POSTING GUIDELINES
This forum is intended to provide an atmosphere of open communication, where each member can share his or her own insights and opinions. To help achieve this goal, we ask that you:
Do not post libelous or illegal material.
Do not post harassing or discriminatory comments based on race, ethnic origin, gender, or sexual orientation.
Do not solicit or advertise.
If you have questions or comments about this forum (such as technical difficulties or performance issues), please contact your forum administrator for the appropriate channel for your inquiry.
Moderation
Any post that violates the above conditions, or departs from the intended purpose of this forum may be removed without notice by the administration.
We reserve the right to edit any post for reasons including, but not limited to: language, length, or content not appropriate to the topic of this forum.
Older threads or messages may be removed from time to time, to main to maintain categories or threads of manageable length.
Any member who breaches these Guidelines through hostile, abusive or other inappropriate behavior may find their account privileges revoked.
Privacy
Remember that this is a public forum, and you have no guarantee or expectation of privacy. Your post could be read by anyone.
Posts can be traced. We record information about every user of this forum, and will honor any court orders or requests by recognized law authorities for information about individuals posting libelous material.
All communications on this board are deemed to by public and not private communications. We reserve the right to remove without notice any message posted for any reason, but we have no obligation to remove content you find objectionable.
Regarding your email address and other personal information
Although we require your email address for verification purposes, we recommend that you do not post it or any other personal information such, as phone numbers or your home address. Your posts can be searched by bots or third parties that have no affiliation with the administrator of this forum.
Disclaimer
The views expressed by members of this forum are their own and do not reflect the position of the administrator or other members. Each member is responsible for the content of his/her own posts.
Please report any activity that you notice which is libelous, inflammatory, or in violation of common decency to the management immediately.
Leafing through the online Smash Hits archives, I get the impression they rarely gave the Rats a good review. This for Banana Republic:
Delayed by legal wrangles, doubted by the press...I'd rather be in Iran than be in the Boomtown Rats. Having switched the lp title from something mind-expanding to 'Bongo Crazy', I sense they're going for that 'all-purpose modern beat group' image (hello Joe Jackson band) where you remain unpredictable by mating cross-cultural rhythms into pop singles. This one fails - a drab, tedious calypso shuffle, it makes Barcadi Rum look like Tizer, and it's almost as tasteles.
The song reached number 3. 'Mondays' was similarly dismissed by Red Starr (?) and House on Fire was trashed by a certain Pet Shop Boy ('no fun and no hit'). At least Red Starr conceded Mondays would be number one for weeks, but couldn't help describing the Rats as 'shallow' and 'prize bores'.
For 'Million Years' we are told that Geldof is redoing David Bowie's 'Heroes' badly and they decree that failing to put the band's name and song title on the cover awards them the silliest sleeve award - complete with 6 potentially vinyl-damaging 'ventilation holes'
They seemed to fulminate much less about the albums, giving V Deep a surprisingly positive review and stating (what many of us on here have always said) what an excellent choice Skin on Skin would make for a single. That someone Rats-connected could read that and ignore it or just not be aware of the review in the first place, then run with Charmed Lives is astonishing.
Wasn't too long ago on another thread I was quoting 'Red Starr' as writing off Madness as one year wonders on back of One Step Beyond album. The guy (think it might have been Ian Cranna who progressed to Q?) seemed to be their 'indie' guru if I remember rightly so was obviously far too cool (in his mind) to rate the Rats. I've always preferred reviewers just to describe the tracks myself, and like those that compare to other (bands') songs or sounds to give me a flavour of what I may or may not want to explore further. Passing comment on the band itself seems to me to be outside of the job remit?
I suppose law of averages means entirely subjective and not overly helpful reviews would have reflected ultimate popularity about half the time. How many one hit bands were lauded as the next big thing, never to be heard again, I wonder? Will have to have a look at either on line archives or my copies again to gauge their accuracy.
In case of Banana Republic looks like someone was simply trying to steal a march on the rest by predicting the (inevitable) demise but got caught out. Possibly should have done the job properly and judged the single rather than pre-judge the public mood?
Suppose that makes the V Deep review mentioned all the more surprising, but just maybe that was someone doing the job properly for once? To hear Skin on Skin for what it was worth shows they took the trouble to listen rather than just write off the album due to band name and add their hammer to those nailing the coffin.
It's an interesting point about how much/little the band or their management paid any attention to reviews or even fan feedback (far less apparent pre-internet I suppose). Must be an element of artistic pride (hubris??) that refuses to be dictated to. Charmed Lives was certainly the fall that followed if so.
I remember seeing James once, and refusing to play Sit Down. Mood turned quite nasty with band slagging crowd and vice versa. Struck me as a real shame that they thought 'they knew better'. Not suggesting Bob/band/mgmt really thought that, but Skin on Skin might have been a stay of execution.
I guess by that stage though they steadfastly refused even to look at reviews to know there were any that weren't vicious or personal.
Funny Neil Tennant calling a Rats song 'no hit and no fun'. It was a minor hit, and to be very fair the Pet Shop Boys have been well known for tediousness and flat deadpan delivery.Is 'Suburbia' fun? Can't see anyone smiling in here, to quote Jarvis.
To be fair with reviews you have to take the rough with the smooth. Easy enough to agree with the ones you like. Some are just barely disguised prejudice, having little to say about the music. Many contain would be musical agendas propagated by the writers wondering why the artist/band isn't aware of the writers current politial or musical crusade or hobbyhorse.
More importantly most people judge for themselves by listening to the music.I always find you learn more about the writers of reviews than the music they are critiquing- you can just sit back and let them get it all off their chest.
Yes Suss sometimes you notice when a writer has actually listened to an album. The pass comment on the more obscure tracks and seem to have something original to say. Sadly (or not!) some reviews are so short than they cannot do any sort of justice to the music. In the end it's all down to just one persons opinion and we should remember that.
One of my old reviews of The Fine Art of Surfacing was so riddled with drug references that it told me a lot about the writer. His conclusion was the Surfacing was 'all uppers and no downers' lol. It was the seventies after all.
-- Edited by noelindublin on Monday 15th of October 2012 01:09:25 PM
-- Edited by noelindublin on Monday 15th of October 2012 01:11:52 PM
The Mondo Bongo review was also positive, but I can't find the review for Elephant's Graveyard. I love this as a single, but feel it was raced out almost passing Banana Republic on the way down. A March release may have been better and, I know we've covered this before, a third single in the summer of '81 would have helped maintain interest. Mondo Bongo had a perhaps shortened lifespan because of the failure to put out a third single to support it.
In the 70s/80s, I always made my mind up after hearing the single either on Radio 1 or ILR (Beacon Radio where I lived) - but with albums, you were more in need of the help of a reviewer to sort the wheat etc and I suppose in this respect, the Rats were generally better treated. Certainly, things were no better in '84 with Drag Me Down dismissed as 'more over-produced nonsense'.
I've always loved Banana Republic, a brave single in many respects.
