Print
Email
Discuss (123)
Share
FeedsHannah Green: Grady, you know how in class you’re always telling us that writers make choices?
Grady Tripp: Yeah.
Hannah Green: And even though your book is really beautiful, I mean, amazingly beautiful, it’s… it’s at times… it’s… very detailed. You know, with the genealogies of everyone’s horses, and the dental records, and so on. And… I could be wrong, but it sort of reads in places like you didn’t make any choices. At all.
—Wonder Boys, 2000, Directed by Curtis Hanson
We already know Joanna Newsom isn’t afraid to go big. Hell, she sits her small frame behind that hulk of a harp all the time, and knocks out those strange, percussive notes of hers. However, Have One on Me isn’t big—it’s enormous. It’s an album without borders, its two-hour-plus running time is an unruly and unreasonable length. We saw her expand from tight, contained songs on her debut The Milk-Eyed Mender to sprawling yet stately folk epics on Ys, backed by the huge swirl of Van Dyke Parks’ string arrangements. So, at first glance, you could mistake this new, triple-album as a next step for her.
Yet Have One on Me is not a logical progression. This isn’t the only thing that could have followed the expansive tracks on Ys. In fact, this album bears little if any resemblance to that one. That album has tracks like “Only Skin”, which clocks in at around 16-minutes, but the whole record runs for a contained 55-minutes. Each song is built on tight, energetic pieces knitted together nearly seamlessly. “Sawdust and Diamonds” wins you over in its ten minutes because it moves from forlorn space to taut pleading, each step along the way distinct and bracing.
There are moments like this, or at least close, on Have One on Me. “‘81”, one of the shortest songs on the record, is a clever and charming Garden of Eden story. “It was dirt and dirt is all the same,” she coos early on, then spends the songs making dirt seem awfully special, effectively mixing the properness of her biblical setting with a colloquial language that works well for her, since it makes the plink and plunk of the harp a little more approachable.
“Baby Birch” is barely there for six-minutes, as Newsom does her best approximation of a thumping cowboy ballad. Like “Sawdust and Diamonds”, it rides on a tense quiet that erupts, yet remains controlled, with spacey drums and long, tangled strings of words. It sets us up for other solid ballads on the record like the affecting “Go Long” and standout “In California”. The latter is one of the better arrangements on the record, a gentle mix of stringed instruments that lay back and let Newsom’s vocals spin and fall, channeling Joni Mitchell at her most arresting.
She also stretches out and tries some new sounds here, a few of which work. “Good Intentions Paving Company” is the most upbeat song we’ve heard yet from Newsom. It’s straight piano-pop, built up by bright drumming, and Newsom spins a lyrical web while holding onto melody through most of the song, which is what makes it work over its long running time.
Still, around this handful of standouts is a huge swath of music. Big, wandering, formless music. The title song, barely the longest here at 11-minutes, acts as a microcosm for the entire album. It starts with a modest melody, Newsom nearly whispering over her harp. Then the song wanders off, away from its own structure for a number of minutes, before trying to mask it by crowding up the song with percussion and lush strings and horns and whatever else seemed to be lying around.
“Soft As Chalk” attempts a kind of barroom piano stomp, and while the moment of deep rhythm is nice, it’s surrounded on all sides long, trudging phrases, both lyrically and on the piano, that weigh the track down. That song also leads into an entire third disc that runs slow, Newsom’s voice now slack in its quiet, seeming exhausted after whooping up all these sounds. “Autumn” is threadbare, almost the impression of a song rather than the song itself, except for where strings rise up and overwhelm it. “Ribbon Bows”, on the other hand, announces itself with a bit more authority, but then spends its time trying, and failing, to find steady ground.
So who can blame Joanna Newsom for sounding tired as these songs wind down? Have One on Me is an exhausting album to listen to. Even its high points take an effort and though they provide that sweeter brand of fatigue—that challenging but ultimately rewarding music can yield—they are surrounded by these other sandbags.
It’s not even that the album is so long, at least as far as running time goes, but that all this music seems to have no shape whatsoever. No decisions are being made here, as if every note created for this album was preserved in this, the final product. That’s a frustrating result for a songwriter that, love her or hate her, has show so much restraint up to now, so much ability to find space and affecting expansion within tight structures. There are no real structures here, however, and this is not exploration. It’s expansion, directionless and ungrounded, and much of Have One on Me floats away as a result.
