The quest to reclaim PFAYM

[tzb]

Yep, as others have said they spend most of their time reacting against what came before, they went sleek arena rock after GT, then angular after that, then more symphonic indie, then heavily produced, then very unproduced (or at least weird production) on KYE ("the enemy is what we'd become"), then ultra-sleek pop again on Lifeblood, arena rock again on SATT... and then they FINALLY made a decision to take their direction in hand, putting out JFPL which they need never have released but ended up an absolute triumph although it does kind of stand apart in their discography given the nature of the thing, and then they tried again with... PFAYM, specifically targeted as "one last shot at mass communication", which I hardly take as a "reaction" approach after the commercial nature of last album proper SATT.

I think the problem is most of the time they have no idea what they want, they just work from what they don't find comfortable - being outsiders, or being mainstream, or being commercially successful, or often the absence or legacy of Richey... and they end up making difficult and interesting records as they pinball around between those tensions. Then when they decided they did know what they want free from those elements (fame, mainstream success) they lost that drive before the project was complete and ended up making a bad job of it in my opinion. I'm quite happy for them to keep making "reaction" records as it keeps them on their toes, makes them fresh and interesting and, crucially, keeps them interested in a way that the whole PFAYM saga suggested they really weren't.

[The Gutless Wonder]

Originally Posted by bachelorette

You clearly love James even more than I do to rearrange reality in your head like that! Funeral suit, really!

Was not a funeral suit!


*Puts AFALC on repeat and sulks!*

[hummingbird]

Originally Posted by The Gutless Wonder

As did James!

his tie was wonky. Sean looked immaculate. Shame he was sat down

[scott_laconia]

I'm struggling to describe what I'm feeling about the band at the moment in terms of consistency, for me being a huge fan of them it doesn't matter to much but in terms of them getting new fans I can't help but think they are such a confusing band.

They want to sell millions of records but never follow up success they've had. I'm not saying this is such a bad thing as I say I love that they can be so diverse.

I'm convinced that if lifeblood had been released after this is my truth it would have regarded as a masterpiece and sold a similar amount but know your enemy seemed like a clumsy collection of songs after such a successful album. Your love alone sold well and put the band back our there but JFPL was never going to be commercially successful.

Anyway I thought postcards was decent, no where near their best but not as bad as many have said on here.

[tzb]

That's absolutely fair enough of course and you're certainly not alone in that, but as I said in the first post many of us feel differently to the extent many longstanding fans left them at this point, which is what the thread's about. To the many fans of PFAYM I'm sure it seems weird and strange, but these were my reasons and as a few have written in agreement it seems I'm not the only weirdo who felt this way

[starstruck]

all i really know is elements of PFAYM and all of RTF connect with me in a way that the Manics have not for a while.

i kind of hope the lifelong fans like some if not all of the new stuff, or at least enjoy the live performances to this day.

oddly, they are a band you can imagine - and indeed many do - loving to the death and defending forever even if they release complete shit. they just have that effect that's brought us all together here.

[raven]

Originally Posted by Bathtub

They said they did Strictly as a "Situationist spectacle". I have no idea what that means nor do I suspect Wire does. My attitude remains if you must go on strictly fine, but don't dress it up as something it isn't.

Well if telly is part of the illusion, part of the spectacle that makes us conform and be passive consumers then they are using the spectacle to turn it on its head. To rebel from within. Though most rebellious acts end up being incorporated by the spectacle and become part of the spectacle which turns rebellion into money. ...... Or it could just be they wanted to plug their song on one of the most watched TV shows on at the moment.....and there is nothing wrong wi that. How else do you get people who are not already fans to hear your songs? What would be the purpose of turning it down unless you reckon that TV shows audience are somehow beneath you? Is that not elitist? .... I can understand that some bands might want to say no to a slot on X Factor cos they could argue that show reflects essentially all they hate about the very industry they are a part of.....there would be a reason there although even then why not show them what real music sounds like but generally shows on prime time tv....why would you not?

Originally Posted by Bathtub

Yeah they have a lot of integrity, stuff they've done for charity etc. I do think though, and it goes for any band-adverts, reality tv, talent shows etc are a no go place credibility wise. Especially adverts.

Originally Posted by hummingbird

Depends on the company using your song surely? It's just another way of getting your stuff heard.

