THE NATIONAL - The National (2001; listened to "2021 Remaster" version), first three listens

 [Listens #1 and #2 posts originated as e-mails to my brother, hence the especially casual tone and my freeness with rhetorically addressing musicians I don't know and who are probably perfectly decent guys as "you hipster twat."]

 

 

The National (2001; listened to "2021 Remaster" version), listen #1

- You're really going to start with a song called "Beautiful Head?"  Is making the audience feel dirty your whole thing?

- On the one hand, the guitar work of the first few songs is appealing.  On the other hand, the first 3-4 tracks all take the same basic repetitive-riff + speak-singing vocals approach that gets old pretty quickly.

- Way too many relationship songs in a row that take a sneering tone.  some people just shouldn't date.  I actually prefer when they do more weirdo cryptic poetry, songs like "'Bitters & Absolut" at least sound like they're about something

- Everything sounds so crisp!.  Maybe it's too much listening to messy black metal and the shit I like that makes me unprepared for a record where it's clear what's going on, ha.  But here every instrument is clear and distinct.  The drums in particular have a real snap to them.  It's a really well produced record.

- Speaking of sound, about midway through the record they start doing the thing where they double Matt's vocals, and it suits the songs really well.

- I like to imagine that whoever's being spoken to in "Son" has just gotten used to tuning it out whenever father-figure starts rambling semi-coherently about, uh, whatever that song is about

- Okay, so I'm going to introduce some completely arbitrary terminology.  I've realized that in my head there's "rock & roll" and there's "indie rock" (regardless of whether it's on an independent label or not.  And regardless of whether the genre is actually rock rather than metal, or country, Americana, folk, etc.  Feel free to come up with a better term).  People like Steven Hyden act like rock & roll and indie-rock are the same thing.  But to me, a good rock & roll record gets your blood pumping, gives you some tunes to latch onto, and makes you feel things.  Most indie-rock is more about vibes and soundscapes, and not about vocal melodies - singers often mumble or get distortioned into the background - and, well,  the shit just doesn't rock.  What I'm calling "indie-rock" here generally leaves me cold.  And this incarnation of the National is definitely indie-rock.  That style of music is not a deal breaker, but it does mean that I'm going to have a little bit of a higher barrier to liking it.

- You know what does work for me?  The way the music that seems kind of on edge, the crude sex metaphors, and the sneering vocals come together in "Theory Of The Crows."  Maybe they should write lyrics with a clear point after all.  Clear highlight of the record, at least on first listen.

- You know what doesn't work for me?  The minimalism of "29 Years."  Hey, Matt, I know you're above it all, but it might help to at least pretend you give a shit about making music and being in this band, you hipster twat.

Favorite track:  "Theory Of The Crows"

Runner up:  Probably "Watching You Well"

Least favorite track:  "29 Years"

Preliminary rating:  I think about a 2.5/5.  I don't hate it, but nothing's really exciting me yet.

Listen #2 to come sometime, whenever I get around to it!

 

 

 

 

The National (2001; listened to "2021 Remaster" version), listen #2

- This is a cliche, but listening with headphones is a way to appreciate music better.  I don't know if it was familiarity or if the fact that the beginning was in the car the first time, but the first few tracks have momentum that I didn't really appreciate before.  They actually do kinda rock.  (Well, "Beautiful Head" and "The Perfect Song" do.  I just think "Cold Girl Fever" is a boring song, although the sound is okay there too.)

- I'm kind of surprised they don't have one of the Dessners play keys more prominently.  With the style of music that this era of the National is making, lots of piano would seem to be the most natural fit imaginable.  It's perfect for "Bitters & Absolut" and I get a kick out of how the keys come in right after the lyrics mention a piano on "Anna Freud."  Now, Wikipedia tells me they didn't have a regular keyboard player at this point and that only Aaron was actually in the band (with Bryce I guess joining later), so maybe there'll be more keys to come.  (By "the style of music," I'm talking about the sort of mid-tempo stuff that straddles the line between modern rock and Americana.  If you're openly describing your music as "retro," the thing to do is add a fiddle player.  Otherwise, I recommend more piano.  Or cello, if you're weirdos like intermittent Benjamin favorite Murder By Death.)

- Okay, I know you don't know this record and I know you barely listen to lyrics as it is, but can we talk about the lyrics?  That's the thing that has me most worried that this will be a very long project.  Webpages describe the band as having inscrutable lyrics that are hard to make sense of.  That occasionally works if you're, say, Kurt Cobain and have an innate sense for how to make word salad sound like it means something.  But very few singers can pull that off.  Here, I present the chorus of the song "Son:"

"And how is the water of the rain?

And how is the air of the wind?
And how are the arms of your mother?
She's holding you in, holding you in, holding you in."

As a listener, what the fuck am I supposed to do with that?  You can't sing along to that.  You can't rock to that.  You can't feel an emotion - of any sort - to that.  So, does it eventually get better with this band?

- On the other hand, "The Perfect Song" gets it right, with a slightly vague lyric that's straightforard enough that it gives the song a wistful energy that I like a lot.  They are capable of good stuff, we'll just see how often they stick the landing.

