Oh shit. I didn't want to do this. It looks I'm going to be forced to say that Grammatics' new single is a little bit...sassy.
I hate myself. Really I do. It is a phrase mostly applied to lowest-common-denominator chav-'n'-b that dominates the top 40.
But the way that minimalistic intro shuffles into view, a simple vocal melody leading into a bass-oriented verse, provides a platform for singer Owen to flex his silky vocal chords in a slightly sultry fashion. Lyrics about 'heavenly letting go' and 'we could do somethine we'd never desired to try'. Oo er. Thankfully, however, no Grammatics song ever goes from A to B without passing X, Y, μ, γ and π on the way. The chorus lifts the song up another hip-swinging gear, with its 'Hey sugar!' line at once a surprise and a highlight, before taking a solid lurch to the left(field) - not the band - with a sprawling middle eight section (that seems to end up as a second, independent chorus). Oh how I struggle trying to apply conventional pop song structures to a track like this. Here the band explore the dreamier, more expansive side of their soundscape, coming over like a dancier Mew, as guitar and cello once again resume their uneasy but devastatingly effective marriage.
The thunderous drum pattern (which will probably draw more unfavourable - and entirely wrong - Foals comparisons) which underpins the entire song gets star billing for a moment towards the end before another blast of that second chorus. The drums on this record have been captured brilliantly, prominent in the mix and sounding full enough to almost appear as if the band are actually live on your stereo.
Grammatics remain a classic Marmite band (another bloody phrase I hate myself for using); albeit a Marmite which few have been exposed to yet. This is 'pop' music crafted the way it should be. This is not a song to drift by in the background. It is fresh, exciting and just a little bit different. Give it a try, you might have found your new favourite band.
9/10
'Double Negative' is available on 7" vinyl and download. A clip is available to stream on their website or their MySpace.
Saturday 31 October 2009
Tuesday 27 October 2009
Some opinions from the last few weeks in sport...or a small subset of it, at least.
In this edition:
Football - on Burnley (briefly), England and the World Cup.
Motorsport - Button - a worthy champion, 'Crashgate'.
Tennis - Andy Murray, just leave him be, part 11023.
And finally... - Silly names, silly puns and silly videos. Altogether rather silly.
Football.
In an earlier blog, I noted the peculiarity that was David Nugent signing for Burnley. Well, the sight of Burnley recording what may well be their biggest Premiership win of the whole season against Sunderland – three goals scored by two ex-Preston players – was a turn of events so bizarre I'm quite surprised the Rift didn't open under Turf Moor.
So England are off to the World Cup, amid a blaze of hype about this being our best chance yet to bring home the trophy (© the red tops 1997, 2001, 2005). Here we go again. Forgive me for being a tad cynical; all we've done to reach the finals is win two matches. Yes, you heard me right. Those matches are; v. Croatia (home) and v. Croatia (away). All the rest should be gimmes, quite honestly. Considering that A. this is supposed to be our national sport, B. the money poured into the Premiership (or EPL if you're from outside these shores) and C. the wealth (pun intended) of talent we admittedly have in this country, all the games not involving Croatia in this qualifying group bloody well ought to be put to bed by our players. Anything less is just laziness. Even beating Croatia is not exactly up there with historic footballing legend; so they once finished third in the World Cup? Big deal. Only the fact that England lost to them last time (in qualifying for Euro 2008), when they really shouldn't have done, has built up a fervour over beating a team that hasn't done anything in world football for a good decade into it being an achievement unto itself. Which it is not.
In the time since the last World Cup, English (and in some cases, British) sport has found a new level - GB+NI have finished fourth in the Olympic medal table, had two F1 world champions, had its best World Athletics championships since 1993 and been athletics (men's) Europa Cup champions, found its most successful tennis player in the Open era, dominated track cycling and uncovered two road stars, a first world diving champion and made names in swimming, in the pool and on open water. The football team's closest counterparts, the England rugby union team, defied expectation to reach the World Cup final and put up a great fight therein.
England's football team, meanwhile, has failed to make the last 16 teams in Europe for the one major tournament in that intervening period. They have now cemented their place amongst the last thirty-two names in the world, at the expense of those sleeping giants of the global game Andorra and Belarus. While I accept that they as a team have looked good in those games, putting away teams seemingly with a new found confidence and professionalism (well for all that money they fucking ought to be professional about it!). The first test comes against Brazil in the Middle East (because that isn't about the money at all); then the hard work actually begins. So far, the England National Football Team have achieved precisely this much:
________________________
End.
Motorsport.
Jenson Button. How can a man who won six Grands Prix in a season have his world title questioned - especially when no other driver has won more than two? Not only that, but he has been able to produce recovery drives when his qualifying performance has admittedly gone off the boil. His drive to secure the title was worthy of a champion - risky overtaking manoeuvres on Grosjean, Nakajima, Kobiyashi and Buemi (the latter from a car length's back - how on earth did he manage to brake so late?) showed unbelievable skill and mettle in a pressure situation sans pareil.
Furthermore, if Button doesn't deserve to win, then who does? Barrichello, for being AWOL when the Brawn was at its best? Vettel, who made errors at critical moments (eg at Turkey when he really should have won from pole) or Webber, quick on his day but just too inconsistent? If anyone pulls out the old 'he only won because of the car' - go and watch some fucking F1 and come back with something better. Champions in this sport are always made from a weighted sum of car and driver capability. When Nigel Mansell won in 1992 it was the culmination of a talented driver having a long career near the front, but with the destructively quick FW14B at his hands and feet, active suspension and all.
Anyone who has watched Jenson (as I have) from 2000, when he made his debut, would recognise a driver whose smooth driving style means he gets the best out of a good car, but is less able to make a bad car drive well, unlike say Hamilton who likes a tail-happy car anyway. But remember, champions always come from good cars, so Jenson's style meant that he would be up there with the best this season. Recall for instance Imola 2004, when Button put his Honda on pole and drove away from Schumacher in the first stint, (albeit on a slightly lighter fuel load) - Schumi referred to his pace as 'mind-blowing'. Compliments like those aren't handed out like penny sweets in the playground.
Jenson's world title has been the hardest to win - an early lead whittled away while the other teams caught up has left us on tenterhooks for months and put him under incredile pressure. More pressure, I suspect, than most of us would be able to handle. That alone should be reason enough to deflect criticisms of worthiness for his world title.
***
The main story of recent F1 was actually 'Crashgate'. Erstwhile Formula One commentator James Allen was a great fan of game theory, and specifically its application to a Grand Prix. He would get very excited about the boffins and their computers back in the team factory, running through different scenarios and plotting their outcomes. He would talk about the unusual strategies employed by teams 'out of position' on the grid. Most ironically, he would hold up Renault and Nelson Piquet Jr's one-stop strategy in Germany in 2008 as the gold standard on the subject; the one which vaulted him from his 17th starting slot to an eventual 2nd, thanks to a timely safety car.
