28/02/2014
Reading - February 2014
23/02/2014
Shopping 22 February 2014
![]() |
| Wish we were here! |
So, the albums came from the usual three shops and encompass some of the usual suspects - nothing outré here, just cheap albums I hadn't got round to buying before or hadn't heard of until recently. They were:
- Kings Of The Wild Frontier by Adam And The Ants (1980)
- Prince Charming by Adam And The Ants (1981)
- I've been meaning to buy these albums almost since they came out. Hey, I'm only 33 years late to the party.
- Fields Of Fire (The Ultimate Collection) by Big Country (2011)
- I've broken my own rule here and bought a compilation rather than the original albums. I just wanted "Wonderland" really. I probably should have been more patient.
- Carried To Dust by Calexico (2008)
- Parent album of "Red Blooms", one of my favourite songs from the 00s.
- Tago Mago by Can (1971)
- I don't know anything by Can, and there it is in the 1001 Albums list, so here it is.
- Pearl by Janis Joplin (1971)
- "Oh Lord, won't you buy me a Mercedes Benz".
- Angel With A Lariat by k.d. lang And The Reclines (1987)
- Shadowland by k.d. lang (1988)
- k.d. lang's first two albums were not present in my collection, for some reason. Odd given how much I like her third, fourth, fifth etc.
- Houses Of The Holy by Led Zeppelin (1973)
- I know this album well, thanks to my student days, but still didn't own it until now. Plugging another gap in my collection.
- The Holy Bible by Manic Street Preachers (1994)
- I'm a sucker. This is a limited, 10th Anniversay edition of an album I didn't think I owned, but already did. Probably the first time I've ever bought something twice by mistake.
- Deserter's Songs by Mercury Rev (1998)
- I own the two significant singles from this, bought at the time ("Opus 40" and "Goddess On A Hiway"), so not sure what the album will add. Let's see.
- Days Of Future Passed by The Moody Blues (1967)
- "Precursor to prog-rock", it says here. Also 25% of the trivia question: name the odd one out, from Days Of Future Passed, Ulysses, 2001: A Space Odyssey and 24.
- Words And Music by Saint Etienne (2012)
- Bought entirely for overwhelmingly geeky awesomeness of the cover (see above).
- Phaedra by Tangerine Dream (1974)
- "Like The Orb without beats," say Brian, and who am I to doubt him?
- Scott 4 by Scott Walker (1969)
- Another classic.
- White Blood Cells by The White Stripes (2001)
- Actually what I wanted was The Raconteurs.
- You And Me Both by Yazoo (1983)
- Can't go wrong with a bit of Vince Clarke.
- Everybody Knows This Is Nowhere by Neil Young with Crazy Horse (1969)
- CSN&Y notwithstanding, I'm still not sure about Neil Young. Giving it a go.
- Echoes by Will Young
- Bought for £2, purely for the single "Come On", which I really like.
- Eliminator by ZZ Top (1983)
- Billy Gibbons is a Guitar God.
Accompanied by good beer, good chat, some surprisingly nice fish and chips (The Duke Of Argyll comes up trumps again) and more beer and chat, it was another good day. Shame South West Trains spoiled it slightly.
16/02/2014
Journey Through The Secret Life Of Plants
Stevie Wonder
1979
Curate's egg of an album nevertheless proves that, pre-1982, there really was no such thing as a bad Stevie Wonder album.
Is this a proper Stevie Wonder album? It was originally a soundtrack to a long-forgotten slice of pseudo-scientific nonsense but, thanks to Wonder's fame, the music has long since outgrown the association. In fact, the instrumental sections illustrate the images rather well (remarkably so given that Stevie obviously couldn't see any of them), and they are never dull; but taken on their own they are a little aimless.
I much prefer the songs with more traditional lyrics and structure, and one of the good things about this album is that it contains some lesser-known examples of Wonder's songs that are new to me. "Race Babbling" is a nicely funky groove, although it's a bit too long. "A Seed's A Star" has a great tune and driving beat, and wouldn't be out of the place on Songs In The Key Of Life, nor would "Outside My Window".
There's quite a lot of what sounds like early digital synth technology, which now sounds more much dated than the analogue synthesizers used on earlier classic albums like Talking Book - what are classified in my mind as Casiotone sounds, although I'm sure that in 1979 it took a lot of expensive technology to sound like that.
Nevertheless, there is more good than bad here and it's great to find some Stevie Wonder material that hasn't been played to death.
1979
Curate's egg of an album nevertheless proves that, pre-1982, there really was no such thing as a bad Stevie Wonder album.
Is this a proper Stevie Wonder album? It was originally a soundtrack to a long-forgotten slice of pseudo-scientific nonsense but, thanks to Wonder's fame, the music has long since outgrown the association. In fact, the instrumental sections illustrate the images rather well (remarkably so given that Stevie obviously couldn't see any of them), and they are never dull; but taken on their own they are a little aimless.