Sure, there is a precedent for this kind of huge album. We’ve seen them before, and they all seem to hold some of their charm in their unapologetic imperfection. So even if it’s not a good album, Have One on Me is a fascinating document of an artist and her approach. However, this isn’t the same as Tusk or Odessa or even something from much later, like Mellon Collie and the Infinite Sadness. Those Fleetwood Mac and Bee Gees records were set up to fail, fueled as they were by drugs and excess, both seemingly ubiquitous in pop music and prone to huge, hubris-injected misjudgments. Billy Corgan shouldered an ego that could have its own hemisphere when Smashing Pumpkins were at the height of their powers, and that feeling of being untouchable led to his own, huge, sprawling mess.
Newsom doesn’t seem to fall prey to any of these vices. So what makes it so hard to chalk this one up as charmingly uneven, or to even approach the word “ambitious” when talking about the album, is that everything we’ve seen from her before this points to one fact: she should know better. The album artwork says it all. In all that high-brow clutter, it’s hard to even make Newsom out in the picture, and the same is true when you listen to the music.
It’s not ambition when you’re not making any choices, and it’s not daring when there’s not much at stake. In the digital world, a triple album is just a few more ones and zeroes to fit on the hard drive. It’s too bad really, that Have One on Me is so overdone because there’s a decent album hidden somewhere in there. It’s an album the Newsom we saw in 2006 would have found, formed, and made shine.
Rating:
short sighted/small minded.
Posted by jim on February 23, 2010 at 2:18 am
I’m glad I listened to this album before I saw the review - otherwise I might’ve been turned off to a pretty awesome collection of songs. ;)
Posted by Derek from Pensacola, FL on February 23, 2010 at 3:31 am
I can’t believe you gave this amazing album a 4/10….
It’s AT LEAST an 8/10.
Posted by Cal on February 23, 2010 at 4:38 am
It’s probably too long, but in no way are there more lows than there are highs, as a 4/10 score suggests. I think this is an album people are going to be discovering new levels to for years.
Posted by Richie on February 23, 2010 at 4:43 am
Despite your ultimately low rating, this is one of the best reviews I’ve seen of the album. As a devoted Newsom fan, I have to be realistic, and understand many of your criticisms concerning a lack of direction and formlessness. Thankfully, as a general listener and not a reviewer I can get to know this work at my leisure. And just like her previous albums, these three disks unfold and reveal themselves gradually as they transition from mysterious strangers to intimate friends. With 3 CDs for the price of 1, I can handle a few duller tracks.
Posted by Mark F from UK on February 23, 2010 at 5:32 am
im thinking popmatters just wants the publicity. probably only listened through once.
Posted by wtf on February 23, 2010 at 5:40 am
Also, given that the last album was in 2006, she had four years worth of new material to choose from, and well enough time to carefully consider everything even in a record this long - I think the assumption (and central theme of the review) that she just indiscriminately threw everything she’d been working on onto the album is way off.
Posted by Richie on February 23, 2010 at 5:52 am
Is it a trend at popmatters to award albums from musical geniuses with a 4 rating? As i remember the same rating was given to the crying light from antony and the johnsons. Ridiculous review. Luckiliy pitchfork sees the genius of this album and awarded it with a 9.2. Suck on that !
Posted by john on February 23, 2010 at 5:58 am
Yes, Jim, anyone who doesn’t like Joanna Newsom’s new album is short sighted and small minded.
Forget that Mr. Fiander liked her last two records. Forget that Mr. Fiander obviously had a nuanced opinion as to why he disliked the new album in particular. And, most of all, forget that most artists can’t even put together a coherent double album, let alone a TRIPLE album.
I’m sorry, but Joanna Newsom is not Bob Dylan - she does not have the vision to sustain this kind of a record. Unfortunately, every other publication is going to, predictably, eat this up (*cough* Pitchfork).
Posted by Bob on February 23, 2010 at 6:44 am
Wel, there are different opinions about this. This review is a very good one but has a totally different conclusion from this one for instance:
http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/13960-have-one-on-me/
So we all have to make our own opnion i guess ;-).