Well it seems the Renault team decided to take the idea a stage or two further a few weeks later in Singapore. Under the floodlights, team bosses Flavio Briatore and Pat Symmonds (according to Piquet Jr. and his father) asked Piquet Jr. to crash in order to bring out the safety car – timed straight after teammate Fernando Alonso's pit stop, which allowed him to take the lead since all other teams would pit under the safety car conditions.
Can I make one thing clear though: it is not really race fixing, is it? Fixing implies that all the variables that make sport what it is have been influenced to such a degree as to be nullified; this necessarily includes those normally outside the participants' jurisdiction (in this case, the Renault team). In this case, 'all' Renault did was to use one of their own team members to maximise their chances of victory.
From a purely sporting perspective, Renault therefore did nothing hugely out of the ordinary. It is no more 'fixing' the outcome of a race than using the second driver to back the field up, while the lead driver scampers off into the distance. How many times has commentator Martin Brundle referred to the teammate as a 'rear-gunner' for his leader? Perhaps Brawn should be hauled in front of the FIA when Jenson Button won the Monaco Grand Prix by virtue of his teammate being slow enough to allow Button to open up a large gap in the first stint before his pit stop.
That is not to say that what Renault did does not cross a line, however. Asking a driver to crash is presumptuous in the extreme; although the safety levels in F1 have improved considerably, a car crash is an inherently unpredictable event, even with one of the world's most skilled drivers at the helm. Young Henry Surtees was killed as a result of a freak occurance in an accident earlier this year in a Formula Two race; how can any team boss risk this of their driver?
Renault got away lightly with the punishment; a suspended sentence rather than a fine. McLaren's involvement in the also-lazily titled 'Spygate' scandal of 2007 cost them $100m (interestingly, Renault were also implicated, but not punished). Perhaps with Renault reputedly on the edge of pulling out of the sport altogether, the result is not a surprise, especially since that figure may well run a team for two whole seasons in years to come.
Tennis.
Andy Murray. Again. Sorry, Murray haters. I know there's a lot of you.
So Murray played in the Davis Cup with a slight wrist injury, and aggrevates it to the point of having to pull out of Tour tournaments - including the Shanghai Masters. He'll be losing a stack of ranking points in the process in this, the indoor hard court leg of the World Tour (at which Murray is arguably the best in the world and is defending 3 titles including two Masters). All to try and fight a losing cause for a team whose credentials are of practically no worth at all. Now that they have been relegated to Euro/Africa Zone II, I hope Murray gives up on Davis Cup altogether. Now can you please get off his back and let him get on with it?
Dan'sWide Weird World of Sport
5 really silly names for sports teams:
Super Aguri (Formula One)
Evidently anything but super.
Total Network Solutions (now The New Saints) (Football)
Led to Sky Sports' Jeff Stelling's joke "They'll be dancing in the streets of Total Network Solutions tonight!"
Wakefield Trinity Wildcats (Rugby League)
Either name on its own would be bad enough, but both together? And the inclusion of 'Trinity' spoils the alliteration, surely the only reason for a name like 'Wildcats' in the first place.
Brisbane Roar (formerly Queensland Roar) (Football)
The fans of also-stupidly-named Perth Glory would chant 'Queensland Roar is a fucking stupid name, a fucking stupid name...'
Serramenti PVC Diquigiovanni-Androni Giocattoli (Cycling)
Just too long.
Ridiculously contrived sporting puns.
When Manchester United first won the Premiership and FA Cup in the same season, it was largely attributed to the state of the Old Trafford pitch, which was often compared to an Arctic area of permafrost. Commentators said they did the Double on tundra.
The tennis player jumped out of bed in the afternoon, having slept in. Rushing down to the tournament grounds he looked at his watch once more and exclaimed, in his Australian drawl, "I'm not going to be on time for my match!". He was late, he knew it.
I wish I was responsible for this, surely the greatest headline of all time. It was from The Sun, referring to the time Inverness Caledonian Thistle (perhaps another contender for silly team names) knocked Celtic out of the Scottish Cup:
'Super Caley Go Ballistic Celtic Are Atrocious'.
Genius.
Video of the month.
Thank God for Cuddles himself, Cadel Evans, superbly winning cycling's World Road Race Championships in Mendrisio in September because it gives me a perfect excuse to show this snippet from an interview during the 2008 TdF. No doubt the related videos will highlight some other contretemps with the press. But for the sheer incongruity of him holding a cuddly lion while berating a poor reporter this is a winner every time.
Football - on Burnley (briefly), England and the World Cup.
Motorsport - Button - a worthy champion, 'Crashgate'.
Tennis - Andy Murray, just leave him be, part 11023.
And finally... - Silly names, silly puns and silly videos. Altogether rather silly.
Football.
In an earlier blog, I noted the peculiarity that was David Nugent signing for Burnley. Well, the sight of Burnley recording what may well be their biggest Premiership win of the whole season against Sunderland – three goals scored by two ex-Preston players – was a turn of events so bizarre I'm quite surprised the Rift didn't open under Turf Moor.
So England are off to the World Cup, amid a blaze of hype about this being our best chance yet to bring home the trophy (© the red tops 1997, 2001, 2005). Here we go again. Forgive me for being a tad cynical; all we've done to reach the finals is win two matches. Yes, you heard me right. Those matches are; v. Croatia (home) and v. Croatia (away). All the rest should be gimmes, quite honestly. Considering that A. this is supposed to be our national sport, B. the money poured into the Premiership (or EPL if you're from outside these shores) and C. the wealth (pun intended) of talent we admittedly have in this country, all the games not involving Croatia in this qualifying group bloody well ought to be put to bed by our players. Anything less is just laziness. Even beating Croatia is not exactly up there with historic footballing legend; so they once finished third in the World Cup? Big deal. Only the fact that England lost to them last time (in qualifying for Euro 2008), when they really shouldn't have done, has built up a fervour over beating a team that hasn't done anything in world football for a good decade into it being an achievement unto itself. Which it is not.
In the time since the last World Cup, English (and in some cases, British) sport has found a new level - GB+NI have finished fourth in the Olympic medal table, had two F1 world champions, had its best World Athletics championships since 1993 and been athletics (men's) Europa Cup champions, found its most successful tennis player in the Open era, dominated track cycling and uncovered two road stars, a first world diving champion and made names in swimming, in the pool and on open water. The football team's closest counterparts, the England rugby union team, defied expectation to reach the World Cup final and put up a great fight therein.
England's football team, meanwhile, has failed to make the last 16 teams in Europe for the one major tournament in that intervening period. They have now cemented their place amongst the last thirty-two names in the world, at the expense of those sleeping giants of the global game Andorra and Belarus. While I accept that they as a team have looked good in those games, putting away teams seemingly with a new found confidence and professionalism (well for all that money they fucking ought to be professional about it!). The first test comes against Brazil in the Middle East (because that isn't about the money at all); then the hard work actually begins. So far, the England National Football Team have achieved precisely this much:
________________________
End.