Originally Posted by Bathtub

I don't know, for me, unless it's amnesty international or similar it's always a no, but (as you may have guessed!) I'm a bit hardline and old fashioned about this.

I agree about adverts cos it does look like you're endorsing the product advertised and the company behind the product. Though yeah that could be a situationist spectacle. And even charity....it can be more more credible to support a local or relatively small charity that means something to you than just putting your name to some big charitable or aid event just cos it looks good but a closer look might reveal that not all is exactly as it seems and certainly not as straightforward .....a lot of the aid agencies in the aftermath of the genocide in Rwanda ended up rushing to help the actual mass murderers for example....i digress but fuck where was the thinking????

Although you could say that If You Tolerate being picked up by the EDL was the ultimate Situationist Spectacle. The song undermining the EDL message beautifully.....if only Nicky had thought that one up

[starstruck]

Originally Posted by raven

Although you could say that If You Tolerate being picked up by the EDL was the ultimate Situationist Spectacle. The song undermining the EDL message beautifully.....if only Nicky had thought that one up

come on, own up - wouldn't we all love it if some marketing exec at NatWest (if they still exist, or any of the others) said "oh look, a band has written a song about us. let us use it in an advert"

[mar]

Originally Posted by starstruck

oddly, they are a band you can imagine - and indeed many do - loving to the death and defending forever even if they release complete shit. they just have that effect that's brought us all together here.

Agree Lee. I might like some albums better than others, but I buy them all, and try to see the band live as much as I can even the album of the moment isn't on my top. And they won't become less favorite because they make a 'bad' album. Even a 'bad' Manics album is better than the 'good' ones by many other bands. That said, I don't mind if we get a 2015 album sung by Sean with James playing a tambourine while Nicky plays a theremin. I will buy it. I know it.

[JimmiB]

Originally Posted by scott_laconia

I'm struggling to describe what I'm feeling about the band at the moment in terms of consistency, for me being a huge fan of them it doesn't matter to much but in terms of them getting new fans I can't help but think they are such a confusing band.

They want to sell millions of records but never follow up success they've had. I'm not saying this is such a bad thing as I say I love that they can be so diverse.

I'm convinced that if lifeblood had been released after this is my truth it would have regarded as a masterpiece and sold a similar amount but know your enemy seemed like a clumsy collection of songs after such a successful album. Your love alone sold well and put the band back our there but JFPL was never going to be commercially successful.

Anyway I thought postcards was decent, no where near their best but not as bad as many have said on here.

This is exactly how I feel, especially your comment about Lifeblood. It could have been a real success.

Re Postcards, it was interesting that my nephew, who's 19 and came to the Ritz with me, really likes It's Not War. It might not be my favourite, but perhaps shows that maybe us devotees look at them a little differently to outsiders.

[pingu]

This has been a really great thread, and tzb's OP was one of the best I've read on any forum in ages.

I was on a complete Manics high with JfPL and my confidence in them nosedived with the utter rubbish that is PfaYM. I agree with whomever said RTF was a last chance album - and thank heavens it delivered. Anyway. Good stuff, FD.

[darkanddivine]

I had a chat with a completely neutral friend about this very thread last night. Quite interesting. Also pleased to see an interesting chat rather than just "thy non believers are twats!" tzb's OP is well written, but it almost confirms what a weird state of flux has been going on for about a decade now.

From what I have heard, Joe Public and older fans are looking at RTF and saying "this not great in the grand scheme of things" and it's not a comment without merit purely based on the writing, the sound and the feel of the record. Over the last few years, having built up a reasonable amount of credibility once again, they've seemingly aimed 2 albums at Radio 2 audiences. It feels very much like comforting music to play on a rainy Saturday afternoon. By the way, this is not wrong, far from it. I don't get on with the last 2 albums at all, but that is just my opinion. You could also argue that The Great Western is a much more successful foray into the kind of territory they have headed towards recently, without the lack of magic dust that seems to be an issue on the last 2 records.

For Know Your Enemy, Lifeblood, the era around Forever Delayed, Send Away The Tigers, the band have made (and sometimes admitted to) poor decisions on track-listings and even what was released at all. Great songs have seemingly been lost as B-sides, album tracks or one offs. I think what people find confusing is that all of the albums I mention above only garner a tiny percentage of coverage from the band themselves. If you curated a fantastic Manics set, I'd imagine half the tracks would muster no reaction because they've been plunged into the abyss immediately after the album promo is over. But what really sticks in my mind is the shows. Casual fans might not buy an album but might go to a gig. When they get there, the sets are heavily weighted with material from 92-98 since 2000, which means there is now a whole decades worth of music being lost as album tracks and curiosities.

