Not bad. Better than I expected.

We should have taken guesses on the theme that the Pitchfok reviewer would have taken...was there any doubt that they'd take the easy way out and give some formulaic and readymade comments about how depressing the music and/or the artist who makes it is? Geez...that's been the topic of every review and interview of E since day one.

It also strikes me that the review finds very little to criticize, other than the length of the set. He doesn't point out specific tracks that should be excised...only that the record is too long. That doesn't strike me as providing any good reason to show that the record deserves the score it received...did E try too hard? Was he was too creative? Did he have too many ideas? The Rapture got a 9.0 and Annie got an 8.8. This "sprawling and ambitious" record is only a 6.5? It's actually good...I'm surprised it doesn't get penalized for that, too.

Oh well. I expected worse, and I shouldn't be surprised. It's not very indie, and it's not electronica, and that's the only stuff that they give a whit about...

I actually really like Pitchfork. I think they do the best interviews, and I usually like their style of writing, both in news and in reviews. But they definitely don't give much credit to a lot of good pop music. They gave the last Eels album like a 2.6 or something. Granted, it wasn't their best album, but it had some damn good songs (Saturday Morning, Love of the Loveless). If it was just that they don't give a high score to anything that is too similar to everything else out there, that would be one thing, but they rave about Bloc Party, Interpol, and a million other bands that aren't stylistically unique.

I also felt like they were way off on Ben Folds "Rockin' the Suburbs." That was an incredible album from start to finish and they gave it like a 6 or something. It sounds like they did something similar to Josh Rouse this year.

I find that some of Pitchfork writers write interesting, thoughtful reviews, but others harp on superficial things and seem to criticize the album without criticizing any of the actual music. That or they listen to an album looking for reasons to hate it. And if they can't find one, they make spurrious comparisons to legendary bands then criticize them for not measuring up to said bands (Read their Elephant review).

Pitchfork's review of Blinking Lights seems to grade them down for being depressing, and that's it. As if the chief argument of the piece is "It isn't evoking the emotions that all music should strive to evoke, and therefore it's not good."

I must not have any feelings or empathy because I've never once listened to an eels album and been depressed. I can understand that there are a lot of heartbreaking and despairing lyrics, but there's always been an overarching theme of moving on and making the most of your lot. It's life, what are you going to do? You didn't ask to be brought into something with an automatic death sentence, but hey, you know what, "I get up early in the morning; no matter how disappointed I was with the day before, it feels new." ("Things the Grandchildren Should Know", the new album's closer.)

E has always written great melodies and some downright beautiful songs. I don't consider myself depressed or depressing, but I completely relate to his lyrics, voice and music. "If I had to it all again, well it's something I'd like to do."

This new one is extremely good. Some songs give me shivers and some make me want to dance, but overall, I enjoy taking the ride straight through both discs. I'll never fast forward this thing or even break it up. I also enjoy playing it loud. E's voice burrows right into my soul, and with a simple killer melody like "I'm Going to Stop Pretending That I Didn't Break Your Heart", I guess maybe I've refound my feelings, since that one makes me cry. (Extra credit for using more slide and surf guitar on this one too.)

Well, my family and I will be going back next month to see eels again at the aptly-named Galaxy Theatre in Santa Ana.

There are some really fantastic songs on this album. And then there's the 'theme album' aspect of it which is sort of like Quadrophenia ("Me against the world" attitude beginning from a harsh childhood).

There are others that don't really strike me at all..it's kind of like one of those 9999555555 albums we've talked about on another thread. (More like 55959959559)

lol.

I'm saving my judgement when I listen to both discs a couple of times....

I haven't been in the mood yet to give it my full attention.

"Me against the world" is more like a sub-theme of every eels album, but it certainly isn't the main theme of this album. If you need a theme, just look at all the family photos of his mom and pop, listen to all the lyrics about family and how they go away (either emotionally or physically), factor in how a song ends and then a musical comment about the lyrics of the last song follows it. Then, there's plenty of allusions to a chance about life getting better because it always does, but then you get pushed back to when it isn't. The theme is more about loss than anger. Anyhow, it's subjective and I could be full of it from E's perspective, but I'm right on from my own.