Motorsport.
Jenson Button. How can a man who won six Grands Prix in a season have his world title questioned - especially when no other driver has won more than two? Not only that, but he has been able to produce recovery drives when his qualifying performance has admittedly gone off the boil. His drive to secure the title was worthy of a champion - risky overtaking manoeuvres on Grosjean, Nakajima, Kobiyashi and Buemi (the latter from a car length's back - how on earth did he manage to brake so late?) showed unbelievable skill and mettle in a pressure situation sans pareil.
Furthermore, if Button doesn't deserve to win, then who does? Barrichello, for being AWOL when the Brawn was at its best? Vettel, who made errors at critical moments (eg at Turkey when he really should have won from pole) or Webber, quick on his day but just too inconsistent? If anyone pulls out the old 'he only won because of the car' - go and watch some fucking F1 and come back with something better. Champions in this sport are always made from a weighted sum of car and driver capability. When Nigel Mansell won in 1992 it was the culmination of a talented driver having a long career near the front, but with the destructively quick FW14B at his hands and feet, active suspension and all.
Anyone who has watched Jenson (as I have) from 2000, when he made his debut, would recognise a driver whose smooth driving style means he gets the best out of a good car, but is less able to make a bad car drive well, unlike say Hamilton who likes a tail-happy car anyway. But remember, champions always come from good cars, so Jenson's style meant that he would be up there with the best this season. Recall for instance Imola 2004, when Button put his Honda on pole and drove away from Schumacher in the first stint, (albeit on a slightly lighter fuel load) - Schumi referred to his pace as 'mind-blowing'. Compliments like those aren't handed out like penny sweets in the playground.
Jenson's world title has been the hardest to win - an early lead whittled away while the other teams caught up has left us on tenterhooks for months and put him under incredile pressure. More pressure, I suspect, than most of us would be able to handle. That alone should be reason enough to deflect criticisms of worthiness for his world title.
***
The main story of recent F1 was actually 'Crashgate'. Erstwhile Formula One commentator James Allen was a great fan of game theory, and specifically its application to a Grand Prix. He would get very excited about the boffins and their computers back in the team factory, running through different scenarios and plotting their outcomes. He would talk about the unusual strategies employed by teams 'out of position' on the grid. Most ironically, he would hold up Renault and Nelson Piquet Jr's one-stop strategy in Germany in 2008 as the gold standard on the subject; the one which vaulted him from his 17th starting slot to an eventual 2nd, thanks to a timely safety car.
Well it seems the Renault team decided to take the idea a stage or two further a few weeks later in Singapore. Under the floodlights, team bosses Flavio Briatore and Pat Symmonds (according to Piquet Jr. and his father) asked Piquet Jr. to crash in order to bring out the safety car – timed straight after teammate Fernando Alonso's pit stop, which allowed him to take the lead since all other teams would pit under the safety car conditions.
Can I make one thing clear though: it is not really race fixing, is it? Fixing implies that all the variables that make sport what it is have been influenced to such a degree as to be nullified; this necessarily includes those normally outside the participants' jurisdiction (in this case, the Renault team). In this case, 'all' Renault did was to use one of their own team members to maximise their chances of victory.
From a purely sporting perspective, Renault therefore did nothing hugely out of the ordinary. It is no more 'fixing' the outcome of a race than using the second driver to back the field up, while the lead driver scampers off into the distance. How many times has commentator Martin Brundle referred to the teammate as a 'rear-gunner' for his leader? Perhaps Brawn should be hauled in front of the FIA when Jenson Button won the Monaco Grand Prix by virtue of his teammate being slow enough to allow Button to open up a large gap in the first stint before his pit stop.
That is not to say that what Renault did does not cross a line, however. Asking a driver to crash is presumptuous in the extreme; although the safety levels in F1 have improved considerably, a car crash is an inherently unpredictable event, even with one of the world's most skilled drivers at the helm. Young Henry Surtees was killed as a result of a freak occurance in an accident earlier this year in a Formula Two race; how can any team boss risk this of their driver?
Renault got away lightly with the punishment; a suspended sentence rather than a fine. McLaren's involvement in the also-lazily titled 'Spygate' scandal of 2007 cost them $100m (interestingly, Renault were also implicated, but not punished). Perhaps with Renault reputedly on the edge of pulling out of the sport altogether, the result is not a surprise, especially since that figure may well run a team for two whole seasons in years to come.
Tennis.
Andy Murray. Again. Sorry, Murray haters. I know there's a lot of you.
So Murray played in the Davis Cup with a slight wrist injury, and aggrevates it to the point of having to pull out of Tour tournaments - including the Shanghai Masters. He'll be losing a stack of ranking points in the process in this, the indoor hard court leg of the World Tour (at which Murray is arguably the best in the world and is defending 3 titles including two Masters). All to try and fight a losing cause for a team whose credentials are of practically no worth at all. Now that they have been relegated to Euro/Africa Zone II, I hope Murray gives up on Davis Cup altogether. Now can you please get off his back and let him get on with it?
Dan's
5 really silly names for sports teams:
Super Aguri (Formula One)
Evidently anything but super.
Total Network Solutions (now The New Saints) (Football)
Led to Sky Sports' Jeff Stelling's joke "They'll be dancing in the streets of Total Network Solutions tonight!"
Wakefield Trinity Wildcats (Rugby League)
Either name on its own would be bad enough, but both together? And the inclusion of 'Trinity' spoils the alliteration, surely the only reason for a name like 'Wildcats' in the first place.
Brisbane Roar (formerly Queensland Roar) (Football)
The fans of also-stupidly-named Perth Glory would chant 'Queensland Roar is a fucking stupid name, a fucking stupid name...'
Serramenti PVC Diquigiovanni-Androni Giocattoli (Cycling)
Just too long.
Ridiculously contrived sporting puns.
When Manchester United first won the Premiership and FA Cup in the same season, it was largely attributed to the state of the Old Trafford pitch, which was often compared to an Arctic area of permafrost. Commentators said they did the Double on tundra.
The tennis player jumped out of bed in the afternoon, having slept in. Rushing down to the tournament grounds he looked at his watch once more and exclaimed, in his Australian drawl, "I'm not going to be on time for my match!". He was late, he knew it.
I wish I was responsible for this, surely the greatest headline of all time. It was from The Sun, referring to the time Inverness Caledonian Thistle (perhaps another contender for silly team names) knocked Celtic out of the Scottish Cup:
'Super Caley Go Ballistic Celtic Are Atrocious'.
Genius.
Video of the month.
