Immerse Your Soul In Love - The Radiohead Thread

I have to ask - would Kid A really be that mindblowing to a kid nowadays? It's a great album but it's been over 20 years since it came out and any album is going to start to sound a bit dated at some point. I'm much younger than the average poster on here but I'm also old enough to where I feel like my generation might be the last to really be wowed by Radiohead. Consider that we live in the age of streaming, where even the most experimental music can find a fairly large audience with the right promotion, and the "shock" of a band like Radiohead releasing something like Kid A just doesn't have the same impact to a modern audience unless they're given all of the context around it.

💙

I want to clarify that I don't know if I was even trying to make an argument, just hypothesizing on how future generations will look back on Radiohead! I am somewhat fascinated with wondering what the denizens of the future will think looking back on our current media 🤔
The next 8 sentences of Chapter 2 (after that first sentence that I quoted) say this:

8E930876-15A0-4894-AF48-892892791C69.jpeg

I can’t tell if he’s being sarcastic or earnestly hyperbolic. It’s just like…way out there.
 
It’s hyperbole for effect. Neither earnest or sarcastic more just blowing it out of proportion to make the point that this is important and is going to endure.
Like comedic effect, you mean? Like maybe he's not trying to actually make any substantive point about Radiohead or Kid A but just wants to make the reader laugh? I guess I just don't get the point of it.

I feel like either he actually believes what he's saying (which would be kind of weird, but ok, whatever) or he's saying this sarcastically to mock people who would say things like that. Or maybe he wants it to be true but at the same time recognizes that he's just fanboying out about it so it's both sarcastic and earnest at the same time in a self-deprecating way, haha. But like, that's what WE do on social media or like a dumb podcast like "U Talkin' U2 To Me?" - I don't really need to buy a book from a well-known music critic to get that kind of mindless riffing where you're just trying to make someone laugh.

As an example, imagine if you wrote someone a thank-you note and said, "Oh wow, thanks for giving me that sweater for my birthday. Receiving this sweater is the greatest thing that's ever happened to me, and I've already notified my family that, upon my death, I would like to be buried in this sweater so that I have it with me for all eternity. The staggering degree of thought and care that you put into this gift has humbled me because I know I've never given you, nor anyone, a gift of this magnitude. I am forever indebted to you in ways that I can't even begin to describe or fully comprehend." I would read that and think they hated the sweater and they're an asshole for writing that all out and sending it to me, or possibly that they really loved the sweater and have just completely lost their mind in a way that may or may not be related to the sweater, and that I shouldn't really take anything they say very seriously. Or they're just trying to be funny in a way that doesn't really make me laugh.

Despite how much I'm writing here, I'm really not trying to make a big deal about this, haha, I just feel like I'm getting tripped up on nearly every sentence here. I already bought the book, so I don't want to just give up, if I'm just reading it the wrong way. Maybe it's just intended to be much more of a personal, stream of consciousness-type, using-his-internet-voice perspective than I was expecting, and I'm unfairly expecting him to relay information about Radiohead and Kid A with more substance in a more objective tone. I just feel like the album is fascinating enough without needing to inject anything extra into a discussion about it, and the fact that there's all of this other weirdness just undermines any trust I might put in the things he says.
 
Like comedic effect, you mean? Like maybe he's not trying to actually make any substantive point about Radiohead or Kid A but just wants to make the reader laugh? I guess I just don't get the point of it.

I feel like either he actually believes what he's saying (which would be kind of weird, but ok, whatever) or he's saying this sarcastically to mock people who would say things like that. Or maybe he wants it to be true but at the same time recognizes that he's just fanboying out about it so it's both sarcastic and earnest at the same time in a self-deprecating way, haha. But like, that's what WE do on social media or like a dumb podcast like "U Talkin' U2 To Me?" - I don't really need to buy a book from a well-known music critic to get that kind of mindless riffing where you're just trying to make someone laugh.