I don't read the song "Now You're Really LIving" as 'things are getting better', instead I read it as 'things are staying the same but I'd much rather focus on the good things than the bad'.

At the end of the album he sort of copes with his deficiencies by accepting his idiosyncracies as part of who he is. At no point does he really say that life is improving -- just his attitude toward it.

Pitchfork's bias against artists that bob close to the mainstream (Rouse, Ben Folds, and eels are good examples) in favor of obscure bands and those with more preferable indie credibility is why I don't pay much heed to any of their reviews. In the same vein, I don't pay much attention to what Rolling Stone says in their reviews either, because they'll ass kiss any of the existing rock gods.

Maybe the reviewers really didn't think the Rouse, Ben Folds, or eels records were worthy of anything higher than a 6.5. Or maybe it just wouldn't be indie cool to give them the rating that they deserved. In the end, that's why I don't read their reviews very often. It just frustrates me that, from my point of view, there's a lack of objectivity for the sake of credibility. But I'm probably wrong...it's probably just the fact that the stuff I like, they don't like as much as I do (or at all) and the stuff I can't stomach is the stuff they love. Maybe when my pals and I get our site off the ground I can rectify that.

I agree with mark, though. I don't find the lyrics to be depressing...I find the struggle through adversity uplifting. I find the constant reference to E being a depressive to be lazy and, honestly, bad pop psychology. It's not just Pitchfork...every review I've read of the new eels focuses on his depression.

I finally got around to listening to "Electro-Shock Blues." I like it, but I'm not sure whether to invest in this new Eels record. I'm just afraid (with 33 tracks) it is going to be one of those records with a few really good tracks and the rest is basically filler that, while not BAD, is not really outstanding in any way. To buy or not to buy?

I am a longtime Eels fan who likes the new CD, but if you don't really like Electro-Shock Blues, then I'm not sure if you should buy Blinking Lights. I don't think this new CD is as good as Electro-Shock Blues, but then again, I really like dark, depressing music for some reason. This one's a bit more upbeat, and it has some ambient-type 2:00 interludes. Tough call.

I think Blinking Lights is better...but, they are very similar albums, so liking one probably means liking the other.

Believe it or not, Electro-Shock Blues and blinking lights, etc. are completely different. The first is almost COMPLETELY about E's mum dying of cancer and what that means. It's GREAT! It is life-affirming, but mostly from the context of death, decay and missing out on what you used to have. It's a tribute to the LIFE of his mom, and how immature her son feels without her for the first time in his life. The music IS NOT DEPRESSING IN THE LEAST!

The new album, which I too think is PROBABLY better, is about LIFE in GENERAL. Life sucks (you can't get out alive), but this album covers more than one person's life, and it does it in every way imaginable. Personal is too lightweight a word to describe this album, which means that every living being should EASILY relate to it. What did I say? Life sucks? Yes, but it's full of so much wonder and amazement. E has composed his most uplifting album, if you ask me, more so than Daisies of the Galaxy. HA! I live a sheltered life apparently, but this is EASILY one of the two best albums of the year (Andy Bird's Eggs being the other.)

Hmm...mark, I realize the topicality of the songs between the albums are completely different, but the two are very *musically* similar.

Hah, I seem to be getting some divergent opinions here. Maybe I will just wait a few weeks and see if I feel like going on a CD spree, which happens sometimes.

I might get Daisies of the Galaxy before I got the new eels. I really like that one.

quote:

I might get Daisies of the Galaxy before I got the new eels. I really like that one.

My brother's the same way. Daisies is his favorite Eels album. It probably is his most accessible album (though none of his stuff is too challenging). My Dad even likes that album. I'll take Electro-Shock Blues but Daisies is a close second.

You are ALL correct, but I've listened to the new one at least 15 times. It's transcendental NOW!

I only have Electro-Shock and this, and..I prefer this slightly.

"Novocaine For the Soul" is my favorite Eels song, and I plan to buy the new Eels CD. Does anybody here have it? Is it any good?