Thank God for Cuddles himself, Cadel Evans, superbly winning cycling's World Road Race Championships in Mendrisio in September because it gives me a perfect excuse to show this snippet from an interview during the 2008 TdF. No doubt the related videos will highlight some other contretemps with the press. But for the sheer incongruity of him holding a cuddly lion while berating a poor reporter this is a winner every time.
A racist on the BBC?
Finally, after all these years, on BBC1 on Thursday night a racist was unveiled to the nation. Yes, Andrew Neil on 'This Week'; in the week that Gordon Brown was forced to admit his favourite type of biscuit, Neil referred to his two studio guests Dianne Abbott and Michael Portillo (pictured below) at the top on the show as a 'chocolate hobnob' and a 'custard cream'. Shocking.
Clearly no offence was intended, but it did create one of those double-take, 'Did he really just say that?' moments. Sadly the show is un-iPlayer-able (to coin a word).
Tuesday 20 October 2009
What is the point of Gok Wan?
The title is probably enough for most, but can anyone actually answer that question? I mean, for a start, that's not a real name. People don't call their kids Gok. I'm sorry, I know that's probably a bit...borderline, we wouldn't be having that problem if he was say, Gok Smith. But really. Gok. That's not a name, more like onomatopoeia from a Batman comic.
"Oh, I'm Gok. These are my brothers, Biff and Bam, and my sister, Kaboom."
And this guy gives fashion advice?!?! He looks like Mark Lammar, circa Shooting Stars, with his head trapped between closing lift doors. Just imagine Lammar when he was captain of team A, flanked by two teammates, each pushing against a cheek with an open palm. It's Gok!
If this blog achieves nothing else, I'd like to single-handedly be responsible for the downfall of Gok Wan. Is there such thing as career homicide? I'd like to try it.
"Oh, I'm Gok. These are my brothers, Biff and Bam, and my sister, Kaboom."
And this guy gives fashion advice?!?! He looks like Mark Lammar, circa Shooting Stars, with his head trapped between closing lift doors. Just imagine Lammar when he was captain of team A, flanked by two teammates, each pushing against a cheek with an open palm. It's Gok!
If this blog achieves nothing else, I'd like to single-handedly be responsible for the downfall of Gok Wan. Is there such thing as career homicide? I'd like to try it.
Friday 16 October 2009
Masterchef: The Professionals
Why the rush? Seriously.
This is a programme where snooty presenters oversee snooty chefs serving snooty food to snooty people. Just like the meals produced in the show, it is divided up into three distinct courses; the introductions to the chefs and the critics, followed by the actual cooking bit, then the X-factor style 'and the winner is...' results bit.
The main portion of the show, then, is a breathless run through the chef's individual perfomances in the kitchen; all close-range, quick-fire, heavily edited shots of the chefs at work. At all points the chef and ourselves are reminded of the eternally ticking clock in which one of the two presenters shouts a random number of minutes left before the food goes out, all interspersed with pseudo-profound, Yoda-esque one-liners. Adding to the overall perplexity is the pulsating dance music ensemble this whole thing is set to, giving that off-your-tits-on-E, Ministry of Sound feel to the proceedings. Probably the only reason the viewer doesn't keel over at this point is that the body can't decide what to have first; an epileptic fit or a mild coronary. That and the brief moments of respite where we watch the chef analyse his/her own performances in the sancturary of that bit at the back of the kitchen with shots of their tortured expressions betwixt morsels of hope or despair or both, coming on like it's the fucking Shawshank Redemption.
The whole emphasis on speed is baffling to say the least. On one occasion, when the chef ran out of his allotted 'time' and the meal was now Officially Late, the host pointed out that the diners 'will be waiting now.' What the hell were they doing hitherto? Playing bloody darts? Eventually the chefs get to 'plate up' - which is surely not a real phrase - where they take laughably large plates and arrange practically sod all on them, while the hosts stare down and shout 'come on' and cause the poor guy to put ice-cream on the fish and vinegar on the pudding amid the confusion. They are then presented to the judges who raise quizzical eyebrows at each other, forgetting all the while that they are BEING PAID to EAT FOOD. Lucky buggers. Just to ratchet the tension up another notch, the shots of each service are underscored by a single low musical note, giving the vague impression that one of the dishes has been poisoned or that the maitre'd is actaully concealing a large cleaver under his suit and about to turn on the critics. Which would be different, at least.
After a good twenty minutes of this carry on, the chefs are gathered together for the results. At this point, due to the mad rapid-fire production approach of the actual kitchen segment, no-one can quite remember who cooked what, including the audience at home, the hosts and even the chefs themselves. In fact by this stage, remembering what day of the week it is becomes quite a task. Compounding matters further, the presenters then announce the chefs in turn as winners and losers in no logical order, who - once they recall what their own names are - either stand in a non-designated winner's area or march disconsolantly out the door.
This process, with subtle tweaks, has been running for a number of weeks, whittling down the contenders. Eventually one chef will rise above all others, and presumably spend the rest of his/her days on Valium trying to calm themselves from the relentless time pressure they have been subjected to and go and work in the world's only Michelin-starred library. I have to say, however, that despite my attempts to send this programme up, I found it oddly compelling, if only because my idea of fine dining is one where you do the tin of beans in the pan instead of the microwave. I just wish they'd slow down a bit.
This is a programme where snooty presenters oversee snooty chefs serving snooty food to snooty people. Just like the meals produced in the show, it is divided up into three distinct courses; the introductions to the chefs and the critics, followed by the actual cooking bit, then the X-factor style 'and the winner is...' results bit.
The main portion of the show, then, is a breathless run through the chef's individual perfomances in the kitchen; all close-range, quick-fire, heavily edited shots of the chefs at work. At all points the chef and ourselves are reminded of the eternally ticking clock in which one of the two presenters shouts a random number of minutes left before the food goes out, all interspersed with pseudo-profound, Yoda-esque one-liners. Adding to the overall perplexity is the pulsating dance music ensemble this whole thing is set to, giving that off-your-tits-on-E, Ministry of Sound feel to the proceedings. Probably the only reason the viewer doesn't keel over at this point is that the body can't decide what to have first; an epileptic fit or a mild coronary. That and the brief moments of respite where we watch the chef analyse his/her own performances in the sancturary of that bit at the back of the kitchen with shots of their tortured expressions betwixt morsels of hope or despair or both, coming on like it's the fucking Shawshank Redemption.
The whole emphasis on speed is baffling to say the least. On one occasion, when the chef ran out of his allotted 'time' and the meal was now Officially Late, the host pointed out that the diners 'will be waiting now.' What the hell were they doing hitherto? Playing bloody darts? Eventually the chefs get to 'plate up' - which is surely not a real phrase - where they take laughably large plates and arrange practically sod all on them, while the hosts stare down and shout 'come on' and cause the poor guy to put ice-cream on the fish and vinegar on the pudding amid the confusion. They are then presented to the judges who raise quizzical eyebrows at each other, forgetting all the while that they are BEING PAID to EAT FOOD. Lucky buggers. Just to ratchet the tension up another notch, the shots of each service are underscored by a single low musical note, giving the vague impression that one of the dishes has been poisoned or that the maitre'd is actaully concealing a large cleaver under his suit and about to turn on the critics. Which would be different, at least.