I think it’s a beautiful album and although it’s huge and some songs are very long, i think it’s not at all boring or as the reviewer writes ‘this music seems to have no shape whatsoever’. I dont’t recognise that at all. So you see how very different the effect is of the same music to different people.
Posted by Gaby on February 23, 2010 at 7:04 am
pitchfork gave this cd a “9.2”
‘nuff said.
Posted by ed h on February 23, 2010 at 8:20 am
Wow,
couldn’t possibly disagree more with this. The very same song you reserve some of the harshest criticism for (Soft as Chalk) is perhaps my favourite (for now - keeps changing) on the album! And the title track is brilliant too; never once meandering and formless - rather a thing of huge lyrical intensity and shape-shifting deviance. I love this record. For its ever-present ambience and for its alarmingly honest sadness (disc three) and yes, for it’s wonderful, twisting melody lines and its generous format. There is no filler here. Every nuance and extended bridge seems to serve a purpose and nothing, to me at least, seems superfluous. Just goes to show that music reviews (even my defensive diatribe here, to a certain extent)are basically defunct anomalies that only exist because of the very art they seek to build up and tear down. Pointless. Especially when it comes to people like Newsom, whose music means so many different things to so many different people. I, for one, feel pretty grateful that this album has dropped in 2010 and not before or after my time. And that, if only for me - and in this day and age of plastic transaction and placcid inaction, has got to count for something. That’s why i’m here, speaking up for something that is way, way too good to recieve such a dressing down and (don’t get me started) less than half marks. Don’t believe the review. If you love Joanna’s music then you already “get it” - and this album will probably enchant you as it has me; a long-jaded fan of proper music and the kind of albums that just don’t seem to get made any more. Bravo for a collection of songs that doesn’t rush to the point (or attempt to satisy any demographic). A major work of spacey, space-filled art that (shock horror) has the audacity to make demands of the listener. It’s not just a one-way thing Mr. Writer. Invest some. Work on your “listening stamina”. Or perhaps go pick apart something even unworthier of your expensive time and cynically-pitched words. Yeah, you heard me. Armed with a pen but with less creative talent than Ms. Newsom has in her little finger alone.. here is a true culture vulture, and in the worst possible sense.
Posted by jenny from UK on February 23, 2010 at 8:26 am
Quit it newsom fanboys. This album stinks.
Posted by crapola on February 23, 2010 at 9:00 am
Lol,
like you’d know…
Posted by jenny from UK on February 23, 2010 at 9:21 am
phenomenal album. Well-written but horribly mistaken review.
Posted by Adam from United States on February 23, 2010 at 9:46 am
i’ve been callling joanna newsom a genius for the last 4 years, and i still think this is a good review. this album is (so far) an extreme disappointment. musically, and especially lyrically, there just doesn’t seem to be much there compared to previous albums.
Posted by scott on February 23, 2010 at 10:41 am
This record may have faults, but to give it a 4/10 is just ridiculous. There’s a difference between subjectivity and an obstinate insistence on being a part of the anti-hype. To say that this record is anything less than an astonishing achievement just means that you weren’t paying any attention. Clearly, you sat down and listened all in one fell swoop, which isn’t how she presented it. This isn’t an entree - it’s an amuse bouche, an appetizer, a fish course, a pasta, a meat, a dessert and an aperitif. If you want a quick bite at Mickey D’s, plenty of other artists can give you that.
All that said, I take this review with a very tiny grain of salt. Every other reputable publication with actual music critics (NYT, Guardian, etc.) gave this record high marks, as they should have.
Posted by lisalisa on February 23, 2010 at 10:59 am
You will live to regret this review. Your name and reputation are forever etched in history now, and generations will read this review in incredulous wonder at the man who rated this enduring work of art a 40/100. It is because of reviews and reviewers like you that I started my own blog 2 weeks ago. But no anger here - just pity.