I much prefer the songs with more traditional lyrics and structure, and one of the good things about this album is that it contains some lesser-known examples of Wonder's songs that are new to me. "Race Babbling" is a nicely funky groove, although it's a bit too long. "A Seed's A Star" has a great tune and driving beat, and wouldn't be out of the place on Songs In The Key Of Life, nor would "Outside My Window".
There's quite a lot of what sounds like early digital synth technology, which now sounds more much dated than the analogue synthesizers used on earlier classic albums like Talking Book - what are classified in my mind as Casiotone sounds, although I'm sure that in 1979 it took a lot of expensive technology to sound like that.
Nevertheless, there is more good than bad here and it's great to find some Stevie Wonder material that hasn't been played to death.
Stored in the circular file under
music,
shopping 23-03-2013
31/01/2014
Reading - January 2014
12/01/2014
Brilliant Corners
Thelonious Monk
1957
Delicate, sensitive harmonic exploration, or tedious, lethargic, meandering indulgence?
I have blogged before about my late-teenage infatuation with jazz - or, at least, my attempt to be seen liking jazz (hey, how interesting am I?) - but even then, I preferred something with a bit of life to it. Many of the albums I liked were on Blue Note, and the label has come to be associated mostly with hard bop that has more of a soulful or funky edge - such as Donald Byrd's Byrd In Hand, one of my favourites.
Despite Brilliant Corners being classified as hard bop (according to Wikipedia, anyway), this doesn't sound like it to me. It's not soulful or funky enough. I'm quite prepared to believe that there's some very clever composition and playing, but it doesn't touch me.
As Joey "The Lips" Fagan says in The Commitments (the book), "soul is from the heart, jazz is from the head". This is head music and there is no heart in it. Dull dull dull.
1957
Delicate, sensitive harmonic exploration, or tedious, lethargic, meandering indulgence?
I have blogged before about my late-teenage infatuation with jazz - or, at least, my attempt to be seen liking jazz (hey, how interesting am I?) - but even then, I preferred something with a bit of life to it. Many of the albums I liked were on Blue Note, and the label has come to be associated mostly with hard bop that has more of a soulful or funky edge - such as Donald Byrd's Byrd In Hand, one of my favourites.
Despite Brilliant Corners being classified as hard bop (according to Wikipedia, anyway), this doesn't sound like it to me. It's not soulful or funky enough. I'm quite prepared to believe that there's some very clever composition and playing, but it doesn't touch me.
As Joey "The Lips" Fagan says in The Commitments (the book), "soul is from the heart, jazz is from the head". This is head music and there is no heart in it. Dull dull dull.
Stored in the circular file under
1001 albums,
fifties,
music
Before And After Science
Brian Eno
1977
I'm finding Before And After Science to be a more interesting album than Here Come The Warm Jets, but it's still a patchy affair.
Much of the first side reminds me of something else - and usually something better. "No One Receiving" sounds like Station To Station-era white funk, only less convincing. "Energy Fools The Magician" sounds a bit like a cross between Jaco Pastorius' first solo album and Miles Davis circa Decoy or Tutu, which is no bad thing, but it's a bit directionless. "Kings Lead Hat" is obviously Talking Heads (in anagram and sound) - scratchy, antsy and funky, just not quite as good. It's fitting that Eno should then go on and produce them though.
The second side is more relaxed and less derivative and better for it. None of the songs stand out particularly, but are nicer in mood and sound and provide a more rounded listening experience. Again, none seem to go anywhere much but it's easier to forgive here.
To be charitable to Brian Eno, I think much of Before And After Science would be classed as experimental, which from what I know of the great man is more likely to be what he was aiming for than popular, polished or commercial. Unfortunately, it doesn't make for something that rewards me for repeated listens.
1977
I'm finding Before And After Science to be a more interesting album than Here Come The Warm Jets, but it's still a patchy affair.
Much of the first side reminds me of something else - and usually something better. "No One Receiving" sounds like Station To Station-era white funk, only less convincing. "Energy Fools The Magician" sounds a bit like a cross between Jaco Pastorius' first solo album and Miles Davis circa Decoy or Tutu, which is no bad thing, but it's a bit directionless. "Kings Lead Hat" is obviously Talking Heads (in anagram and sound) - scratchy, antsy and funky, just not quite as good. It's fitting that Eno should then go on and produce them though.
The second side is more relaxed and less derivative and better for it. None of the songs stand out particularly, but are nicer in mood and sound and provide a more rounded listening experience. Again, none seem to go anywhere much but it's easier to forgive here.
To be charitable to Brian Eno, I think much of Before And After Science would be classed as experimental, which from what I know of the great man is more likely to be what he was aiming for than popular, polished or commercial. Unfortunately, it doesn't make for something that rewards me for repeated listens.
Stored in the circular file under
1001 albums,
music,
shopping 23-03-2013
05/01/2014
Bad Pharma
Ben Goldacre
2012
Ben Goldacre's previous book, Bad Science, was a brilliantly indignant rant (if something so measured in tone and so completely referenced can be called a rant) against some very obvious, yet entirely deserving targets. As such, it didn't surprise, except sometimes in the lengths to which people will go to fleece their fellow humans.