After a good twenty minutes of this carry on, the chefs are gathered together for the results. At this point, due to the mad rapid-fire production approach of the actual kitchen segment, no-one can quite remember who cooked what, including the audience at home, the hosts and even the chefs themselves. In fact by this stage, remembering what day of the week it is becomes quite a task. Compounding matters further, the presenters then announce the chefs in turn as winners and losers in no logical order, who - once they recall what their own names are - either stand in a non-designated winner's area or march disconsolantly out the door.
This process, with subtle tweaks, has been running for a number of weeks, whittling down the contenders. Eventually one chef will rise above all others, and presumably spend the rest of his/her days on Valium trying to calm themselves from the relentless time pressure they have been subjected to and go and work in the world's only Michelin-starred library. I have to say, however, that despite my attempts to send this programme up, I found it oddly compelling, if only because my idea of fine dining is one where you do the tin of beans in the pan instead of the microwave. I just wish they'd slow down a bit.
Tour de France 2010
So the parcours for the 2010 TdF was unveiled today. Hopefully the route will make up for what was a relatively stale edition this year. Certainly the organisers have pulled out a few extra stops along the way this time around. This news gives its fans a taste of what to expect and a vague excuse to start the first round of predictions, gossip and lick-your-finger-and-stick-it-in-the-air guesswork, which I will shamelessly try to do here.
This Tour of France will start in Holland (obviously), Rotterdam to be precise. Interestingly, with the 2009 Vuelta a Espana having started on the Assen TT circuit and the 2010 Giro d'Italia due to kick off in Amsterdam, that makes three Grand Tours in succession starting in the Low Country. Weird.
An almost certainly flat, 8km prologue will favour the usual suspects; so expect Cancellara and Wiggins to be fighting it out, along with Contador (whose TT abilities have improved massively) and Armstrong if he gets back to his former ways (and providing his team get an invite). Also this may be one for the powerful sprinters to get involved in; this year's green jersey Thor Hushovd has already set his sights on the short dash for yellow. With the race crossing into Belgium in the following days, this may give Tom Boonen the incentive to try and win the famous garment to wear into his homeland. In a recent interview he claimed he wished to improve his TT abilites for a tilt at the 2010 Worlds; this opportunity may be an extra motivation.
As mentioned, from Rotterdam the race moves on to Belgium for three stages. If Cancellara, Hushovd or Boonen get themselves high up in the GC early on, expect them to make a bid for the yellow jersey, or to extend their lead on stage three, a 207km dash across Belgium featuring the return of cobblestone sectors to the route. This will suit the strong men who feature in races such as Paris-Roubaix and the Tour of Flanders, who may try and make a break for the line and avoid the mass sprint finish that usually punctuates the early days of the Tour. This may give the new British squad Team Sky and its troupe of Classics specialists (for instance Flecha) to grab some glory. It will also be fraught with danger for the GC guys, with not much to gain, but plenty to lose in crashes and punctures that come with the cobbles.
Otherwise, the opening week of flat stages will give plenty for Britain's sprint superstar, Mark Cavendish, to lay down his challenge for the green jersey, which he lost in 2009 to Thor Hushovd, despite winning 6 stages along the way. The number of stages designated 'plain' is down one this coming edition from 10 to 9, but that is still plenty for Cav to get his teeth into. He flags up 8 stages for possible wins, anyone want to bet for less than 5 or 6? However, it remains to be seen how effective his Columbia team's lead out train will be this year, and especially with the emergence of rivals Garmin in recent months with the likes of Tyler Farrar and Chris Sutton (although he might be off to Sky), Hushovd again likely to be challenging, perhaps Boonen, McEwen and Ciolek too. Another shout might be the young Norweigan Edvald Boasson Hagen, winner of four stages in the Tour of Britain, the Eneco Tour and Gent-Wevelgem this year, this talented rider also moves to Sky for next year and could be one to watch when the peloton roars under the red kite. I'll also choose this time to mention Gert Steegmans, the Belgian who pinched a win from his leader Boonen in their home country and won on the Champs Elysses in 2008, before going AWOL in 2009 after a disagreement with his team. Now he has found a happy home at RadioShack he might well be back in form next year.
Of course, the race is won and lost in the mountains, and for the 2010 edition the giant Col du Tourmalet will make a return for its centenary, not once but twice (making up for the fact that it was undoubtedly wasted in its 2009 appearance) - once either side of the second rest day. For the second encounter the summit will act as the stage finish and its prominence in the middle of the third week, especially since the riders will have a free day beforehand, may decide the Tour in a similar way to Alpe d'Huez did in 2008 when Carlos Sastre attacked at the base of the climb and won the stage and ultimately the Tour.
The mountain goats that may contest this epic dash up the Col will have to include defending champion Contador, Andy Schleck, world champion Cadel Evans (if he rides - rumours suggest he may be farmed out to contest one of the other three-week tours instead). From a British perspective we must also consider Bradley Wiggins in this elite group of GC contenders, following his sensational fourth place in 2009. What may hinder his progress up the rankings this time around is the fact that the route in this year past could not have been better suited to him - even he accepts this as fact. There is only the single individual TT (outside of the prologue) - and no TTT. If he remains at Garmin, this will be sorely missed - look at how much time he gained with it in 2009. However, should he make the much-speculated transfer to Sky, a team without TT pedigree, this may be a blessing. This is not to take away from his new-found climbing abilities - he was up there mixing it with the best of the best in that respect, but the TT has always been Bradley's speciality on the road and losing vital kilometres in the discipline will hinder his podium credentials.
Where Wiggins loses, so Andy Schleck (the 2009 runner-up) gains. He was the one rider who looked to match Contador on the mountains and may have ridden away from him on the Ventoux were he not looking after big brother Frank so much. As Contador's future looks uncertain at the moment after his Astana team seems to have been pulled from underneath him by Armstrong and the RadioShack boys, perhaps the super-strong Saxo Bank squad could put Schleck in the favourite's position for 2010? Certainly he will have a fighting chance against Contador, who is not invincible (look back to the Dauphine Libere for proof of that). Armstrong himself is a complete mystery - an incredible return to the sport saw him land a podium; will his team of loyal lieutenants like Leipheimer, Zubeldia and Popovych be enough to offset his advancing years and bag him another top three finish? I would hesitate to say yes, but if there's one man you don't want to write off...