While songs like 1985, Peeled Apples, Dead Martyrs, Send Away the Tigers and I Live To Fall Asleep (and more) could have been the essence of a classic Manics show circa 2013, instead they've been cast aside to remain virtually unheard. As we know it's rare for anything bar a single or two to survive past an album tour. Looking at the last tour sets, obviously 6 tracks were played from RTF. Outside of this, 13 original songs are from the first 5 albums, only 2 tracks represent the last 5 albums.

Perhaps unwittingly this has helped convince some casual and older fans that their early work is the only material worth bothering with. Then when the band themselves slag off their own recent work, this surely only delivers the impression that a band is simply making new albums for a couple of singles to play on tour, or as cynics might say; going through the motions.

[dolphin]

I don't really get the antagonism for Postcards.

It took a while to grow on me but there's at least half a dozen tracks that I really like which is not a bad total...RTF has maybe 3-4 for me.

Also, I'm finding to hard to get my head round an early post in this thread which suggests that a better album would have resulted if most of the tracks were replaced by the b sides. Some of the b sides were OK but certainly not better than stuff like Golden Platitudes and Billion Balconies.

[Mr.Selfdestruct]

Originally Posted by darkanddivine

While songs like 1985, Peeled Apples, Dead Martyrs, Send Away the Tigers and I Live To Fall Asleep (and more) could have been the essence of a classic Manics show circa 2013, instead they've been cast aside to remain virtually unheard.

Very good point. To be honest i have a lot more of problem with the band having consistently crap sets over nearly my entire time going to see them as a fan(1999-present), than i do with the odd bad album. The exception being the shows i saw in 2004 and 2005.

[Nikolai]

It's a lovely main post and an interesting debate this - and forgive me because I think I'm about to go off on a few different tangents in reply - but, like I said around the time of the release of Postcards, I think the way a lot of folks on here felt/feel about PFAYM is the same reaction that I had to TIMTTMY back in the day. Obviously TZB's a long term fan but I do still think it's a fan-generational thing in a lot of ways.

To (try to) put what I'm saying into a slightly better context, I know a big complaint is that the Manics went from a dark, daring and artistically powerful album like Journal to the more glossy, slightly superficial fluff of Postcards, but for me the existence and creation of Journal just a year earlier, not to mention the re-awakening of a version of the Manics that I'd thought was long gone, allows me to forgive a lot of what I might otherwise not like about Postcards. As such, at the time of release I was accused of damning the album with feint praise, but what I meant is that after an album as intense and emotional as Journal, it was understandable that the boys wanted something a bit more easy going and less emotionally demanding as a follow up.

There's also the huge factor that JFPL was inspired by the words of Richey and the truth is - and it's something the remaining Manics are only too willing to admit - any band would become a lot less ferociously remarkable without someone like Richey in the fold anymore. He pushed the group to heights of intellectuality and intensity that they'll never be able to recapture without him. For all the love and respect that I have for the rest of the Manics, that's just a simple statement of fact. To make a slightly odd comparison, it's a bit like Barcelona without Messi: still a great team, but lacking that bit of sheer unpredictable genius and magic to give them an extra edge.

As a long-term fan of a band, any band, it's tricky judging a new album solely on its individual merits and some kind of career context inevitably comes into play. For example, I love RTF and think it's a very good album but, in all absolute honesty, if it was the debut Manics album would it have turned me into the lifelong hardcore MSP fan that I am today? Absolutely no chance. In truth, if it'd been an album by another band, I'd have probably immediately written it off after one listen as MOR acoustic tedium and gone back to the Clash remasters or the new Michael Monroe album.

In the context of a long-term, fairly prolific, band's career, you're not realistically going to love absolutely everything they release and you should admire them for trying things a little different and producing work that honestly reflects exactly where they're at during that period of their creative lives.* The Manics have achieved this beautifully with RTF and as a long term fan of theirs, I can embrace and support them for doing that.

* Mind you, This Is My Truth is still unforgivable...just joking