CD Review: Peter Bjorn and John "Living Thing"
Garry Juhans
Issue date: 4/28/09 Section: Arts & Life
It's amazing how certain things can grow on you. In most cases, it's a wonderful experience.
I'm talking mostly about the act of listening to a record that, at first listen, can completely annoy the hell out of you, only to later become a favorite. That's a big habit of mine, which makes the act of reviewing a new record difficult because by time I really "feel" the music, it's old.
There's nothing wrong with old music. But if you want to be out there, "on the scene" so to speak, old records are like used condoms: only great for trash and recollections. So it goes.
How can a critic totally digest the value of a record with two or three listens? Can you feel the heart of something that quickly?
Suppose listening to a record was equal to having sex.
Is the first time with a partner always the best? With all that awkward, twitchy bodily contact filled with stops and starts and "No" and "Yes" and "Not yet," it's only after the first time that things start to click. Repetition is the key.
Imagine if you were screwing Yeah, Yeah, Yeah's "It's Blitz" for the first time. Not a great experience, I'm sure.
But like all great lovers, it takes time. I continued to hear "It's Blitz" and now, my ears have adjusted to it. I like the record now. I've grown into it like a new pair of shoes. So it goes.
I've had similar experiences with other records as well. TV on the Radio's "Dear Science" was a piece of shit for a few days before it became a nice, shiny example of what patience and understanding brings with music. I love it now, and that has nothing to do with Pitchfork Media, I swear.
So, upon hearing Peter, Bjorn and John's "Living Thing" for the first time, I immediately hated it. It annoyed me greatly and had all the qualities of a bad relationship: pleasant, safe and utterly mundane.
Predictably, my first review of the album was horrific and, in all honesty, not really fair. You see, I hadn't "adjusted" to "Living Thing" yet.
I'm talking mostly about the act of listening to a record that, at first listen, can completely annoy the hell out of you, only to later become a favorite. That's a big habit of mine, which makes the act of reviewing a new record difficult because by time I really "feel" the music, it's old.
There's nothing wrong with old music. But if you want to be out there, "on the scene" so to speak, old records are like used condoms: only great for trash and recollections. So it goes.
How can a critic totally digest the value of a record with two or three listens? Can you feel the heart of something that quickly?
Suppose listening to a record was equal to having sex.
Is the first time with a partner always the best? With all that awkward, twitchy bodily contact filled with stops and starts and "No" and "Yes" and "Not yet," it's only after the first time that things start to click. Repetition is the key.
Imagine if you were screwing Yeah, Yeah, Yeah's "It's Blitz" for the first time. Not a great experience, I'm sure.
But like all great lovers, it takes time. I continued to hear "It's Blitz" and now, my ears have adjusted to it. I like the record now. I've grown into it like a new pair of shoes. So it goes.
I've had similar experiences with other records as well. TV on the Radio's "Dear Science" was a piece of shit for a few days before it became a nice, shiny example of what patience and understanding brings with music. I love it now, and that has nothing to do with Pitchfork Media, I swear.
So, upon hearing Peter, Bjorn and John's "Living Thing" for the first time, I immediately hated it. It annoyed me greatly and had all the qualities of a bad relationship: pleasant, safe and utterly mundane.
Predictably, my first review of the album was horrific and, in all honesty, not really fair. You see, I hadn't "adjusted" to "Living Thing" yet.
Be the first to comment on this story