Just to be different, I'm going to back Schleck the younger for the big W in 2010, but going back over the potential list of names contending in the sprints and in the mountains, combined with the adventurous and varied route, leaves me to conclude that this Tour de France could well be the most exciting in years. Doesn't it feel like the past few years of gradually weeding out the cheats, the new talent emerging alongside old contenders and surprise names is building to a head for next year? Furthermore, with cycling as a sport on the verge of really taking off in Britain, the emergence of Cavendish, Wiggins and Team Sky (even though they will be competing for column inches with the football World Cup) might send it into overdrive. And wouldn't that be something?
This Tour of France will start in Holland (obviously), Rotterdam to be precise. Interestingly, with the 2009 Vuelta a Espana having started on the Assen TT circuit and the 2010 Giro d'Italia due to kick off in Amsterdam, that makes three Grand Tours in succession starting in the Low Country. Weird.
An almost certainly flat, 8km prologue will favour the usual suspects; so expect Cancellara and Wiggins to be fighting it out, along with Contador (whose TT abilities have improved massively) and Armstrong if he gets back to his former ways (and providing his team get an invite). Also this may be one for the powerful sprinters to get involved in; this year's green jersey Thor Hushovd has already set his sights on the short dash for yellow. With the race crossing into Belgium in the following days, this may give Tom Boonen the incentive to try and win the famous garment to wear into his homeland. In a recent interview he claimed he wished to improve his TT abilites for a tilt at the 2010 Worlds; this opportunity may be an extra motivation.
As mentioned, from Rotterdam the race moves on to Belgium for three stages. If Cancellara, Hushovd or Boonen get themselves high up in the GC early on, expect them to make a bid for the yellow jersey, or to extend their lead on stage three, a 207km dash across Belgium featuring the return of cobblestone sectors to the route. This will suit the strong men who feature in races such as Paris-Roubaix and the Tour of Flanders, who may try and make a break for the line and avoid the mass sprint finish that usually punctuates the early days of the Tour. This may give the new British squad Team Sky and its troupe of Classics specialists (for instance Flecha) to grab some glory. It will also be fraught with danger for the GC guys, with not much to gain, but plenty to lose in crashes and punctures that come with the cobbles.
Otherwise, the opening week of flat stages will give plenty for Britain's sprint superstar, Mark Cavendish, to lay down his challenge for the green jersey, which he lost in 2009 to Thor Hushovd, despite winning 6 stages along the way. The number of stages designated 'plain' is down one this coming edition from 10 to 9, but that is still plenty for Cav to get his teeth into. He flags up 8 stages for possible wins, anyone want to bet for less than 5 or 6? However, it remains to be seen how effective his Columbia team's lead out train will be this year, and especially with the emergence of rivals Garmin in recent months with the likes of Tyler Farrar and Chris Sutton (although he might be off to Sky), Hushovd again likely to be challenging, perhaps Boonen, McEwen and Ciolek too. Another shout might be the young Norweigan Edvald Boasson Hagen, winner of four stages in the Tour of Britain, the Eneco Tour and Gent-Wevelgem this year, this talented rider also moves to Sky for next year and could be one to watch when the peloton roars under the red kite. I'll also choose this time to mention Gert Steegmans, the Belgian who pinched a win from his leader Boonen in their home country and won on the Champs Elysses in 2008, before going AWOL in 2009 after a disagreement with his team. Now he has found a happy home at RadioShack he might well be back in form next year.
Of course, the race is won and lost in the mountains, and for the 2010 edition the giant Col du Tourmalet will make a return for its centenary, not once but twice (making up for the fact that it was undoubtedly wasted in its 2009 appearance) - once either side of the second rest day. For the second encounter the summit will act as the stage finish and its prominence in the middle of the third week, especially since the riders will have a free day beforehand, may decide the Tour in a similar way to Alpe d'Huez did in 2008 when Carlos Sastre attacked at the base of the climb and won the stage and ultimately the Tour.
The mountain goats that may contest this epic dash up the Col will have to include defending champion Contador, Andy Schleck, world champion Cadel Evans (if he rides - rumours suggest he may be farmed out to contest one of the other three-week tours instead). From a British perspective we must also consider Bradley Wiggins in this elite group of GC contenders, following his sensational fourth place in 2009. What may hinder his progress up the rankings this time around is the fact that the route in this year past could not have been better suited to him - even he accepts this as fact. There is only the single individual TT (outside of the prologue) - and no TTT. If he remains at Garmin, this will be sorely missed - look at how much time he gained with it in 2009. However, should he make the much-speculated transfer to Sky, a team without TT pedigree, this may be a blessing. This is not to take away from his new-found climbing abilities - he was up there mixing it with the best of the best in that respect, but the TT has always been Bradley's speciality on the road and losing vital kilometres in the discipline will hinder his podium credentials.
Where Wiggins loses, so Andy Schleck (the 2009 runner-up) gains. He was the one rider who looked to match Contador on the mountains and may have ridden away from him on the Ventoux were he not looking after big brother Frank so much. As Contador's future looks uncertain at the moment after his Astana team seems to have been pulled from underneath him by Armstrong and the RadioShack boys, perhaps the super-strong Saxo Bank squad could put Schleck in the favourite's position for 2010? Certainly he will have a fighting chance against Contador, who is not invincible (look back to the Dauphine Libere for proof of that). Armstrong himself is a complete mystery - an incredible return to the sport saw him land a podium; will his team of loyal lieutenants like Leipheimer, Zubeldia and Popovych be enough to offset his advancing years and bag him another top three finish? I would hesitate to say yes, but if there's one man you don't want to write off...
Just to be different, I'm going to back Schleck the younger for the big W in 2010, but going back over the potential list of names contending in the sprints and in the mountains, combined with the adventurous and varied route, leaves me to conclude that this Tour de France could well be the most exciting in years. Doesn't it feel like the past few years of gradually weeding out the cheats, the new talent emerging alongside old contenders and surprise names is building to a head for next year? Furthermore, with cycling as a sport on the verge of really taking off in Britain, the emergence of Cavendish, Wiggins and Team Sky (even though they will be competing for column inches with the football World Cup) might send it into overdrive. And wouldn't that be something?
Friday 9 October 2009
'Black Swan Song' - forthcoming Athlete single for charity
Increasingly frustrating but still occasionally brilliant South London band Athlete are releasing their next single, Black Swan Song on November 9 to coincide with the run up to Remembrance Day. They've really gone all out on the video this time and it works wonderfully. The video is on a war theme and is dedicated to the memory of singer Joel Pott's grandfather, who as the caption tells us fought in the Battle of Arnhem in 1944. The proceeds from the single will be donated to the Royal British Legion.
The song itself is much of the same emotive balladry they've been peddling since circa 2005 (but probably more in the Yesterday Threw... or Second Hand Stores calibre) and probably won't change your opinion of the band one way or another, but the video and the promotion surrounding the single just might.
The video won't embed in this blog, but click HERE to watch.
The song itself is much of the same emotive balladry they've been peddling since circa 2005 (but probably more in the Yesterday Threw... or Second Hand Stores calibre) and probably won't change your opinion of the band one way or another, but the video and the promotion surrounding the single just might.