Posted by Bryan Bond from spencer, NY on February 23, 2010 at 11:02 am
Sorry, but this review is awful. No only cause this album is awesome. The guys just cared about the length. Your job it’s review the music! It doesn’t matter if the album is triple, runs for like 2h, whatever. This album is awesome. When i listened at first i rated a 3, after two more listens it was a 4, now it’s a 4.5 It grew on me. It’s not a mess at all, the songs connect to the listen emotionally in a way Ys never did! This review is bullshit. Like the Bat For Lashes one, you guys rated a 5 and suddenly was ranked among the 50 greatest of the year. Explain THAT. I know there are other music reviewers on this website crazy to review this, i guess you guys should re-review it. This is not a 4. I can deal with a 4 as long as the reviewer explain why. This is nowhere near a 4. It’s kinda like the review took 3 points away just cause it’s no Ys. Sorry, i can deal with negative reviews as long as they explain the rating. This review fits a 6, or even a 5, but it’s no 4. Pop matters should re-review it, give another critics who has patience and actually doesn’t complain about length. Cause you guys are PAID to do that. You guys in no way should complain about that, it’s YOUR job.
Posted by Joanx on February 23, 2010 at 11:19 am
I just wanted to say that while I think I disagree with your review (I’ve only listened to the album twice so I’ve not really formed an intelligible opinion) I really like the Wonderboys quote at the top, great movie, and regardless of the quality of the album pretty applicable.
Posted by Taylor on February 23, 2010 at 11:25 am
This is a classic example of wrong album and wrong reviewer. Seeing the previous writing of this music reviewer (who actually writes really good review), i’m actually surprised Popmatters gave this album to him, it’s totally not his cup of tea. Matthew Fiander would review it better, he actually enjoys and understands a lot more about singer/songwriters. He would compare Joanna to others, previous materials, contemporaries, and give a review that actually match its rating. PopMatters recently started to give good reviews and terrible ratings. It’s not the first or the last case. I hope this grow on listeners and reviewers by the end of the year. People only cite Pitchfork, but this album has received already 3 perfect scores, and the rest of them rated near perfect (4 stars or 4.5) based on more than 15 reviews. This is the lowest review so far, and unless you count Rolling Stone, it will be the only negative one.
Posted by Joan on February 23, 2010 at 11:27 am
i can’t see my comment so i don’t know if i made this mistake or not. I meant that this album should have been reviewed by Michael Metivier. I don’t even know if i mistaken the name, but anyway i will post this!
Posted by Joan on February 23, 2010 at 11:30 am
Interesting review. I think you pick up on something that is true, but draw the wrong conclusion. This is Joanna’s ‘romantic’ album, as opposed to her ‘classical’ Ys. Strikingly the melodic lines are much longer than in Ys, and her voice is softer, and these two facts contribute to a much more structureless feel than her previous work (although I remember thinking Ys was unlistenably flabby at first). But I think in the end this is simply falling into the trap of dismissing this album for not being like the one before. Once you get used to those longer descending lines, and let the arrangements soak in a bit more, I swear you will find this album as beautiful as anything she has done. More spacious, more bluesy, more romantic, more straightforwardly emotional.
Posted by Dom on February 23, 2010 at 11:37 am
It’s kind of sad that this review is totally wrong. All the others were positive, this is the only negative so far, and it actually sounds more like a mixed one (you know rated a 5 or 6). The thing is… Regina Spektor’s Far was rated 7 out of 10, and it was a pop mess. Tori Amos’s Abnormally Attracted To Sin was an even bigger mess, and it was rated an 8, every other music critic hated, an album that actually deserved 2 stars, or a 4 out of 10. The thing is: This albums runs 126 minutes, it was divided in 3 discs, and still out done the others i cited. This is easily an eight. Instead of complain about the length, you should review the music. Joanna’s admirers already know that, you have got to be patient. This is album deserves an eight, and i’m glad critics are giving this amazing reviews. You know why? Cause instead of discount 2 points cause she didn’t manage to make the full album a 10, she was close, it was hard to follow an album like Ys, and the album is a triple album that runs for like 2h, and yet she managed to deliver. This will be as controversial as the Rolling Stone 2 star review they gave to Ys. This album rewards. It’s not gettin raves cause it’s Joanna, it’s really good. Too bad Matthew was exception. It is easy to say that Tusk, and Sandinista are masterpieces, everybody knows that. But at the time, it divided critics, they called it too big. And that’s what this guy is saying overall. There is no filler, everything is in its place, and the 3 disc thing is a way to help people to listen to it the right way! Music should be the focus, not the length. And as a reviewer you rating should be like a reflect of the review. This review sounds more like a 6 out of 10, than a 4. Popmatters should actually give this album another shot, with another reviewer. There are a bunch over there that wants to review this album, i know that. Rolling Stone trashed Newsom, yet she appeared in 6 ballots while they made their “Albums of Decade” list. The Guardian trashed Teen Dream by Beach House, and all the other critics that work on the paper, expressed how much they liked the album and were totally against the final rating.
