22/03/2003 - Entry #76
War on Iraq Special!
Dom: "So the band Hot Hot Heat."
Dom's Musical Conscience: "What about 'em?"
D: "I really fucking hate them. With a rancid passion."
DMC: "Hmm. What for?"
D: "Because they encapsulate absolutely everything I loathe about music. They're the collective sum of all my gripes with the medium."
DMC: "Such as?"
D: "Well, first of all, the most obvious thing is they sound identical to The Clash. Y'know, I mean, I'll get the obvious stuff out of the way first. Musically they're just a direct reincarnation of the Clash, let's face it. Possibly with some of The Cure's vocals thrown in, as if that makes them some kind of musical melting pot."
DMC: "But there's nothing wrong with influences. You can't criticise them because of who they take their cue from."
D: "I'm not. I'm criticising them for sounding exactly fucking like them. I mean, don't get me wrong, I have nothing against influences. It'd be ridiculous if I did. Every musician has some kind of musical root that you can trace back. But usually those roots contain more than just one band, like Hot Hot Heat's. Maybe two, at a stretch."
DMC: "Well, I read recently that he hit back at criticism about his voice and the ridiculous similarity to Robert Smith's, by saying it's just how he sings. You gotta admit he has a point. Can't change your singing voice."
D: "Mmmm, that has a hint of truth to it, but still doesn't wash with me. You CAN tone up or down elements of your singing style. It's not just his voice, but the way he sings, which you can definitely change. Besides, he wasn't always the vocalist. He was the keyboardist originally, and took over vocal duties. He didn't have to. The band could have said 'Dude, you sound a bit too much like Robert Smith. Together with our lacklustre Clash-copying approach to music, we're gonna get shredded by the musical press.' But they didn't. The irony being that I'm all but positive the band are only being lauded by said musical press because of his fucking voice. So I think saying that I can't criticise him because of it, doesn't really work. For starters, it's not only a criticism of him and his style, but also of the band's decision as a whole. Secondly, they're a band, and they choose to perform publicly. By doing so they offer their work up for criticism. It's part and parcel of public performance. Might not be fair, per se, but it's the way it works. If I'm not allowed to criticise someone for something innate about their work, then I'm not allowed to form an opinion at all, and that would get ridiculous. Thirdly, it's their major selling point."
DMC: "Alright, alright, point conceeded. So other than his voice, what don't you like about them?"
D: "Right, well, the utter fucking banality of their music also happens to piss me off greatly. Let's see, I read a review recently, on a very prominent music website, which singled out the song 'No, Not Now' as being particularly twisty turny, "traipsing through a series of irresistibly catchy segments." Right, so listen to it. Let's do it together, right now."
DMC: "Alright."
D: "..."
DMC: "..."
D: "Spotting the segments yet?"
DMC: "Yeah, I guess. The keyboards are changing."
D: "The keyboards. Yes. That constitutes segments does it? I mean, listen to the drums, for one thing. Hear that bass drum? The monotonous thud of it, every single 4/4 beat for the entirety of the song?"
DMC: "..."
D: "Do you hear it? I'm asking you a question."
DMC: "Yes, I hear it. There's no need to get snotty."
D: "Alright, well, paired with that repetitive thud that doesn't break for a single second throughout the entire two and a half minutes of the song, is Bays' voice, which similarly sticks to one theme. I mean, there's a verse and a chorus, but that's hardly segments, is it?"
DMC: "Well, it's as segmented as anything you get in, say, pop music."
D: "A-ha! And there's the rub. This is mildly interesting for chart pop faux-indie stuff a la Travis or the Stereophonics, but that's it. Still, it gets lauded as being something more. Again, the same review states "you can't help but notice the musical talent at play here." I assume it means 'the level of talent', being, as it is, next to zero. I say again, for chart pop, this'd be an improvement. But for a genre that's supposed to be a more serious and talented bunch of musicians, this is a definite step behind the pack. I mean, think about it. What's your favourite thing about Hot Hot Heat?"
