>a score of 3.96 with over 2400 ratings
This is going to be one of the most highly rated records of the decade. it will be remembered as a classic.
And deservedly so, the album is incredible.
I liked the album but it's pretty clear people are rating it higher than they would have because he died. People are really easy to sway with shit like this and it's made even worse if you have something based on thousands of them. I remember the Pop Group's album last year getting decent ratings before P4K gave it a shitty score and then the rating dropped like a rock. Doesn't really bother me though.
>it's pretty clear people are rating it higher than they would have because he died.
His death contextualized alot of what the album is about and helped it make sense to alot of people.
/mu/ was all over it in the week leading up to the actual release of the album so....
Also the fact he died and had to have known during the making makes the title track 2spooky4me
The added context for the album makes the already present themes more potent. Obviously there will be people giving 5 stars out of grief, but it is a truly brilliant album, a piece of art closely linked with the death of the artist.
better than Heroes? I think not.
Do you really think this? I'm sure it's true for some people but I think for most people it's just overrating dead people like happens all the time.
Like I said, I liked the album a lot, but even if the score now is what I think it deserves it jumped a considerable amount of points after he died.
>Do you really think this? I'm sure it's true for some people but I think for most people it's just overrating dead people like happens all the time.
Pretty sure a little of both is happening
>expect the album to be decent
>it's actually excellent
Fuck, it only makes it even more depressing.
The album was also different when we learned he died. You can't deny that context plays an important part of this album. I wouldn't even be mad if review sites reevaluated it because of this.
But yes of course some people will overrate it because of it.
>but I think for most people it's just overrating dead people like happens all the time.
Of course this is always the case, but I haven't really noticed most people outside of /mu/ even talking about the album. They rather talk about Life on Mars. It's to the point where I have to remind these people that a Bowie album had actually come out several days ago.
I'm kind of saddened by this as well. It was a fantastic departure for someone who knew his death was near and all people want to lament about is what the guy did in the early 70s. I liked his early 70s output too, but I feel only focusing on the one era really misses and downplays the self re inventive ethos Bowie was all about. Yeah, he was Ziggy Stardust along with a thousand other characters who deserve just as much attention.
>the fact he died helps them understand the concept of this album
Should it, though? I'd like to think an album should stand on its own merits (of which Blackstar has very little) rather than the context around it. I think Metal Machine Music has an interesting context and concept, but it's still shit.
The exact same shit happened with J Dilla's Donuts; artist releases alright album, artist dies, album hailed as classic. Context is everything in the music world.
Hell, they were both even released on the artist's birthdays.
If you don't put Seinfeld in context, it seems like a ripoff show using unoriginal jokes
If you don't contextualize Nirvana's MTV Unplugged record, it's just a nice acoustic performance
Context is crucial
This happened to me exactly. I first wrote the album off as a little pretentious but when I realised it was literally all about his own death everything changed.
Art is all about context. None of the all-time greatest books, films, albums or paintings can be fully appreciated without a complete understanding of the context.
I think it's pretty cool that he wrote lyrics revolving around his death, but before he died, I listened to Blackstar and thought the music itself was really bland and nondescript. I listened to it again today after his death and my opinion on the music itself hasn't changed (even if my opinion on the lyrics has), and I'm not sure why it's supposed to like everyone is saying.
Crazyaga is actually right for once. First listen, I thought it was a decent album, nothing special, but with the context of Bowie'sillness and death, it's definitely something special.
>None of the all-time greatest books, films, albums or paintings can be fully appreciated without a complete understanding of the context.
What about all of the poems with anonymous writers/origins
Yes it should. the album has it's own merits, and the fact he died just helps people understand what the album is about.
I'm not, don't believe everything you read on /mu/.
I think the music on this album is a work of a genius. that is my honest opinion
This is easily his best to me, most of his music just does nothing for me. It's all just really generically poppy and samey. I felt like this wouldn't get great reception, it's a shame he died and now I'll never know how it would've been received otherwise (though to be fair, I suppose it wouldn't exist)
Not a single scholar in existence would agree with you. I've studied a large number of anonymous poems and the fact is that regardless of their writer's personal background we still know plenty about context which informs and colours our understanding of them.
