Dealers keep dealing, thieves keep thieving
Continuing my trip back through the 1994 album charts.
03/04/94 : Give Out But Don't Give Up - Primal Scream
Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear. I really liked Screamadelica so I bought this when it came out (twelve for the year) - and it's fair to say I was somewhat disappointed. I think I listened to it the once and then never again - maybe it will have matured like a fine wine, but somewhat I doubt it.
Actually, to be fair, it was way better than I remembered. For an album I remember as being "fuzzy", it's got a pretty clear sound to it and I wouldn't go as far as saying any of the tracks are dreadful (although the 8:29 of "Struttin'" is certainly excessive - and I still quite like "Rocks". However, what it isn't, in any way, is essential - being mostly a poor Rolling Stones knock-off. And so, after the special thing that is Screamadelica, it's a massive, massive disappointment which I STILL can't forgive them for.
We're at #2 with a new entry in the charts this week on the start of a thoroughly undeserved 21 week run, with this being as high as it got. The rest of the top five were Pink Floyd (a new entry, starting a run of four weeks at the top - HOW?!?), Ace Of Base, Mariah Carey and a Marvin Gaye best-of (another new entry) and we have one more new entry in the top ten for The Beautiful South (#6) with Miaow, an album I recognise the cover of but don't think I've ever heard.
Wikipedia tells us it's their fourth album and "was received with dismay from fans" - too bloody right! Other than telling us the cover is from a photo by William Eggleston, the entire entry covers the critical response - which was surprisingly positive in places, although my suspicion is that they liked the fact that the band didn't do what was expected rather than the actual album. Melody Maker were not going down that route though saying that "the second most feverishly anticipated record of the last three years, is absolutely f***ing dreadful" - for a change, Rolling Stone got it right with "what makes the band's alleged crime doubly egregious is its perceived abdication of its role as dance-rock avatar — one of the most innovative outfits of its era". Commercially, it did OK in Europe, getting to #7 in Sweden, but I can't help but feel their following album suffered as a result - they would have had to have done something special to tempt me back (and they didn't).
discogs.com tells us you can pick up a decent CD copy for a quid, but if you're absolutely mad you can splash out £102.49 on a double vinyl copy. I, however, am still annoyed about the money I spent on this album back in the day - even if I have to grudgingly admit it's not as bad as I remembered.
Comments
Post a Comment