I'm an immense fan of Joy Division. The endless comparisons to Joy Division where what drew me to Interpol, and when I first purchased 'Turn on the Bright Lights' and 'Antics' (a fiver each in Fopp) I was spectacularly disappointed. At the same time, I found them strangely compelling, and so persevered. After half a dozen plays or so, I found they had drawn me in, and I was completely sold, and before long they were cemented amongst my absolutely definitive 'essential' albums. And so it goes.
A while ago I wrote an article suggesting that reviewers should give albums time to 'bed in' before giving their evaluations. Retrospective reviewing, as much as two, three or even five years after the fact, would, I argued, really enable the reviewer to see how a record stood up. It would mean that albums that weren't 'immediate' but that had slow-burning quality would shine through, and it might save reviewers a lot of blushes: in the clamour to proclaim the 'next big thing' a lot of lousy acts with flimsy albums receive undeserved praise and undue hype.
This is borne out by my initial reaction to 'Our Love to Admire,' which I thought was a bit lazy and lacked a lot in comparison to its predecessors. I now consider it to be Interpol's most consistent and refined album to date. So what of their eponymous fourth album? It is any cop? The reviews posted by listeners on Amazon suggest not. On first hearing, I'd have been inclined to agree. There's not a lot that really grabs the attention, nothing that yells 'instant classic' to be found here.
However, I downloaded 'Lights' via the band's website a couple of months back, and thought it was pretty average at first. It's such a grower, though, that if you look at an on-line dictionary for the definition of 'grower,' there's a link to this track with the instruction to play often over the period of two or three weeks. Yes, I made that up, but you see what I'm getting at.
So, while the opening track 'Success' sounds more than just a little bit like Interpol by numbers, and doesn't exactly draw the listener in with an atmospheric intro or snare the listener with a monster chorus and succession of hooks, it does possess a certain something in the many layers of guitar and vocal harmonies. Plus, it does introduce some different sounds to the established and distinctively Interpol sonic palette, not to mention a certain edginess hitherto unheard in their output.
|
Each song has its good points, and each song introduces new elements: from the almost ballad-like 'Memory Serves', via the reflective 'Summer Well' with its almost electro verses which give way to the kind of chorus, built around a vintage skeletal guitar-driven chorus, to the choppy, almost white funk sound of 'Barricade' that wouldn't have sounded out of place on the last Radio 4 album.
Lyrically, 'Interpol' is as given to obliqueness every bit as much as its predecessors, although there aren't any of the clunky couplets that are as trademark as Paul Banks' baritone vocal. Having said that, 'Always Malaise (The Man That I Am)' is a somewhat awkward title that belies the track's slow-burning melancholy as it builds from a 'Hands Away' delicacy to a march reminiscent of 'Pioneer to the Falls.' 'Safe Without' is a dreamy, drifting number built around a looping, nagging guitar line, and is a clear standout in the early stages.
It's perhaps not a classic, and is by no means an instant classic if it is, especially with its rather subdued and downbeat second half. However, 'Interpol' does further expand the band's range in a number of directions. What's more, it shows just how far they've come since 'Turn on the Bright Lights' without the need for a sudden and radical shift of the sort made by Editors. Yes, many fans probably will be disappointed and bemoan the fact that it isn't 'Turn On...' or 'Antics,' but what would be the point in a second-rate rehash? Right now, I'm giving I some heavy rotation and can feel it beginning to get under my skin. I rather suspect patience and perseverance will be rewarded.
|