The album is as much performance art as it is music, which is obvious now after his death and it's only fair the points go up now that we've context for it. Not to mention it was also really good musicwise. This is going to be hard to top for AOTY
>The album was also different when we learned he died. You can't deny that context plays an important part of this album. I wouldn't even be mad if review sites reevaluated it because of this.
This pretty much
>thread talks about how good Blackstar is
>it's actually shit
>we still know plenty about context
This. Anonymous poems from unknown times only get kicked around because they still fit into the context of the general human condition, you total idiot.
See why would I care what a scholar thinks
The only thing that matters to me is my personal enjoyment of something, and I personally fell asleep every time I tried listening to Blackstar
>implying the general human condition is esoteric enough to be considered a "context"
I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not. But if you are, name me one anonymous poem where we know nothing of the context.
>The only thing that matters to me is my personal enjoyment of something
That's fine for you, but don't make generalisations like art should stand on its own without context. Because very few people feel the same way.
I agree with the fact that context elevates the quality of this album.
However, this isn't a unique example of that. How much music do you think you guys have dismissed because you didn't understand the context of it? It makes me think of how kids are always calling Bill Hicks and Carlin "le edgy teenager humor", when in reality, the context of what they were doing was actually ground breaking.
I remember a friend of mine getting really mad at me and calling me pretentious because I was trying to explain to him that although he was listening to my classical music CD collection and enjoying much of it, he couldn't fully appreciate it without learning the context.
And remember, there are some things for which the true context may never be revealed. And there are others, who's true cultural context, can't be known for years to come.
The take away here is, when you are listening to music, try to dig a little deeper. Give everything the benefit of the doubt that it has just as much underneath the surface as 'Blackstart' does. Because I assure you, there are a lot of artists out there putting their heart and soul into things that you might gloss over with only a listen or two.
The argument you're making is the same as when people try to defend the guy who made the "painting" consisting of a blank white canvas. All the context in the world isn't going to convince me that what I can immediately tell is unworthy of praise is "good" in any objective sense.
The problem here is that your friend was right and that you are pretentious. If you can't enjoy something without knowing the context behind it, that's the definition of pretentious
>How much music do you think you guys have dismissed because you didn't understand the context of it?
Quit coming to conclusions on my character and assuming that I've dismissed music because I "didn't understand it". You're just projecting at this point. Context can still make or break a record.
>How much music do you think you guys have dismissed because you didn't understand the context of it?
And not just music but film, literature, art in general.
Context turned Godzilla from a schlocky monster movie to a sad, harrowing, art film tfor me.
I agree with what you're saying but I don't like the way you're saying it. I can understand where your friend is coming from because telling someone that they "can't fully appreciate it without learning the context" sounds incredibly invalidating - like you're saying that no matter how much he loves a piece of music, you'll always love it "better" than he does because you know the history behind it and he doesn't.
That's not remotely close to what I'm saying. A blank canvas will always be terrible art because it does not interact with context in any way, context is used as a scapegoat for it being terrible art. The context and the art itself need to work together, each enriching each other - Bowie's death helps us understand and appreciate Blackstar in the same way that Blackstar helps us understand Bowie's death. The exact same can be said of any Shakespeare play, or anonymous poem.
Unplugged was recorded in a setting filled with funeral lillies. People just thought it was Kurt being Kurt, but when you watch the live footage, it's his fucking funeral. Add in the avoidance of many hits in favor of cover songs he loved, and of course the live footage of him singing Where Did You Sleep Last Night? And it all maks sense. There's a face he makes at the end of that last song, and to me, that's the moment he knew he was going to kill himself soon
And yes, it was basically the last authentic Nirvana moment. Recorded in November 1993, shown on TV December '93, released not long after Kurt's death.
I was talking about the fact that many people who have heard the album, may have not understood it's about death the first time they heard it.
the fact that we are given this context, helped them understand the concept that was always within the album. this album is brilliant even if he wouldn't die, it's just that less people would have realize it.
I also disagree with your statement that says you need to dig deeper when you listen to an album. i mean, you can do that, but you don't NEED it to appreciate the album, understand what it's about, and love it. i could understand easily that F#A# Infinity is about the end of everything without reading deeper into the history of GY!BE
>How much music do you think you guys have dismissed because you didn't understand the context of it?
>he couldn't fully appreciate it without learning the context
You sound like an actual art snob.
Context is important just to albums where you need it to understand what the album is about.
