irritating critical trend re:artist drug references.

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

queens of the stone age's rec has that line "first it giveth / then it taketh away" in it. fine. but loads of reviews seem to think that this is evidence of astonishing accumulated wisdom. They say things like: "The Queens are well aware of the dark side of drug use, and are unafraid to tackle it BLAH BLAH BLAH..." And all this stems from the one line "First it giveth...". You mean they're saying there can sometimes be a downside to excess? Gasp! wisdom indeed...

it happens with Primal Scream re: "If you play with fire / you're gonna get burned" (Yikes! What an astute observation!) and "Hallucinogens can upend me or untie me". Less of this, please.

opinions?

― weasel diesel (K1l14n), Saturday, 1 March 2003 21:16 (twenty-two years ago)

I have to admit I quite like the lyrics to higher than the sun.

― chris sallis, Saturday, 1 March 2003 21:20 (twenty-two years ago)

More of it please!

― chris sallis, Saturday, 1 March 2003 21:21 (twenty-two years ago)

it's always been this way ever since Jim Morrison at the very least. My fave example was in the Blender article about Queens Of The Stone Age. They were watching some doc where the Carter Family was singing about "Staying in the light" and Mark Lanegan - Tom Waits II: Electric Boogaloo - said "fuck the light, stay in the darkness!" The Blender writer just creamed all over about that.

I always thought the chorus of First It Giveth was FUNNY, like in a Blue Oyster Cult way. I hope they don't ruin Queens for people by acting so reverent.

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Saturday, 1 March 2003 21:22 (twenty-two years ago)

Hallucinogens can open me or untie me..."

― Nick Southall (Nick Southall), Saturday, 1 March 2003 21:30 (twenty-two years ago)

they quoted it as "upend" in the review (correctly or incorrectly). it was in select magazine's songs of the 90's. they used that line as proof that lyrically, the scream were miles ahead of the rest. don't get me wrong, i like the records mentioned in this thread, i just don't think saying "drugs can be bad sometimes" is a staggeringly wise observation.

― weasel diesel (K1l14n), Saturday, 1 March 2003 21:44 (twenty-two years ago)

And indeed it isn't. But what is?

― Nick Southall (Nick Southall), Saturday, 1 March 2003 21:46 (twenty-two years ago)

"be my computer, cuz baby I'm a user"

― Ronan (Ronan), Saturday, 1 March 2003 21:49 (twenty-two years ago)

This seems to be the theme of every Spiritualized article written in the last few years as well. Which kind of bugs me because the last record certainly doesn't seem so anti-drug to me. Not with lines like "there's no use cryin' over what you've lost".

― David Beckhouse (David Beckhouse), Sunday, 2 March 2003 00:26 (twenty-two years ago)

drugs are great and anyone who doesn't take vast quantities of them can eat shit

― dave q, Sunday, 2 March 2003 13:33 (twenty-two years ago)

Green Velvet's godawful "Somethin' 'bout those little PILLS the THRILLS" etc etc to thread. Eesh.

― J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Sunday, 2 March 2003 15:33 (twenty-two years ago)

john if you're honestly dissing green velvet then i disown you, for real

― jess (dubplatestyle), Sunday, 2 March 2003 15:39 (twenty-two years ago)

John that record is meant to be anti-drugs, Velvet is the best lyricist around as far as I'm concerned, bearing in mind I only listen to dance now. That's a more blatant track than what he's usually up to hence the blatant lyrics.

― Ronan (Ronan), Sunday, 2 March 2003 19:18 (twenty-two years ago)

dave q is staggeringly OTM!

― Adam A. (Keiko), Sunday, 2 March 2003 19:24 (twenty-two years ago)

Green Velvet's not tryina be deep with that track, nor do i expect most ppl. regard him that way anyway. He's tryina be funny.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Sunday, 2 March 2003 21:13 (twenty-two years ago)

Haha, no mention of "E'S ARE GOOD, E'S ARE GOOD... EBENEZER GOODE!"?

― donut bitch (donut), Sunday, 2 March 2003 21:15 (twenty-two years ago)

Hooray for Electroclash: "Sniffing in the VIP area"

― Siegbran (eofor), Sunday, 2 March 2003 21:16 (twenty-two years ago)

wasn't there a fight with velvet and mr c? wherein velvet came out as very anti drugs?

― Ronan (Ronan), Sunday, 2 March 2003 21:53 (twenty-two years ago)

yup, mr c said he was going to release an answer record to defend pills. what happened to it? (or, ohmigod i've just thought, maybe the plan is to rerelease ebenezer goode....?)

― pete b. (pete b.), Monday, 3 March 2003 18:32 (twenty-two years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.