- I still do not understand "29 Years."  Suddenly track 11 of 12 is this tuneless thing with almost no instrumentation, deliberately low-fi production, and static over everything.  They're a new band still in the phase of trying things out, but I just don't get why they would imagine that anyone would want to listen to that track. Wikipedia tells me that some of the lyrics would later be re-used to make something called "Slow Show," so I guess they figured there was something there that needed another draft...

- Favorite track:  "Theory Of The Crows" (still)

- Runner Up:  "The Perfect Song"

- Least favorite track:  "29 Years" (still)

- Current rating:  3 (out of 5).  Middle of the road.  Yeah, there's potential.

Listen #3 (and 4 if I deem it appropriate) whenever I get around to it!

 

 

 

The National (2001; listened to "2021 Remaster" version), listen #3

So, rather than dissect the overall sound of the record anymore, I'm going to focus most of my comments on the vocal parts.  That's because this band - and as always, by "this band" I mean the incarnation of the National as of 2001, I don't know what they sounded like afterward yet - is not out to wow you with its instrumentation.  There aren't going to be any guitar heroics, there's going to be a straightforward groove that repeats a lot and is the foundation for a song.  The individual instrumentalists are trying to support the songs, not show off.  I previously praised how crisp the drums sound, but is it unfair to say that Bryan's approach is more Ringo Starr than Neil Peart?  He's not trying to create original soundscapes or express something complex - he's trying to keep the time and let his brother and others sound bigger.  I really have nothing more to say about how all the songs sound, because they all basically sound like indie roots-rock songs in which the main thing distinguishing one from the other is the vocals.

Okay.  Now, when you're not writing hook-filled pop tunes and are basically just mumbling, there are two main ways you can make your songs memorable.  One is to come up with a phrase that fits into a groove and hope people find it catchy.  Like, for example, the "there is nothing you can say" chorus from "American Mary."  I guess something like that does qualify as a "hook," because I don't have a better term for it.  Either a particular hook works for you or it doesn't depending on your ears.  (For the record, "American Mary" finally got to the point where it sorta works for me, but doesn't wow me.  "Watching You Well" I find quite catchy with a similar hook.)

Option two is to say something interesting.  Put the words together in a way that makes them poetry that's more visceral because it's musical.  Paint a picture or make a point.  Here's where The National dabbles with both success and failure.  Take this verse from "The Perfect Song:"

Ten years older than I was

When I brought you down to see
What I thought would make you fall in love
Where an old canal would dream
"Someday, man, I'm gonna be no different than the other rivers"
I tried to look at you but I couldn't break the ice
We stood out there for an hour and were freezing
You put your hand around my back
I guess you thought I needed that

 

That is good.  I wish I could write like that.  There's a clear sense of place.  Matt starts with a pretty straightforward portrayal of a failure to connect with someone, and then dangles just enough details to make it feel lived in (like a story), and then throws in one major metaphor that's pretty good.  It helps that the vocal delivery perfectly matches the lyrics' tone of half-remembered regret.

Now, let's move on to my designated punching bag song, "Son."  It actually starts off standing out a bit because the descending note at the end of each measure gives it a bit of a vibe.  But then we get this:

You wait one turn to sunlight
That's falling on a girl
You're still outside the world

She's reading books from empty women
They're givin' beauty tips from empty hips

And how is the water of the rain?
And how is the air of the wind?
And how are the arms of your mother?
She's holding you in, she's holding you in

Um... what?  Staring at the full lyrics I kinda maybe get what the song as a whole is trying for (it makes a little more sense with the opening stanza, which I skipped in the name of brevity), but why are you epitomizing outsider status by snarking about beauty tips and women?  And why use such weird terms as "water of the rain?"  And why frame it as a parental thing, and where does the mother come in?  Now, I'm sure Matt (or whoever wrote the lyrics) has a process and a meaning in mind, but simply to a casual listener trying to pick it up as it's being sung, that seems impossible to tease apart.  It reads less like a particularly dense metaphor worth picking apart and more like word salad with pretension dressing.  And since this is my review, I'm not obligated to give anything any benefits of doubts or process anything, beyond "I like this" or "I don't like this."  So, yeah, I think it's a shit lyric.  And I think that the fact that the lyrics suck makes the song uninteresting to me because there's nothing else there to hang onto.

So that's why I'm harping on vocals and lyrics.  If the National is going to write a bunch of records that sound anything like The National, I really hope they come up with worthwhile words to put over them.  I know they're capable of it, and I know that they don't always do it.

Tidbits:

- Still think it was a mistake to lead off with too many relationship-trouble/breakup songs too early in the record.  Maybe the band is just always this self-obsessed, but if not, it feels very self-obsessed and bitter.

- No, I never warmed on "29 Years"

- Favorite track:  "The Perfect Song" (new champion!)

- Runner Up:  "Theory Of The Crows"

- Least favorite track:  "29 Years" (still)

- Current rating:  3/5 (unchanged)

My thoughts on Sad Songs For Bitter Lovers whenever I get around to it!