Posted by James on February 23, 2010 at 12:08 pm
Seriously? A 4 out of 10? That is hilarious. In this digital world, you might as well release as many great songs as you can because that’s what the fans want. And, I, for one, would like to thank her for that. This is truly one of the great achievements in songwriting of the century.
Posted by Nate on February 23, 2010 at 12:09 pm
i am somewhat amused/bemused by such a misquided yet well(technically) written review of a gargantuan of an lp… clearly.,, the writer/critic had his work cut out for him… this album is a beast.,,, this album is something you may never see and or hear again… originality of language, rhythms & melodies are by far and wide one of the most difficult accomplishments a musician can make…. to the credit of the critic here,.,. it is apparent that you spent yer time with this album,.,. but it also begs the question.,, were you actually listening? had you just lost your puppy? broke it off with your love? possibly you didn’t have have the patience of mindfulness to really see the authenticity and sincerity AND spirit behind this album… well this is possibly the clearest example why writers/critics are so jaded and predictable and useless….so it’s vexing to me that they have stuck around for so long…. simply put this recording piles oh so many other musicians into a cave of stinky pretentious cheese…. how about that huh? .. this is art being created amongst a culture that likes to repeat what happened yesterday…in this case originality wins out. art involves spirit… and that, yeah that is ALL here…this is not only new,, this IS today…...
Posted by matthew farmer from roxbury, MA on February 23, 2010 at 12:18 pm
I wouldnt put too much stake into this review. It will be on their best-of list by the end of the year. Remember, Neko Case’s “Middle Cyclone” was given a rating of 5 yet finished the year at #6 on their best-of list.
Posted by Sanjay on February 23, 2010 at 12:47 pm
Wow. If only all this passion were turned toward really important matters such as, oh, the need for universal health care, for one.
Matt did fine on this review—he just isn’t drinking the Newsome fanatics Kool-Aid.
So much misdirected hysteria going on, here.
Posted by Albert J. from Denver on February 23, 2010 at 1:18 pm
Attention seeking. Popmatters wants to be the site to give it a low rating so that when people see a list of professional reviews amd see the only 4/10 score they go to the site to see the reason why thus more page views. It worked on me and will work many more times
Posted by David from London on February 23, 2010 at 1:31 pm
Sorry Albert! But people come on this page to read a review and discuss, this is not a health care forum. We’re here to talk about music. Leave the politics for the politicians, we voted on them for a reason!
Posted by Joan on February 23, 2010 at 1:32 pm
How dare the reviewer not worship at the feet of Her Squeakiness!!! How dare the reviewer not find her triple disc opus enchanting and mesmerizing!!! She plays a harp! A harp!!! The greatness inherent in that should be readily apparent to anyone with ears!! Elf music lives forever! FTW!!! The Travelocity Gnome rates this album a perfect 11 out of 10 Gnomish Tunics and the shill at Pitchfork has 9.2 chubby for this album, so take that and stroke it PopMatters!!! Exclamation points for all things Joanna!!!!!!!!
ROTFLMAO at the Fanboize coming outta the woodwork to praise, gush, and hyperventilate about the most over-hyped and overrated artist of the past ten years. Funny stuff.
Posted by JP on February 23, 2010 at 1:46 pm
I really can’t think of a review I’ve taken issue with more than this in 20 years. Even taking the subjective nature of music criticism as a given this is still horribly wide of the mark. There are sections of this album that are simply astonishing. I’d go so far as to say that this review actually undermines the credibility of Popmatters as an accurate indicator of artistic value. I’m sad about that.