The video won't embed in this blog, but click HERE to watch.
Thursday 8 October 2009
Marketing Bastards And The Subtle Sleight Of Word
Today's adverts, packages and slogans are designed to offer a lot without actually saying anything useful through clever use of words and wordings. This is typified by a recent Head and Shoulders advert, which claims to provide 'up to 100% flake-free hair'. Up to 100%? That only provides, ooh say, the entire spectrum of hair-flakiness as wiggle room. You could furnish a jar of marmalade with the same claim, and when hordes of the freshly orange-shred-coiffured start beating down your door asking for their money back, kindly point out that zero percent is still within the confines of 'up to a hundred'. (Actually, thinking about it, zero percent implies all flake and no hair, and if that is your starting point then I think you're past the point where a simple shampoo and condition may come to your rescue). Going even further, surely absolutely anything can be 'up to 100%' something with absolute authenticity? Did you know, for example, that I am up to 100% Swiss, Swedish, Portugese, American, Mongolian and Australian? Thought not.
(The 'up to' bit of the ad probably relates to this article I came across. Still it wouldn't hurt them to give us a bit more of a clue, would it?)
Tesco are known to sell their chicken produce with the phrase 'reared to Tesco's livestock standards' on the packet. Well thanks for that, but you stop woefully short of telling me what your standards actually are. For all I know, you could keep your chickens stuffed into a Mini Cooper, like the set up to some surreal Christmas cracker gag. 'Well', says the marketing guru, 'at least it's not a Honda Jazz. We have standards, you know'. (For the record, litigation fans, I know for a fact that Tesco do not keep their chickens in a Mini, or indeed any other city runaround).
Probably one of the more intricate offenders is Greggs the bakers, whose sandwiches are sold boxed with the slogan 'Freshly made with bread we baked' on the front. On the bottom of the box is a bolder statement, in that 'the bread...was freshly delivered straight from our local bakery where our bakers bake fresh bread everyday'. That (count them, folks) is three separate uses of the word 'fresh'. How fresh can you possibly be? The consumer is practically salivating at this stage at the thought of the freshness of the bread he is about to sink his teeth into. At no point, unfortunately, do they make the outright claim that the bread in your freshly-purchased (!) sandwich is that selfsame fresh bread.
Look closely; all they really say is that the sandwich was freshly made, i.e. that the constituent parts that make up the classic BLT were cobbled together in the shop that morning. The constant talk of freshness and the statement about baking fresh bread cause the buyer to make the mental junction between two actually unconnected statements. You see, they talk of making fresh bread daily and they talk of delivering bread today, but never state that they are talking about the same bit of bread, viz:
“Actually, that bread's been sitting around for a month in our bakery. But we delivered it to the shop this morning, so we haven't broken our promise!”
The ensuing misunderstanding is so hilarious that the writers of Frasier are forever kicking themselves that they never made an episode in a branch of Greggs, with the eponymous psychiatrist and his brother squabbling over which loaf to cut up for sandwiches, before Niles' wheat allergy kicks in and the audience goes into a fit of laughter.
So it's not the lies and liars you need to watch out for. It's really those who tell the truth, just not the truth you thought you were hearing - they need watching the most.
Please share any more examples!
(The 'up to' bit of the ad probably relates to this article I came across. Still it wouldn't hurt them to give us a bit more of a clue, would it?)
Tesco are known to sell their chicken produce with the phrase 'reared to Tesco's livestock standards' on the packet. Well thanks for that, but you stop woefully short of telling me what your standards actually are. For all I know, you could keep your chickens stuffed into a Mini Cooper, like the set up to some surreal Christmas cracker gag. 'Well', says the marketing guru, 'at least it's not a Honda Jazz. We have standards, you know'. (For the record, litigation fans, I know for a fact that Tesco do not keep their chickens in a Mini, or indeed any other city runaround).
Probably one of the more intricate offenders is Greggs the bakers, whose sandwiches are sold boxed with the slogan 'Freshly made with bread we baked' on the front. On the bottom of the box is a bolder statement, in that 'the bread...was freshly delivered straight from our local bakery where our bakers bake fresh bread everyday'. That (count them, folks) is three separate uses of the word 'fresh'. How fresh can you possibly be? The consumer is practically salivating at this stage at the thought of the freshness of the bread he is about to sink his teeth into. At no point, unfortunately, do they make the outright claim that the bread in your freshly-purchased (!) sandwich is that selfsame fresh bread.
Look closely; all they really say is that the sandwich was freshly made, i.e. that the constituent parts that make up the classic BLT were cobbled together in the shop that morning. The constant talk of freshness and the statement about baking fresh bread cause the buyer to make the mental junction between two actually unconnected statements. You see, they talk of making fresh bread daily and they talk of delivering bread today, but never state that they are talking about the same bit of bread, viz:
“Actually, that bread's been sitting around for a month in our bakery. But we delivered it to the shop this morning, so we haven't broken our promise!”
The ensuing misunderstanding is so hilarious that the writers of Frasier are forever kicking themselves that they never made an episode in a branch of Greggs, with the eponymous psychiatrist and his brother squabbling over which loaf to cut up for sandwiches, before Niles' wheat allergy kicks in and the audience goes into a fit of laughter.
So it's not the lies and liars you need to watch out for. It's really those who tell the truth, just not the truth you thought you were hearing - they need watching the most.
Please share any more examples!
Friday 2 October 2009
Frank Turner – Poetry of the Deed
It is an interesting truism to note that the level of Frank Turner's success has increased in an inverse relationship with the length of his hair. Expect, then, when he finally hits the big time for him to turn up looking like Michael Stipe. But more centrally to the ascension of our star Turner is his third longplayer offering, 'Poetry of the Deed'. It is very difficult to write a review about the borderline crossover appeal of Turner without reference to the phrase 'selling out'. Fear not, for this critique is not about to accuse Turner of such. Indeed, the wit of the man has beaten me to it; 'We can never sell out because we never bought in', yells a typically animated Turner on upbeat opener 'Live Fast Die Old'.
However, shying away from such actions does not take away from the fact that this is perhaps the weakest Frank Turner album to date. That opening song sets a promising pace for the rest of the album to follow; prominent piano and organ over a clean production sheen (I'd have loved to hear the first album produced like this), a song pitched in the 'Vital Signs'/'Reasons...' bracket. Therein lies the true problem of the album however – most of the songs here have in essence been done before, and done better. Many of them have direct counterparts from the first two albums, almost as though they have provided a blueprint for all future works. For 'Sons of Liberty', for instance, read 'Love Ire & Song' or '...Anarchists', except not nearly as good. There's the songs about drinking, songs about girls, songs about...songs. The problem is that none of them seem to grab this listener in quite the same way that their non-identical twins once did. Remember when you first heard 'The Real Damage' or 'Long Live The Queen'? Nothing on here quite has the same impact, be it through a killer hook or lyric.