For albums where you can easily understand their themes without reading into the band's history, knowing the context of the album is not going to make you appreciate the album more, it will make you know more about the history of the band though
Blackstar was always a concept album about his death, the context just helped people understand it. i'm sure there are people who realized what the album is about even before he died though, the theme of death is all over the album...
personally when i heard the album he already died though.
No, I wasn't being pretentious, and the reality is, the particular piece he was listening to had a particularly interesting context, which, when I tried to present it to him, he told me he didn't care and it didn't matter, thus, my comment to him.
I wasn't implying anything, just asking you to think about it.
I know exactly what you were talking about. But if that's true here, it's true in every case.
Ah haha. This is so fucking funny, because you guys don't even realize that I am just doing the exact same thing you are doing with Blackstar. You can't have it both ways.
The fact is, you're all just being sentimental because he died. If the album had been about some other serious but less fatal subject, it wouldn't be getting re-reviewed upon the discovery of that info for the better, like it is now. People are seriously giving it a perfect score just because he died.
Come the fuck on.
Thanks for this.
I've listened to it, but need to set aside some time to watch.
Montage of Heck was, imo, really good (though I probably should have not been high going in had I known how...surreal/intense the imagery was going to be). Any other great Nirvana docs?
Anon, please read what i wrote above you.
The concepts were always there in Blackstar. it's just that they were written in a way that was not "IN YOUR FACE" obvious, which is why some people may haven't understood what the album is about. now that he died, the concepts just became more obvious, but their quality of the music was always there.
For most albums, knowing the history of when the album was recorded is not relevant at all to the music which the album contains, which is why digging into the band's history is not going to help you understand new values that the album contained.
Classic Albums did an episode on Nevermind that was great
The books Cobain Unseen, Heavier than Heaven, and Come as You Are are all phenomenal reads too. Great ways to really grasp Nirvana and Kurt's existence. If you wanna get real stalker, Kurt's Journals are also available
Our Band Could Be Your Life also traces the American Underground from Black Flag up to basically Nevermind hitting #1
And there is much more than "we are being sentimental because he died" going on here anon.
The album talks about his own own death in a way that is not IN YOUR FACE. so it's OBVIOUS that many people are going to understand the album better after he died because the fact he died helped them understand what the album already talked about.
The fact that people re-review it, is because they haven't understood it the first time they heard it.
I am not a four year old, I don't need those things explained. Of course it was already there. But if it hadn't been death, it wouldn't be so 'poignant' and thus wouldn't be getting all of this love. It is pure sentiment.
And there is far more to the context of something than just band history and chronology. There is concept, there is sacrifice...there is a lot.
What? How could you possibly deduce that from what I said?
You are all being hypocrites. So, if 40 years from now, some 20 tear old is listening to 'Blackstar' for the first time, and enjoying it, then it would be wrong for me to say,'Hey, I know you like that, but you can't fully appreciate it without knowing that he wrote that as he was privately dying of cancer, and two days after releasing a video in which he appeared in a death bed, he actually died'
Are you saying that would be wrong? You can't have it both ways. If it wouldn't matter then, it doesn't matter now, else it is just sentiment. And if that matters, it all matters.
>then it would be wrong for me to say,'Hey, I know you like that, but you can't fully appreciate it without knowing that he wrote that as he was privately dying of cancer, and two days after releasing a video in which he appeared in a death bed, he actually died
You answered your own question in the next line
>If it wouldn't matter then, it doesn't matter now
Thank you, that's what I've been getting at
Let me show you how ridiculous is your comment:
If the album was not about his death, his death wouldn't make people understand the album better. it's pretty obvious that when you make an album that talks about your death, your death is going to make people understand the album better. that is just common sense, anon.
people who give it now a perfect score do not give it a perfect score just "because they are sad he died", but because his death now made them understand the album, which they haven't understood previously.
STOP FUCKING REPEATING THIS OVER AND OVER AGAIN YOU RETARDED FUCKING TRIPFAG WE ALL UNDERSTAND THIS.
THAT IS NOT MY POINT.
MY POINT IS, IF THE SUBJECT WERE NOT HIS DEATH, BUT SOME OTHER CONCEPT WHICH ONLY BECAME CLEAR AFTER THE FACT, NO ONE WOULD CARE.
THIS IS PURE SENTIMENTALITY, NOTHING MORE.