Bad Pharma, however, is a real eye-opener. My general assumption - and, I think, that of the general public - was that medicine was, on the whole, benign. Sure, there are good and bad doctors, good and bad hospitals even (see recent news passim), but overall my expectation is that medical practitioners are well informed and that the pharmaceutical industry is there to serve the public.
Well, it turns out this might not entirely be the case. This book documents the lengths to which those companies will go to fix the market. Goldacre treads a fine line and never makes outright claims of deceit (except in documented legal cases) but his overall point is clear. Big Pharma designs deliberately skewed trials, lies about the results, hides unfavourable ones completely, bribes regulators, politicians and doctors, and even invents diseases (for which they already have "cures" of course) - all in pursuit of a profit. As a result, our doctors are working with out-of-date, incorrect, wildly compromised data.
This affects our health. Everyone's health. And it's ridiculous that this should be the case. Why would people go out of their way to damage other people for a quick profit? As he says, in what to me is a key paragraph:
In a different light however, this is all entirely expected. Capitalism, as has been almost said by many people, isn't the best system possible, it's merely the best we know of. All the problems in the book, real and as in need of solutions as they are, are symptomatic of capitalism - a system that tries to mitigate against people's instincts to compete with each other by using money as a proxy, as Douglas Adams so brilliantly said,
Sometimes the balance is wrong. The signs are that in this case, the situation is being corrected, as Ben Goldacre discusses in a new final chapter. Proponents of capitalism would say it is in the process of self-correcting, and they may have a point. The book mentions in passing that evidence-based medicine has only really been around since the sixties, which makes it a very young discipline really - a generation or two old. Real change in society takes a number of generations. Just look at how long it's taking politicians to catch up with the internet, which has only been with us for about twenty years. By the time my kids are my age, this may have been sorted out. Let's hope so.
2012
Ben Goldacre's previous book, Bad Science, was a brilliantly indignant rant (if something so measured in tone and so completely referenced can be called a rant) against some very obvious, yet entirely deserving targets. As such, it didn't surprise, except sometimes in the lengths to which people will go to fleece their fellow humans.
Bad Pharma, however, is a real eye-opener. My general assumption - and, I think, that of the general public - was that medicine was, on the whole, benign. Sure, there are good and bad doctors, good and bad hospitals even (see recent news passim), but overall my expectation is that medical practitioners are well informed and that the pharmaceutical industry is there to serve the public.
Well, it turns out this might not entirely be the case. This book documents the lengths to which those companies will go to fix the market. Goldacre treads a fine line and never makes outright claims of deceit (except in documented legal cases) but his overall point is clear. Big Pharma designs deliberately skewed trials, lies about the results, hides unfavourable ones completely, bribes regulators, politicians and doctors, and even invents diseases (for which they already have "cures" of course) - all in pursuit of a profit. As a result, our doctors are working with out-of-date, incorrect, wildly compromised data.
This affects our health. Everyone's health. And it's ridiculous that this should be the case. Why would people go out of their way to damage other people for a quick profit? As he says, in what to me is a key paragraph:
On this issue, since people with resources often defend the pharmaceutical companies from deserved criticism, it's worth remembering one thing: health care really is one of those areas where we are, in a very real sense, in it together. If you're super-rich, in the top 0.2 per cent of the population, you can buy pretty much anything you want. But however rich you are, if you become sick you can't innovate new medicines overnight, because that takes time, and more money than even you have. And you can't know the true effects of the medicines we have today, because nobody does, if they've not been properly tested, and if some results go missing in action. The most expensive doctors in the world don't know better than anyone else, since any trained person can critically read the best systematic reviews of a given drug, what it will do to your life expectancy, and there is no hack, no workaround, for this broken system. Even if you are super-rich, even if you make $10 million a year, you are right here in it with the rest of us.
(Chapter 3: Bad regulators, p150)
In a different light however, this is all entirely expected. Capitalism, as has been almost said by many people, isn't the best system possible, it's merely the best we know of. All the problems in the book, real and as in need of solutions as they are, are symptomatic of capitalism - a system that tries to mitigate against people's instincts to compete with each other by using money as a proxy, as Douglas Adams so brilliantly said,
This planet [had] a problem, which was this: most of the people living on it were unhappy for pretty much all of the time. Many solutions were suggested for this problem, but most of these were largely concerned with the movement of small green pieces of paper, which was odd because on the whole it wasn't the small green pieces of paper that were unhappy.
The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (1979), Introduction)
Sometimes the balance is wrong. The signs are that in this case, the situation is being corrected, as Ben Goldacre discusses in a new final chapter. Proponents of capitalism would say it is in the process of self-correcting, and they may have a point. The book mentions in passing that evidence-based medicine has only really been around since the sixties, which makes it a very young discipline really - a generation or two old. Real change in society takes a number of generations. Just look at how long it's taking politicians to catch up with the internet, which has only been with us for about twenty years. By the time my kids are my age, this may have been sorted out. Let's hope so.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)