Posted by John Dover on February 23, 2010 at 1:48 pm
That’s right david! I just saw the wikipedia page, there’s like 1000 “very positive” reviews, a 4 stars out of 4 by Los Angeles Time and a 10 by a german music magazine, three 4 stars reviews, a 9.2 by pitchfork, a 85 by paste and a B by the AV club. And then this. The only low score. People will totally come to see why. I hope this doesn’t hurt the overall reception. And Sanjay is right, PopMatters does have a history of having mixed feelings towards an album and place them inside their EOY, i was totally surprised when i saw Neko, albums that received high scores as 9 or 8 were totally omitted. And Ys received a 10 and yet didn’t make the top 5 back in 2006. Let’s wait for their end of the year. And please people, is just a review, there will be a bunch of others, and 15 of them have been positive already. This is already enough for an awesome metascore and a good place inside many End Of The Year lists!
Posted by James on February 23, 2010 at 1:56 pm
These comments make me want to strangle people. Thanks to the mentality that an aggregate of reviews equals objective truth. People can just dismiss a review that goes against the “established narrative”, and completely avoid judging the opinions of the author on their own merits. Thank’s to the internet no ever has to think for themselves again! (Although the music critics don’t have it as bad as the film critics, in which Keith Ulrich got death threats because he was one of the first to give The Dark Knight a bad review.)
Matthew’s assessment that this album is overstuffed and undercooked is certainly legitimate, to say the least. It should always be a part of the discussion of any album that is this gargantuan. But the comparison to the Wonderboy’s protagonist’s “magnum opus” doesn’t ring true to me. Newsom may not have shown much restraint when making the album 18 songs and two hours longs, but looking at the songs on an individual level, she did make “choices”. For instance “In California” could have worked its way back around to a third chorus. it doesn’t, which leaves the album thematically open for the reprise which concludes the album. As far as novelistic comparisons go the album is more of a collection of slightly intercontextualized short-stories instead of the novel being referenced in Wonderboys.
I certainly don’t like all the songs here, but I think many are truly great. Most will find more than enough to love here, but people probably won’t agree what are the “essentials” that should have been distilled down to a digestible album.
Posted by Brian Murphy from Columbus, Ohio on February 23, 2010 at 2:52 pm
Joanna Newsom is incredibly overrated, and the proof of that is the 9.2 from Pitchfork. P4K already decided the ratings for this album, Vampire Weekend, Hot Chip, Animal Collective, etc before they even heard them. They are predictable as clockwork, and so are the reactions witnessed in this comment section. You people take everything way too personally. A bad review of an album is not a reflection of your taste, nor is a good one.
I applaud Matthew Fiander for having the integrity to actually listen to this album and form his own opinion, rather than cow-towing to the herd, who have stampeded here with ill-informed, knee-jerk reactionary comments that belittle and undermine their position. It’s not the job of the critic to like everything and make you feel better about your banal taste; it’s their job to critique. Just because P4K rubs your balls when they jerk you off doesn’t mean that’s the only way to do it.
Posted by Alan Ranta from Vancouver, BC on February 23, 2010 at 3:28 pm
Not having listened to the album i am not in a position to comment on how it sounds. I will comment on the hysterics (i know, I’m overstating it)however. A bad Joanna Newsom review will not see traffic surge for Popmatters. If it was that easy anyone can do it. A review like this is always going to be subjective and is food for thought. Personally, i found Ys waaaaaay too dense for my liking. My favourite album is The Milk-Eyed Mender. I think it’s her best. Downloading the new one as i type and looking forward to giving it a listen. Perhaps i’ll be back to bitch about the reviewer? Nah, he’s entitled to his opinion and it appears from reading it that he’s given it a lot of thought.
Posted by Ferg from Ireland on February 23, 2010 at 3:30 pm
I don’t think Joanna Newsom, who has an understated eloquence with words (even if they are almost needlessly sprawling at times), would appreciate the lack of tact and decorum some of you have displayed in insulting this website and the reviewer.
It’s one thing to disagree with a reviewer, but to denounce and doubt the validity of an entire website because of it? That’s damn childish. Grow up. No one is impressed with your misguided, albeit passionate drivel.
