Quote:
|
Originally Posted by !@#$%!
i guess pop in a way, although i tend to think of pop as a chirpier, danceable, catchy happier stuff, and this record is a return to the cure’s darker roots. in a way, in pop culture history, they prefigure (with a different sound) the gloom that seattle would later make mainstream in a more rockist way. there are always emotional currents in various directions in the culture, and while earlier cure certainly had a following, it was their poppier melodies that got them mainstream attention. but this was “fuckit, no more lovecats”. (i like lovecats, don’t get me wrong, but this album has a very different emotional content). anyway you got me listening again hahaha thanks. 30 years flies by, wtf is this time machine. so strange...
|
Yeah, it's certainly a lot darker than Lovecats (which I consider to be more of a novelty track than anything - a fun one though), Caterpillar and the sort. It's no Bubblegum for sure. And thematically it does harken back to their earlier, darker stuff. With the title track and Fascination Street street even being callbacks in terms of sound for instance. I'd still consider it Pop though - cleaner production, a lot catchier, more melodic, etc.
But that really comes down to how one defines the term "Pop". There is no general consensus on that, apart from it being music that is "popular". So, I see your point. It is certainly inspired by different styles. There are said callbacks to their earlier, more gloomy output and there are the emotional themes. But there are also dreamy soundscapes, which I think Robert Smith himself once called "Rainy day Dream Pop" (I think he might have used the term "Shoegaze", but I think "Dream Pop" would be a more accurate description - also, don't quote me on that). It's an amalgamation of a lot of good things. And you're welcome
