Welcome to the new Goldfrapp forum. Enjoy your new home! X
Silver Eye (main album thread)
-
1576 Comments sorted by
-
Post edited by whispered at 2017-03-09 08:21:02
-
oops sorry @whispered .......
-
*SCREAMS*I had a king in a tenement castle, lately he's taken to painting the pastel walls brown. He's taken the curtains down. He's swept with the broom of contempt, and the rooms have an empty ring. He's cleaned with the tears of an actor who fears for the laughter's sting...
-
No problem - good to have a Youtube link xLady_Stoneheart said:oops sorry @whispered .......
-
Yep - the Billboard link wouldn't load properly for me without using a VPN. I think the Youtube link works worldwide though.whispered said:
-
WOW. I don't know what else to say...
-
Quite a scathing review of the album here:
-
^could have saved the writing and just posted this
-
If she hated it that much, why give it three stars.. just go for oneShe probably liked that new awful Lorde song *rolls eyes*
-
The most ignorant, petty and self-servicing music review I have read in recent memory, and I'm a writer / reviewer myself. A textbook example of how not to do it, and it has nothing to do with whether they liked the album or not, I can assure you guys.When you review something professionally, you don't turn it into something malicious. You approach it as a civilized adult with an unbiased perspective to convey the same sensations the average listener would experience. Otherwise, it alienates and creates tension right out of the gate, leaving some unwilling to give it a listen themselves. The goal is to leave it open for them to decide. A review is your own "opinion" or take on something, true, but there's a precise art to it, as it is intended to present a piece of work to readers approaching it on a neutral basis themselves. Otherwise, it's an opinion piece similar to a letter to the editor. If you have criticisms, then great! Point them out, but you do so in a neutral manner that intelligently gets the point across. I can't believe this even got published. That bit at the end about metamorphosis was just pathetic. It is clear to me that this reviewer only cared about churning out a high-school-level "glob" (as they put it so eloquently) of text - only fitting to print and wipe one's arse with - in order to reach a deadline. I believe at times this person made some valid (neutral) observations, but they have much to learn.Sorry, rant over. Not going to go on and on about this, as it riles me up too much since there are thousands of capable professional writers out there who would kill to have a proper review of the album published, regardless whether they enjoyed the album or not.Post edited by Slippage at 2017-03-09 12:06:14
-
Gaelen said:
"Bloody cock-wombles..." "Mmhmm, quite right."
I would pay large coin to hear Alison say "Cock Wombles" !The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ.
Moves on: nor all thy Piety nor Wit.
Shall lure it back to cancal half a line,
Nor all thy Tears wash out a Word of it. -
Slippage said:
The most ignorant, petty and self-servicing music review I have read in recent memory, and I'm a writer / reviewer myself. A textbook example of how not to do it, and it has nothing to do with whether they liked the album or not, I can assure you guys.
When you review something professionally, you don't turn it into something malicious. You approach it as a civilized adult with an unbiased perspective to convey the same sensations the average listener would experience. Otherwise, it alienates and creates tension right out of the gate, leaving some unwilling to give it a listen themselves. The goal is to leave it open for them to decide. A review is your own "opinion" or take on something, true, but there's a precise art to it, as it is intended to present a piece of work to readers approaching it on a neutral basis themselves. Otherwise, it's an opinion piece similar to a letter to the editor. If you have criticisms, then great! Point them out, but you do so in a neutral manner that intelligently gets the point across. I can't believe this even got published. That bit at the end about metamorphosis was just pathetic. It is clear to me that this reviewer only cared about churning out a high-school-level "glob" (as they put it so eloquently) of text - only fitting to print and wipe one's arse with - in order to reach a deadline. I believe at times this person made some valid (neutral) observations, but they have much to learn.Sorry, rant over. Not going to go on and on about this, as it riles me up too much since there are thousands of capable professional writers out there who would kill to have a proper review of the album published, regardless whether they enjoyed the album or not.
@Slippage, I know you don't want to get annoyed but take a look at this one I found earlier for the new album from "The Shins". Everyone else on Metacritic gave it 80 and they have it a 20. Scathing isn't even the word for it. It's the height of unprofessionalism. -
Stupid is the word for that review, really! It's clear that some writers in the business have yet to find their calling... or common sense, really. Oh well, at least I can find solace within the TRON-esque explosive beats of "Ocean"!Post edited by Slippage at 2017-03-09 15:11:11
-
Slant is more obnoxious than Pitchfork, if that's even possible. "Tales of Us" got a similarly tepid review from them.I had a king in a tenement castle, lately he's taken to painting the pastel walls brown. He's taken the curtains down. He's swept with the broom of contempt, and the rooms have an empty ring. He's cleaned with the tears of an actor who fears for the laughter's sting...
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!