As an example, imagine if you wrote someone a thank-you note and said, "Oh wow, thanks for giving me that sweater for my birthday. Receiving this sweater is the greatest thing that's ever happened to me, and I've already notified my family that, upon my death, I would like to be buried in this sweater so that I have it with me for all eternity. The staggering degree of thought and care that you put into this gift has humbled me because I know I've never given you, nor anyone, a gift of this magnitude. I am forever indebted to you in ways that I can't even begin to describe or fully comprehend." I would read that and think they hated the sweater and they're an asshole for writing that all out and sending it to me, or possibly that they really loved the sweater and have just completely lost their mind in a way that may or may not be related to the sweater, and that I shouldn't really take anything they say very seriously. Or they're just trying to be funny in a way that doesn't really make me laugh.

Despite how much I'm writing here, I'm really not trying to make a big deal about this, haha, I just feel like I'm getting tripped up on nearly every sentence here. I already bought the book, so I don't want to just give up, if I'm just reading it the wrong way. Maybe it's just intended to be much more of a personal, stream of consciousness-type, using-his-internet-voice perspective than I was expecting, and I'm unfairly expecting him to relay information about Radiohead and Kid A with more substance in a more objective tone. I just feel like the album is fascinating enough without needing to inject anything extra into a discussion about it, and the fact that there's all of this other weirdness just undermines any trust I might put in the things he says.

I just read that passage as exaggerating to make a point. It’s a kinda device I’ll often use myself. I think you might be reading this whole thing a bit too literally.
 
Like comedic effect, you mean? Like maybe he's not trying to actually make any substantive point about Radiohead or Kid A but just wants to make the reader laugh? I guess I just don't get the point of it.

I feel like either he actually believes what he's saying (which would be kind of weird, but ok, whatever) or he's saying this sarcastically to mock people who would say things like that. Or maybe he wants it to be true but at the same time recognizes that he's just fanboying out about it so it's both sarcastic and earnest at the same time in a self-deprecating way, haha. But like, that's what WE do on social media or like a dumb podcast like "U Talkin' U2 To Me?" - I don't really need to buy a book from a well-known music critic to get that kind of mindless riffing where you're just trying to make someone laugh.

As an example, imagine if you wrote someone a thank-you note and said, "Oh wow, thanks for giving me that sweater for my birthday. Receiving this sweater is the greatest thing that's ever happened to me, and I've already notified my family that, upon my death, I would like to be buried in this sweater so that I have it with me for all eternity. The staggering degree of thought and care that you put into this gift has humbled me because I know I've never given you, nor anyone, a gift of this magnitude. I am forever indebted to you in ways that I can't even begin to describe or fully comprehend." I would read that and think they hated the sweater and they're an asshole for writing that all out and sending it to me, or possibly that they really loved the sweater and have just completely lost their mind in a way that may or may not be related to the sweater, and that I shouldn't really take anything they say very seriously. Or they're just trying to be funny in a way that doesn't really make me laugh.

Despite how much I'm writing here, I'm really not trying to make a big deal about this, haha, I just feel like I'm getting tripped up on nearly every sentence here. I already bought the book, so I don't want to just give up, if I'm just reading it the wrong way. Maybe it's just intended to be much more of a personal, stream of consciousness-type, using-his-internet-voice perspective than I was expecting, and I'm unfairly expecting him to relay information about Radiohead and Kid A with more substance in a more objective tone. I just feel like the album is fascinating enough without needing to inject anything extra into a discussion about it, and the fact that there's all of this other weirdness just undermines any trust I might put in the things he says.

Sounds like you just don’t like his style. Honest question: were you familiar with the author before buying this book? Like, did you ever read his columns over the years?

As for your imaginary thank-you card about a sweater, I would personally find that amusing/hilarious.

Last but not least, would you mind confirming that you’re not from the Midwest?
 
The first sentence of that chapter is obvious. By definition, if you never heard it, it’s brand new.

Am I the only one who sees that?
That’s obvious. What is implied and how I took it was you never heard anything like Kid A. Like if you had never heard The War On Drugs album A Deeper Understanding before it would be a new album to you but there are familiar elements that a listener can easily relate to. Whereas Kid A sounds completely foreign.
 
