Tuesday, August 25, 2009

SMASHING PUMPKINS Pt 1

[NOTE: I now subscribe to Rhapsody, which means I now have the ability to suffer through a band's entire catalogue, not just the albums I own. Since the SP discography contains quite a bit, I'm splitting this blog into two parts.]



BACKDROP:
I think that just by writing this, Billy Corgan’s ego will increase by +2 points. That might not be a bad RPG game. Though the word “game” in the phrase “RPG game” is redundant if you think about it. What was I talking about again? Oh yeah, Billy Corgan. I picture Billy googling himself and finding this blog on page 927. Then after reading it, he writes me an angry email calling me a douchebag. Far-fetched? Probably, but hey, it could happen. Erik Estrada once wrote me an email saying that I had a unique writing style and that I better not make any more jokes involving his wife.



GISH:
This is THE album for cool, hip indie kids. Being neither cool nor hip or even all that particularly indie for that matter, I can be the one to admit the truth about GISH. It’s a fucking boring album. Now, I’m not saying it’s a bad album. It’s definitely good, great even, at times brilliant. But it’s also tedious. Sort of the 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY of alternative rock. Incidentally, I still can’t get through either one. Corgan shows talent for creating textures, but his songwriting is just not quite there yet.



SIAMESE DREAM:
There’s really no reason I like this album so much when I dislike GISH. And it’s not warm, fuzzy nostalgia. I hated SIAMESE DREAM in high school. I even gave my copy to a friend in exchange for a Morphine CD. I have never for a moment regretted the move. But I don’t know. It seems as if Corgan took his ethereal textures and grafted them onto actual songs. “Today,” “Disarm,” “Quiet,” “Geek USA,” “Mayonnaise.” All superb enough to make up for any deficiencies (of which there really aren’t many).



PISCES ISCARIOT:
I once read a review of this that read “Billy Corgan’s funky leftovers taste better than most bands’ main courses.” It is pretty amazing that after just two albums, the Pumpkins had enough material left over to craft a third album with “B” material that’s on par with their “A” material. There’s no surprises lurking, no peak at a different facet of the band. Just more quality material from a quality band at their quality peak. And the best version of “Landslide” to boot. Funny story, I used to think that “Landslide” was a Corgan original (yes, despite the booklet crediting Stevie Nicks). The first time I heard the Fleetwood Mac version, I thought to myself, “Why would anyone want to do a crappy adult contemporary version of a Smashing Pumpkins B-side?”



MELLON COLLIE AND THE INFINITE SADNESS:
I used to think that this would be better as a single-disc album, but now I’m not so sure. For starters, distilling this into a single disc would still leave plenty of filler. Let’s just say it couldn’t have been very difficult to pick the singles. Corgan’s prolific writing seems to have caught up with him. He does not have enough steam to pull of such a grandiose effort. Hell, he even allows James Iha to sing a song. Pace yourself, Billy. Your career should be a marathon not a sprint. Yet there’s something hypnotic about the indulgence of this being a double album, particularly because so much of it is simply mediocre. The bright spots shine brighter amidst all the muck (perhaps that’s why these songs work so well on the radio). The grandeur and pomposity is fragilely held together by Billy Corgan’s bald-headed ego. This is a smattering patchwork of songs with no cohesive flow. PISCES sounds more like a well-plotted album than this. Somehow, MELLON COLLIE manages to be good by not being all that good.



ADORE:
Wow, what an incredibly boring album. This is my first time listening to this, and I realize why. To be fair, it does sound pretty. There’s just nothing underneath the gloss. Has there ever been such a chasm between style and substance? Even the high points, if you want to call them that, feel little more than rehashes. “Perfect” desperately wants to be “1979,” does it not?



[To be continued next week, don't get your panties up in a bunch, Billy.]

No comments:

Post a Comment