I've been taking my time and have found much to like along the way. So far Road to Ruin is my favorite, but I'm sure that will change at some point in my journey.
After spending time with the first 4 albums I finally moved on to the Phil Spector produced End of the Century. I was looking forward to this one because it seems to be such a debated entry in the band's catalog with some members even questioning the choices that were made. Joey, Johnny and Dee Dee were all critical of the album in the years following its release with Johnny even saying "End of the Century was just watered-down Ramones. It's not real Ramones."
Knowing all of this I still went in hoping for the best. Instead of a loud and fast punk album I discovered an energetic collection of songs that found the band breaking new ground for themselves. A lot of the album might not be "Punk Rock" but it is full of Punk attitude.
After nearly a dozen listens I definitely consider End of the Century to be a solid album. I also find myself slightly conflicted. Is it OK to like the album despite the (some would say) drastic change of direction? Of course the answer is "yes". What other fans or even the band itself think of an album shouldn't taint an individual's enjoyment of said album.
My main takeaway from End of the Century though is really about bands and the expectations that we place on them. Is the listener being fair with themselves if they judge an album based on what a band has already done? Is it better to catch the growth and slight sonic shifts from album to album or should each release be listened to and analyzed in a vacuum in an effort to judge the album on its own merits?
I think the best result might be to straddle those 2 ideas somehow. Embrace the new and then consider it in light of the past. What do you think?
No comments:
Post a Comment