who criticises Bruce gets a thread dedicated to giving him a kicking. He's paid to review stuff and that's what he's done. Besides, a B- is a good result. I wish all my O Level results had been that good.

Lots of times, GL can be too snobby in their defence of our hero. There have been scores of amazing reviews for this record, so let the others have their opinion without slagging them out.

:P

Is n't GL also a forum to have a gossip and 'chat' with views good and bad fromthe world of the boss. Yes the review grated on me and I wanted to share it, like you do when you come home from work and moan about your day at at work with the mrs, thats all, no harm done!  

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't care if someone doesn't like a record or gives one a bad review, whether it's a Bruce Springsteen record or some other that I like. This review is written in a style I don't really go for The reviewer is more intent on displaying his own acerbic feelings for Springsteen than anything else. It's the sort of review that's more a style piece, if you ask me. I can't put a whole lot of energy into the musings of a guy who seriously thinks that Born In the U.S.A. (as great and popular as it is) is the record that paid off on Springsteen. 

Mostly, it's hard to take too seriously a review that trashes both the record and the artist, then scores it with a B.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, janeymarywendy said:

Here's @Thunder Roadie and I having a moan about the moaners.  

_68942637_drag_bbc.jpg

"Having a moan" means the same thing in the UK that it does here, yeah?

It's not like one of those phrases like "taking the piss" or "goin' on "oliday" or "trotting down the loo" is it?

It just means having a moan, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Jerseyfornia said:

I don't care if someone doesn't like a record or gives one a bad review, whether it's a Bruce Springsteen record or some other that I like. This review is written in a style I don't really go for The reviewer is more intent on displaying his own acerbic feelings for Springsteen than anything else. It's the sort of review that's more a style piece, if you ask me. I can't put a whole lot of energy into the musings of a guy who seriously thinks that Born In the U.S.A. (as great and popular as it is) is the record that paid off on Springsteen. 

Mostly, it's hard to take too seriously a review that trashes both the record and the artist, then scores it with a B.

You know Liddle then!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Jerseyfornia said:

I don't care if someone doesn't like a record or gives one a bad review, whether it's a Bruce Springsteen record or some other that I like. This review is written in a style I don't really go for The reviewer is more intent on displaying his own acerbic feelings for Springsteen than anything else. It's the sort of review that's more a style piece, if you ask me. I can't put a whole lot of energy into the musings of a guy who seriously thinks that Born In the U.S.A. (as great and popular as it is) is the record that paid off on Springsteen. 

Mostly, it's hard to take too seriously a review that trashes both the record and the artist, then scores it with a B.

Absolutely!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Jerseyfornia said:

"Having a moan" means the same thing in the UK that it does here, yeah?

It's not like one of those phrases like "taking the piss" or "goin' on "oliday" or "trotting down the loo" is it?

It just means having a moan, right?

Moaners gonna moan, JF. ;)

All the better if you wear curlers whilst moaning.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The guy starts his review (is it really even a review? It’s three paragraphs long and only one of the three is dedicated to this album) by attacking a 44 year old song. His timing seems a bit off on reviewing either Born to Run or Born in the USA. 

I cannot ever get really worked up over an album review. It’s just one person’s opinion. Means no more or less than mine or yours. This guy thinks Nils Lofgren is a better songwriter than Springsteen. You know what? He’s right. Because it’s his opinion. After all, wasn’t Dave Marsh a music critic? That guy is a massive douche, he just so happened to be fortunate enough to like Springsteen.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...