That’s obvious. What is implied and how I took it was you never heard anything like Kid A. Like if you had never heard The War On Drugs album A Deeper Understanding before it would be a new album to you but there are familiar elements that a listener can easily relate to. Whereas Kid A sounds completely foreign.
Which is why I mentioned my experience with folks into avant Electronica in the 90s being ho-hum about radiohead's "brand new direction"
 
Which is why I mentioned my experience with folks into avant Electronica in the 90s being ho-hum about radiohead's "brand new direction"
Oh no doubt but unfortunately not many IDM records were hitting the Billboard Top 200 at the time. The resulting popularity then drove people like me and my friends to check out artists like Aphex Twin, Boards Of Canada, Autechre, The Black Dog, LFO, etc.
 
Sounds like you just don’t like his style. Honest question: were you familiar with the author before buying this book? Like, did you ever read his columns over the years?

As for your imaginary thank-you card about a sweater, I would personally find that amusing/hilarious.

Last but not least, would you mind confirming that you’re not from the Midwest?
Honest answer: I'd read some of his articles on Grantland years ago that kind of vaguely rubbed me the wrong way, so I just didn't really go seeking out his other articles after a while - the only things I really remember are that: (1) he seemed pretty giddy about the Ryan Adams cover album of Taylor Swift's "1989"; (2) he also wrote about how he was just such a big Oasis fan that he decided to harbor his own weird grudge against everything Damon Albarn did (Blur, Gorillaz, solo stuff, etc) - he seemed to admit that it was silly, but the length of the article seemed to indicate that he was like...proud of himself for it; (3) He kind of trashed Katy Perry's super bowl performance as being like too safe (even though it was actually one of the better and more memorable super bowl halftime shows ever [left shark, that walking on stilts thing she did for "Roar," Missy Elliott, etc.] and said that taking risks was what made them good and that's why the Justin Timberlake - Janet Jackson wardrobe malfunction super bowl halftime show was the greatest ever, in his opinion. I used to read Grantland's Hollywood Prospectus pretty consistently and remember loving nearly everything Andy Greenwald, Rembert Browne, and Alex Pappademas wrote and I'd at least skim most of the articles by Amos Barshad, Molly Lambert, and Mark Lisanti, but for other writers like Hyden and Jay Caspian Kang, I'd only really read their stuff if the title/topic of the article was intriguing.

My impression of Hyden was this weird mix of, on the one hand, seeming fairly pretentious about his own authority as a music critic while, at the same time, never really giving readers anything substantive or insightful to justify his strongly-worded opinions (I remember looking for those breadcrumbs haha), and also fanboying out about stuff that he seemed to know wasn't really that important, but he just didn't really care to spare readers by editing himself at all. He also seemed condescending towards certain artists in a way that wasn't based on their technical ability, creative decisions, or ability to perform live for a crowd, but rather based on whether they seemed "cool" or not in a cultural sense. He doesn't seem to have any actual musical knowledge or experience other than as a listener. I hate to draw this comparison, but it's kind of been staring me in the face - I think the first time I interacted with Storf on the forums and read some of his stuff, I googled "Grantland contributors" to see if it was the same guy. Same obtuse energy under a chatty veneer of click-bait-y pop culture soundbytes.

But, I have a lot of friends (including people on here) who, in recent years, have enjoyed and recommended Hyden's books, and since I love Kid A, and it seems like he does, too, I figured that this book would be a good entry point, and that I wouldn't really have to love his style to still enjoy the book. I was also open to the possibility that maybe he'd changed his style over the years or wrote his published books with a different, more careful, less casual tone than he used in blog articles. Or maybe I'd pick up on something in his writing that I'd missed before that would make it click for me. Or maybe, he'd just stick to talking about Kid A and Radiohead and not go on about his opinions on everything else. But yeah, none of that seems to have happened.

Last but not least, to answer your question: I wasn't born and raised in the Midwest but my parents were and I've spent some time out there with family every year of my life (that's where literally all of my aunts/uncles/cousins live). I also did 4 years of college in Minnesota - so, even though I don't consider myself to be Midwestern, I have a lot of Midwestern friends and family - I'm not like bigoted against Midwestern people. And none of the Midwestern people I know would presume to tell me what to think about music without actually knowing something about it themselves haha.
 
Back
Top