Posted by Thomas McLean from Decatur, GA on February 23, 2010 at 3:40 pm
It’s silly to say the songs have no structure nor direction: e.g. “Esme”, “Have One On Me”, “Easy”, etc. have precious and complex development. However, if you were expecting Ryan Francescony to equal Van Dyke Park’s arrangement complexity, that for sure wasn’t going to happen in this record, but it doesn’t mean it should be rated 4/10 just because Matthew Fiander lack of vision and attention to each detail in which this album was sown, blinded him to analyse the depth the form this album takes (oh, he reviewed lenght and low mood, whic is not inherent to music). Matthew, this album is the epic-in-the-easy-words,is the solo moment of Joanna, it’s a calm lake to swim for years in an empire of pure feeling and chill. I was not supposed to be another “Ys”; that was another concept… So, it’s between 8 or 9 for this beautiful solo moment of Joanna and Francesconi’s simple details: a true, naked and organic album. You review is really empty and hope everybody continue telling you it will bury your reputation as a reviewer.
Posted by Hanzel Lacayo from Managua, Nicaragua on February 23, 2010 at 3:48 pm
@ Thomas McLean
Bravo, and I couldn’t agree more. This review is one man’s opinion and he’s done a good job explaining his views and backing them up. Fiander has expressed appreciation for Newsom’s previous work and also for elements of this album.
Just because you may like every moment of the album, don’t expect that everyone else will.
I think the point is the album needed some editing and restraint: two things that were previously hallmarks of Newsome’s work.
This record is rather like the Clash’s “Sandanista.” Some fine moments, but overly self-indulgent in the end, but a record that would have made a superb single disc.
Posted by Cathy Sedgefield from New York on February 23, 2010 at 3:51 pm
The notion that allowing a writer to go against the general critical consensus somehow detracts from Popmatters’ credibility is insane. Publicized instances of opinion censorship is what really kills the credibility of media outlets (unless we’re talking about Fox News). Are you suggesting that PM engage in thought-control?
Popmatters has done much better than most publications when it comes to giving out inexplicably high or low ratings to works for the sake of irony. Aberrations from general consensus are usually backed by good writing, focusing on a work’s merits rather than eliciting reviewers’ pretensions.
Beauty in any form is subjective. I, like many, find the album to be incredible—more so than any in recent memory—but majority opinion does not equal scientific fact and I can’t fault anyone for having a different appraisal.
Its funny how so many comments praise the writing in the review before bashing its general thesis. Most things said here boil down to nothing more than “I’m right, you’re wrong”, playground-style arguments and cliche comment-board hating instead of valid rebuttals to specific assertions made by the reviewer.
If you love an album, no review, good or bad, should influence the way you listen to it. Stop worrying about a slight drop in its meta-score and simply enjoy it.
Posted by Anthony Henriques from California on February 23, 2010 at 3:53 pm
“Just because P4K rubs your balls when they jerk you off doesn’t mean that’s the only way to do it.” Therefore it’s totally legitimate to unfairly rubbish a good record, as long as that’s the opposite of what P4K do. Actually their review was better as it engaged with the music on its own terms rather than bemoaning what it didn’t do. Charming terminology by the way. The argument is not about whether or not this is a good/great/OK record, it’s about that 4 out of 10. That’s what grates.
Posted by John Dover on February 23, 2010 at 3:54 pm
“The notion that allowing a writer to go against the general critical consensus somehow detracts from Popmatters’ credibility is insane” Indeed. The sh*tstorm over this review has nothing to do with any kind of critical consensus. What it has everything to do with is its failure to provide substantive, reasoned critical argument. Rather it boils down to: ‘it’s too long’ and ‘I don’t like it’. Dare I say that a near two hour album might warrant a longer review. This one feels flippant to say the least.
Posted by John Dover on February 23, 2010 at 4:06 pm
“Just because P4K rubs your balls when they jerk you off doesn’t mean that’s the only way to do it.”
Perfect anti-hipster campaign slogan.
Posted by Anthony Henriques from California on February 23, 2010 at 4:20 pm
There is a big difference between liking what you’re listening to and respecting it. You seem to be confusing the two.
You’re basically saying it’s different (which is completely true), so let’s hate it.
