Tuesday, October 02, 2007

Radioheadlines

In which I compare Thom Yorke to Damien Hirst, kinda.

(Shane Richmond offers a less poncy overview of the business side of things. Honestly, it's like he's David McCallum and I'm Joanna Lumley.)

P.S.: R.I.P. Ronnie Hazlehurst. Definitely going up...

11 comments:

dh said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
dh said...

This whole Radiohead CD price thing looks like a publicity stunt er marketing strategy...to me. But that's pop. I like the idea of Hirst carrying on the Duchamp tradition.

Rimshot said...

Is Radiohead still relevant? Sadly, while I try to stay up to date with the current musical trends, it is the current musical trends that have driven me back to more familiar (read: comfortable) territory.

Billy said...

I'd prefer it if you could pay what you thought it was worth after you'd heard it.

Rimshot said...

Wait, I wanna change my vote...I'll go with what Billy said.

Tim Footman said...

Publicity stunt, Dick? Hush yer mouth. They's proper artists, izzit?

But is relevance an indicator of quality, Rimshot?

And you and Billy should campaign for the reintroduction of listening booths in disc emporia. And coffee bars. And skiffle.

patroclus said...

Billy nails it there, definitely.

I see Prince gave away his concert DVD with the Observer, while the album came out with the Daily Mail. I am confused about Prince's political leanings.

Valerie said...

You've presumably seen this, but http://www.tuaw.com/2007/09/21/radiohead-ditches-itunes-to-keep-album-complete/

Prince is certifiably insane, so it's a little hard to relate him to actual politics...

Spinsterella said...

OPPORTUNITIES IS BRILLIANTS!

Sorry.

Er, I like Billy's comment. Good point lad.

Rimshot said...

Tim: I gave your question a bit of a think and came to the following conclusion:

Tim Footman said...
But is relevance an indicator of quality, Rimshot?


Yes! (sort of)

Relevance is (read: should) be determined by the consuming masses rather than by a self-appointed elite minority of critics and whateverophiles. We (sadly) have to assume that that which is most appealing to the most people is most relevant and by extension (sigh), good (read: quality).

Particulary in these 'instant gratification' times, the shelf-life of something new, be it a car, a film, a song or an album, is remarkably short. But even in this, the cream rises to the top as a few extra weeks at the top of the charts before making way for the next big thing (as a good pop song should).

If this were not the case, we'd be doomed to participate in a supply of redundancy demanded by an ever diminishing quantity.

The music of the future will be new in interesting and heretofore unthought of ways, but still 'staning on the shoulders' of its aural forefathers. It is through this that the no longer 'hot' becomes timeless, through its power to influence.

Yes Virginia, there is...oh wait, that's something else.

Tim Footman said...

Prince has just decided to take the money and run, Patrolcus. Although that's quite difficult in those stack-heeled boots he wears...

Valerie: They're sticking up for the notion of the album as a discrete identity (thus crapping over the core argument of my book - boo!) but then flogging their new album in multiple versions (thus supporting it - yay!).

Anything is better than the last album, Spin.

Rimshot: The thing about the "self-appointed elite minority of critics" is that they're annoying and indefensible and ought to disappear. And if they did disappear, all we'd have left would be the Da Vinci Code and Celine Dion. Sometimes it really is better the devil you know.