But let me be clear, I personally think that context ALWAYS matters. But either iot always does, or it never does, that's my point. You can't have it both ways.
You both sweared me and wrote everything in capital letters.
I stopped reading after the first line, so i will respond just to the first line:
I was saying the same thing in different ways because it seems you haven't got it the previous times i said it.
You're welcome. I disagree, but at least you are being consistent. If you don't think that context ALWAYS matters, but you some how thing that it is okay to posthumously increase the score of this album just because, 'you get it now', you are just being sentimental.
Which is fine, but at least admit it. Because it invalidates your ability to have objective opinions on music.
>but you some how thing that it is okay to posthumously increase the score of this album just because
I don't know who you think you're talking to but that's exactly what I've been arguing against this whole time.
It was a good record before he died... nothing spectacular.
Now... it's possibly his biggest masterpiece. We were all toyed with one last time
>But yes of course some people will overrate it because of it.
Don't you get it, he's literally used his death to get this album across. It's fucking genius the way he's done it.
He's questioned the whole concept of an 'album' again. And he's not even fucking alive.
It's an amazing album if the death is taken into account. His death is part of the album.
holy. shit. is this for real? L O L
I'm not talking to anyone in particular. Like I said, I feel context is always important. If you don't that's cool, I respect your consistency. It's the people conflating sentiment for context that I am at issue her, because they are being spurious.
Thank you. At least one person fucking gets it.
>If you don't that's cool, I respect your consistency.
I've been on /mu/ for over six years now and I honestly think you're the first person I've seen on here genuinely respecting other peoples' opinions. I don't agree with some of what you're saying but you seem like a pretty chill person. Have a good night.
I always go on soundcloud threads, check out artists and then ask "why did he make this?"
A bit of scooping and asking usually gives you a whole new level of understanding and empathising. I love being able to connect to people through their work.
>>Lazarus is the subject of a prominent miracle attributed to Jesus in the Gospel of John, in which Jesus restores him to life four days after his death.
inb4 he resurrects on wednesday
That's what it's all about. There is nothing more cringeworthy than those people who are like,'This song is all about ME'
I saw someone post about Radiohead's Paranoid Android once, a detailed, verse by verse, bridge by bridge, solo by solo interpretation that concluded that the song was about someone being bullied in highschool by jocks, and coming to school with a gun to take revenge. He literally described that things were happening in slow motion at the end of the song. WTF?
And KEK at the tripfag. He quit posting after that guy who's post got deleted put him on blast. It was like being at a 'Jesse and the Rippers' show.
I really liked the album the first time I heard it. I replayed 4 tmes in a row and then some more the following day.
It sucks a bit that now everone is going to think I like the album because of Bowie's death.
The drums are too good.
Anon, please. That is exactly what is wrong with this board. Do you really care what other people think about how you feel about an album? Especially on an ANONYMOUS Bangladeshi Cave Painting Roundtable?
>I saw someone post about Radiohead's Paranoid Android once, a detailed, verse by verse, bridge by bridge, solo by solo interpretation that concluded that the song was about someone being bullied in highschool by jocks, and coming to school with a gun to take revenge. He literally described that things were happening in slow motion at the end of the song. WTF?
As a radiohead fan, that's disgusting.
It's not meant to be about specific events (though I read thom used a certain event as a tool in this case). It's about understanding why he wrote that, and feeling that same sore of discontent with society. It's not about you, but you can relate to it.
>And KEK at the tripfag. He quit posting after that guy who's post got deleted put him on blast. It was like being at a 'Jesse and the Rippers' show.
>it sucks a bit
I don't care that much, it's just something I have been thinking about.
I meant in a social setting somewhere. I already hear a lot of people irl say "I feel sooo bad for shitting on his swan song!! It's not that much of a disjointed mess now that I get the meaning!!!", etc.
>Should it, though?
Yes, it should. Fuck death of the artist.
Everything arises out of context, and this is especially true in regards to context. I'm not a huge fan of his music, but what I find truly impressive about Bowie as an artist is that he's inseparable from his art, and he always has been. Ziggy the Album is nice on it's own, but to be fully understood and appreciated you need to get Ziggy the Artist. Station to Station only truly makes lyrical sense when you know who the Thin White Duke is. And Blackstar lyrically and thematically only makes sense in connection to his death.