vonChristian Ihle 12.08.2012

Monarchie & Alltag

Neue Bands und wichtige Filme: „As long as the music’s loud enough, we won’t hear the world falling apart“.

Mehr über diesen Blog

Zur Feier von „500 Folgen Schmähkritik“ sind wir tief ins Archiv gestiegen und haben die 25 schönsten Verrisse herausgekramt, die wir in den nächsten Wochen nun noch einmal präsentieren wollen.

Der amerikanische Autor Chuck Klosterman befasste sich im letzten Jahr ausführlich mit der Lou Reed / Metallica – Kollaboration „Lulu“ und hat neben einer Kritik des Werkes auch gleich noch eine schöne Analyse über die beiden Acts (und Metallicas Fans) mitgeliefert:

“It’s not really designed for people who like music. It sounds like what it is: an elderly misanthrope reciting paradoxical aphorisms over a collection of repetitive, adrenalized sludge licks. Anyone who tries to suggest it’s surprising in any way needs to reexamine his or her propensity for being surprised. (…) It is not a successful record. It might be a successful simulation of how it feels to develop schizophrenia while suffering from a migraine, although slightly less melodic. (…) If the Red Hot Chili Peppers acoustically covered the 12 worst Primus songs for Starbucks, it would still be (slightly) better than this. “Loutallica” makes SuperHeavy seem like Big Star. But this is what happens in a free society. Enjoy your freedom, slaves. (…) The reason Lulu is so terrible is because the people making this music clearly don’t care if anyone else enjoys it. Now, here again — if viewed in a vacuum — that sentiment is admirable and important. But we don’t live in a vacuum. We live on Earth. And that means we have to accept the real-life consequences of a culture in which recorded music no longer has monetary value, and one of those consequences is Lulu.”

Bonus Track:

Zwar nur eine Fußnote im oben verlinkten Text, aber eine schöne Analyse des Metallica-Fans:

“An abridged list of things Metallica has done to cause its fan base to feel betrayed: getting haircuts, making a video for “One,” headlining a Lollapalooza tour no one really liked, responsibly dealing with their alcoholism, writing a song that required James Hetfield to sing on key, hiring a replacement for bassist Cliff Burton, replacing the bassist who replaced Cliff Burton, not having enough bass on … And Justice for All, not writing songs that were 11 minutes long, suing the same people who purchased their T-shirts, writing the song “2×4,” wearing trousers that cost more than $33, and transitioning away from a lyrical preoccupation with killing other people and toward a lyrical preoccupation with killing themselves.”

…und eine nicht minder gelungene Lou-Reed-Analyse, ebenfalls in einer Fußnote versteckt:

“It should be noted that I’m looking at this situation mostly from Metallica’s perspective because Reed’s motives are impossible to comprehend. It’s possible that — from his position — this is actually the most commercial thing he’s ever attempted. I also think it’s possible he convinced Lars Ulrich that alienating the people who love you is an important part of being important. Which, of course, is true.”

(US-Autor Chuck Klosterman bei Grantland über die aktuelle Album-Kollaboration von Metallica und Lou Reed namens “Lulu”)

Bisherige Best-Of-Folgen:
# 25: Dietmar Dath über die Internetbemühungen etablierter Parteien
# 24: Die SZ über Urban Priol
# 23: Harald Martenstein über den Film „Henri 4“
# 22: Sascha Lobo über die Blogwelt
# 21: Eine Filmkritik zu „Transformers 2“
# 20: Patrick Wagner (Louisville Records, Surrogat) über die Musikindustrie
# 19: Der Hollywood-Reporter über den Film „Rage“ von Sally Potter
# 18: Helmut Dietl über Veronica Ferres


Wenn dir der Artikel gefallen hat, dann teile ihn über Facebook oder Twitter. Falls du was zu sagen hast, freuen wir uns über Kommentare


aktuell auf taz.de


Schreibe einen Kommentar

Deine E-Mail-Adresse wird nicht veröffentlicht. Erforderliche Felder sind mit * markiert.