Still, any new material is a welcome addition to the Turner library. 'Richard Devine' has a quirky, staccato swagger about it, vaguely reminiscent of his backing band Dive Dive's 'Take It, It's Yours' and bizarrely, (and ever so slightly) 'Laura' by the Scissor Sisters (listen to that piano/guitar line in the opening verse). Not a sentence I'd ever thought I'd write. Elsewhere, lead single 'The Road' is another standout – the kind of folk-pop singalong we've grown used to over the years, with an almost trademark driving middle eight in particular lifting the song to a triumphant final chorus. 'Live Fast...' also makes use of this well, especially the lovely sliding effect signalling the run in to a great last minute or so.
Leaving these aside, solo acoustic strum 'Dan's Song' is probably the weakest such effort I've heard from Frank's repertoire, musically and lyrically – an attempt at a 'Real Damage' without the punch. And title track 'Poetry of the Deed' contains the line, “Life is to short to be lived without poetry/If you've got soul darling come on and show it me” - one of those Turner lyrical moments; a genius rhyme or just plain cringeworthy? I still can't decide after numerous listens. However the closing trio of songs somewhat rescues a meandering middle portion of the album; each building, once again, to their own dramatic climaxes; the slow-burning 'Sunday Nights' perhaps the most affecting of these.
Taken outside the context of the first two albums, there is no doubt that this is a highly listenable record; upbeat in many places, generally just good fun. It pains me a little to judge it on the first few listens; some songs may grow over time, or be more impressive in a live scenario. Furthermore, this is no 'backlash' as may have been expected against his growing popularity. But there is no getting away from those earlier efforts and comparisons thereto. This is a Frank Turner minus the angst, the emotion, the call-to-arms anthemics of first two albums works. In other words, everything that made his earlier works special, personal, life-affirming even. Shorn of these traits, Poetry of the Deed is merely a decent collection of songs.
7/10
Well at least I got through this whole review without one use of 'frankly', 'to be frank...' or similar.
However, shying away from such actions does not take away from the fact that this is perhaps the weakest Frank Turner album to date. That opening song sets a promising pace for the rest of the album to follow; prominent piano and organ over a clean production sheen (I'd have loved to hear the first album produced like this), a song pitched in the 'Vital Signs'/'Reasons...' bracket. Therein lies the true problem of the album however – most of the songs here have in essence been done before, and done better. Many of them have direct counterparts from the first two albums, almost as though they have provided a blueprint for all future works. For 'Sons of Liberty', for instance, read 'Love Ire & Song' or '...Anarchists', except not nearly as good. There's the songs about drinking, songs about girls, songs about...songs. The problem is that none of them seem to grab this listener in quite the same way that their non-identical twins once did. Remember when you first heard 'The Real Damage' or 'Long Live The Queen'? Nothing on here quite has the same impact, be it through a killer hook or lyric.
Still, any new material is a welcome addition to the Turner library. 'Richard Devine' has a quirky, staccato swagger about it, vaguely reminiscent of his backing band Dive Dive's 'Take It, It's Yours' and bizarrely, (and ever so slightly) 'Laura' by the Scissor Sisters (listen to that piano/guitar line in the opening verse). Not a sentence I'd ever thought I'd write. Elsewhere, lead single 'The Road' is another standout – the kind of folk-pop singalong we've grown used to over the years, with an almost trademark driving middle eight in particular lifting the song to a triumphant final chorus. 'Live Fast...' also makes use of this well, especially the lovely sliding effect signalling the run in to a great last minute or so.
Leaving these aside, solo acoustic strum 'Dan's Song' is probably the weakest such effort I've heard from Frank's repertoire, musically and lyrically – an attempt at a 'Real Damage' without the punch. And title track 'Poetry of the Deed' contains the line, “Life is to short to be lived without poetry/If you've got soul darling come on and show it me” - one of those Turner lyrical moments; a genius rhyme or just plain cringeworthy? I still can't decide after numerous listens. However the closing trio of songs somewhat rescues a meandering middle portion of the album; each building, once again, to their own dramatic climaxes; the slow-burning 'Sunday Nights' perhaps the most affecting of these.
Taken outside the context of the first two albums, there is no doubt that this is a highly listenable record; upbeat in many places, generally just good fun. It pains me a little to judge it on the first few listens; some songs may grow over time, or be more impressive in a live scenario. Furthermore, this is no 'backlash' as may have been expected against his growing popularity. But there is no getting away from those earlier efforts and comparisons thereto. This is a Frank Turner minus the angst, the emotion, the call-to-arms anthemics of first two albums works. In other words, everything that made his earlier works special, personal, life-affirming even. Shorn of these traits, Poetry of the Deed is merely a decent collection of songs.
7/10
Well at least I got through this whole review without one use of 'frankly', 'to be frank...' or similar.
Free Music (free!) download-orama. Did I mention they were free?
Recently I've come across a number of free downloadables (is that a word? Well I've coined it in any case) from some of my favourite bands, which I would like to share. In a most cases, they require an email address in order to get your hands on them:
Grammatics - D.I.L.E.M.M.A
In order to coincide with going on tour with Bloc Party, (in a move they're calling 'Bloctober' - oh the wit) Grammatics are giving away this cracking album track free, along with a remix of 'Murderer'.
www.grammatics.co.uk
Los Campesinos! - The Sea is a Good Place to Think of the Future
Another band heading out on tour, they released this song for free a few weeks ago, perhaps to be included on their forthcoming third album.
www.loscampesinos.com
Sky Larkin - Smarts
Apparently recorded almost by chance in a day; this is released along with an acoustic version of album track 'Matador'.
www.weareskylarkin.com
Johnny Foreigner - Feels Like Summer EP
Hopelessly out of date by now (considering the title), this was released way back in June, but I've only just come across it now. A whole 3-track EP for your listening pleasure, not bad going.
www.johnnyforeignerband.com
Grammatics - D.I.L.E.M.M.A
In order to coincide with going on tour with Bloc Party, (in a move they're calling 'Bloctober' - oh the wit) Grammatics are giving away this cracking album track free, along with a remix of 'Murderer'.
www.grammatics.co.uk
Los Campesinos! - The Sea is a Good Place to Think of the Future
Another band heading out on tour, they released this song for free a few weeks ago, perhaps to be included on their forthcoming third album.
www.loscampesinos.com
Sky Larkin - Smarts
Apparently recorded almost by chance in a day; this is released along with an acoustic version of album track 'Matador'.
www.weareskylarkin.com
Johnny Foreigner - Feels Like Summer EP
Hopelessly out of date by now (considering the title), this was released way back in June, but I've only just come across it now. A whole 3-track EP for your listening pleasure, not bad going.
www.johnnyforeignerband.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)