DMC: "Hmm. Probably that it's so catchy and danceable."
D: "Catchy and danceable. Sounds like pop to me, don't you think? What else do you like about them?"
DMC: "Er...I guess it just sounds good."
D: "Isn't that really the same thing?"
DMC: "Yeah, I guess."
D: "Face it, man, it's just pop music. But it's overhyped into something it's clearly not. Something it doesn't deserve. Which is really my biggest gripe with the band in the first place."
DMC: "What is?"
D: "That they're so hyped up and overplayed by the 'alternative music press'. The fact of the matter is that Hot Hot Heat are a staggeringly average band with nothing to show for themselves other than some danceability and a...no, that's it. Nothing but danceability. So why are they being given such ludicrously high scores and glittering praise? I mean, don't get me wrong, I'm not asking for their music to be the ubiquitous allegory of black suffering in 50s America or anything, I just think it should have something more to it to warrant such high praise. Lately I've fallen in love with The Aislers Set all over again, and whilst Amy Linton's song-writing pays a huge debt to Brian Wilson, it still draws in countless more influences and becomes a musical act with its own distinct personality, littered with reasons to love it. The song "Catherine Says" alone is worth a billion Make Up The Breakdowns. Ditto "Falling Buildings", actually. Or "Hit The Snow", for that matter. I mean, Aislers Set are unashamedly pop-influenced, but it's a bizarre kind of pop unique to them, hewn from music throughout the last century and given a new lease of life. It's not an update of Rocking The Casbah stretched out for an entire album. Nay, a career. I'd be willing to staunchly defend my claim that Aislers Set are every bit as catchy and rump-shaking as Hot Hot Heat, but do it with a style and genuinely admirable class that is lacking in the latter. Not just them though. One band would be a poor argument. Dilute, when they want to be, are way more catchy than Hot Hot Heat, but they pad out the catchy moments with creative jiggery-pokery and innovative songwriting. The song "Rock And/Or Roll" kicks in with a minute of chop-and-changey stop-and-startey feedback and jazz fusion type nonsense, before sidling gently into this slow-building ass-shaking upbeat indie jam that's infinitely better than anything Hot Hot Heat have ever done, while all the band members spit their lines simultaneously, creating a sparse but muddled bunch of lyrics. Better than Hot Hot Heat. Hell, even Bis are catchier pop than Hot Hot Heat, and they have some vague idea of a concept too. They at least sound original. They have an identity. Rich (enormous twat who will die if he wakes me up one more fucking time when I've specifically asked him not to) was playing Mortal Kombat earlier, and one of the bonus extras is a music video by Adema. Adema? Yeah, that's them. Sorry, had to check the name then. But yeah, it amazed me how they have absolutely no identity whatsoever. You look at them, and it's like they're made up entirely of band members from other rock-grunge nu-metal type bands. The lead singer is surely the clone of the guy from Linkin Park. The bassist looks absolutely identical to the bassist from System Of A Down. The guitarist is surely lifted straight from Deftones. It's ridiculous. It's like someone has a nu-metal band cookie cutter, and they're just pressing out replicas from a giant mess of dough. No individuality whatsoever. The same is true of Hot Hot Heat. There isn't a slew of similar bands right now or anything, but they still have nothing to set them apart from the rest of the herd. In the world of hollywood extras, oftentimes I'll spot some remarkably attractive woman just milling around in the background of a film, and she'll divert my attention from whatever I'm supposed to be looking at. We watched Van Wilder: Party Liaison the other day, and I kept ignoring Tara Reid to look at much more attractive women in the background. Hot Hot Heat are not one of these women. Nor are they Tara Reid. Other bands catchier and more worthwhile than Hot Hot Heat: Simian (though I only have a few of their songs, in fairness), Spoon, The Sea & Cake, Aden (although fair do's, they're every bit as formulaic and uninspiring as Hot Hot Heat are, so it's a cheap victory at best), Matt Pond PA (when they want to be), Homunculus (again, cheap victory, since they're probably even more formulaic and identity-less than Hot Hot Heat, but then, the reviews are accurately and fairly reflecting this, which is definitely not the case with the other, and therein, my friend, lies the source of my bitterness), Frankenixon (big time! they rock so much), Yeah Yeah Yeahs (not as danceable, I'll admit, but the riffs are as singable, and the whole band definitely have more of a standout individual indentity), The Coral (not always as danceable, again, I'll assent. But Dreaming Of You alone makes me want to dance far more than Hot Hot Heat, and they definitely stand out in the crowd). I mean, jesus, KULA SHAKER are catchier and more worthwhile than Hot Hot Heat. Don't get me wrong, I've always said that Kula Shaker were one of the most talented and worthwhile bands to come out of the whole 90s britpop explosion, and I genuinely do love them. But still, it's Kula Shaker. Hardly the music luvvies favourite, if you know what I mean. The day a pitchfork reviewer says "Fair play, though, Kula Shaker, they really could play their instruments, and dude, they wrote better songs than half the bands we give bewilderingly high marks to these days. See how they managed to draw on such strong influences as 70s Deep Purple-esque psychedelic rock without becoming some kind of hackneyed mockery of everything they admire? When they toned down the India rubbish, they rocked so hard." Er, no, I totally lost that train of thought. I think I meant to say "the day a pitchfork reviewer blah blah is the day pigs fly" or something similar. But I dawdled too long in the middle there. But yeah, seriously, Kula Shaker. Download the song "303" or "Grateful When You're Dead" or "Gokula" and then tell me they don't rock way more than Hot Hot Heat ever could, and had more genuine songwriting merit to boot. And this is really my major gripe with Hot Hot Heat. They're just nothing special. I mean, you know, ok, not everyone will agree with every one of the bands I said were catchier and more worthwhile, there. You're probably thinking "Spoon? Catchier than Hot Hot Heat? You're mad", and in fairness I don't blame you. But still, the point of this rhetoric is that it isn't a carefully plotted argument, but more of a cathartic outpouring of hatred. And so I stand by my choices. Every one of those bands is either catchier, or more worthy of praise. At least in critical circles, anyway. Obviously taste is an individual preference, but in terms of technical criticism, I'd take them all over Hot Hot Heat. But sadly professional critics are stupid and fickle creatures who are quicker to jump on bandwagons than.....that sentence is going nowhere, but you get my point. Hot Hot Heat are just the latest media darlings who're the next best thing without actually deserving a single iota (modicum?) of their praise. They're nothing special. It's as simple as that. If you like the music, fair enough, I won't hold it against you. It's the claims that they're anything more than guitar-based pop that I can't stand."
DMC: "So that's why you hate them so much? The combination of weak songwriting, no ambition whatsoever, and patent bias within the musical appreciation society?"
D: "....Yeah. Basically."
DMC: "You'd forgotten it was a dialogue hadn't you?"
D: "Yes."
DMC: "Unlucky. Well, no worries. I can see your point on all of those arguments. I can fully understand why you'd hate them so much. I don't disagree, per se, I just forgive them that stuff."
D: "It's not that they're the worst band in the world or anything. It's just that they're so staggeringly mediocre that they manage to make me hate them far more than other much weaker bands."
DMC: "Odd."
D: "I guess."
DMC: "But understandable."
D: "You think?"
DMC: "Sure. I mean, bad bands are one thing, but potentially good bands being bad is even more unforgiveable."
D: "Thanks man. Sometimes I think I'm being unreasonable. I just can't really help it. It's how I feel. I'm glad I have you around to reassure me."
DMC: "Hey, it's what I'm here for, right?"
D: "Hehe. Yeah. You know, we should do this more often."
DMC: "Yeah, we should. I enjoyed it."
D: "Me too."
DMC: "Hm..."
D: "I...."
DMC: "..."
D: "..."
DMC: "I love you, Dom."
D: "I....I love you too, Dom's Musical Conscience."
Please sign the Guestbook. For the love of God, sign it now.