Posted by Kyle from Canada on February 23, 2010 at 4:26 pm
There are two quotes from this review that really made me choke on my biscuit. The first: “this is not exploration”. OK then, what is it? What does exploration sound like, and if it doesn’t sound like ‘Kingfisher’ then why not? What are your reasons. And I urge you to respond to this so it doesn’t come over as one-way cyber vitriol The second “It’s not ambition when you’re not making any choices”, so all this music just spewed forth unchecked like the chaotic scrawlings of a four year old. Do you have any notion of how ridiculous that is?
Posted by martin bek on February 23, 2010 at 4:28 pm
With the sheer amount of music on this thing, I know it will take me months to get a handle on it. On “Milk Eyed Mender”, songs I once found boring became my very favorites many months/listens later. Taking that into account, I can’t fathom how someone could review this in a couple of days.
I agree that some of the songs are immediately more captivating, but judging from my past experiences with JN, it will take much longer to really have an opinion on the collection as a whole.
That also reminds me, why not treat is as a compilation, rather than an “album” that must be listened to all at once?
Posted by Mike from Canada on February 23, 2010 at 4:56 pm
I guess there had to be someone out there to give it a negative review. If this is big, wandering, formless music to you, I don’t understand your assessment of Ys.
Posted by Ryan from New York on February 23, 2010 at 5:06 pm
In my opinion… The same way that saying that this reviewer should not express his opinion and follow the others is wrong, saying that Pitchfork “made out” is totally cheap talking. Sorry, but other critics are enjoying this, so in no way, pitchfork manipulate their thoughts, sorry for the people that actually believe that pitchfork manipulates opinions. Actually PopMatters is the exception. Do i disagree with them? Yes, i do. Do i think the review sucks? Yes, i do. Do I mind? Not anymore. At first i was pissed cause i wan’t expecting this from PopMatters, they were always Joanna’s supporters! But, now i don’t care. I still love the album, and it was their opinion. I just think the rating is kinda too low. And there is a lot of things to be loved during your first listen, and each time more, it becomes better. And do you know why PopMatters included albums they previously trashed on their lists? It’s not a one-critic-show. There might be others that enjoyed this album, the same way that many must have enjoyed Neko’s since she was inside the top 10. I still love PopMatters, i still love this album, and Matt is a good reviewer, we just didn’t agree on this one and i still believe other critics that liked it on the web-site should review it, so we could see the both sides of story. Or at least Matt could have shown better reasons to justify his 4. He actually gave silly excuses. In this game there’s no right or wrong, only opinions.
After i calmed down, i thought that the same way that the album had to face a harsh criticism, Matt will have to face one too. I guess that’s why PopMatters created this comments area. So people need to deal with opinions, when you post something on internet you have to known you’re automatically open to criticism, positive or negative, with good arguments and bad.
And that thing about Pitchfork balls. Well… i could hate those guys, but i can’t deny they introduced me to many of the greatest bands i heard last decade. So although sometimes they do overrate and underrate stuff, they have an opinion. And if people have to respect Matt’s 4 out of 10, then respect Pitchfork’s 9.2 out of 10 and almost every other music critics positive opinion. Remember: It’s not Matt’s or Pitchfork’s opinion that should make you like or not this album, but it’s not because yo agree or disagree with them that make you right or wrong too! And as i said before, i’m posting a comment, so my opinion might be criticized too, and i’ll have to respect and deal with it!
Posted by Lena on February 23, 2010 at 5:58 pm
Am I dense? Matthew’s review seemed fair to me, and he’s obviously a fan of Joanna Newsom’s previous albums. I don’t think Have One On Me is nearly is as good as Ys, and not liking this album doesn’t mean that I hate Joanna Newsom. The real question is, if anyone other than Joanna Newsom had recorded this album, would you defend it as strongly as you are in this comment section?
Disagreeing with Matthew’s assessment doesn’t make this review a bad review. If you bought/downloaded the album and loved it, that’s wonderful. If someone else didn’t like it, it’s nothing to get apopletic about.
Posted by Hur? on February 23, 2010 at 6:36 pm
I really disagree with this review. The album is a bit more spacious than Ys, and I could see why a detractor may call it “formless.” But the 4/10 rating is simply absurd, and I agree that it seems like backlash against the indie hype. I found the album surprising, poetic, and a bit more earnest and romantic than usual.
Several people have mentioned the Neko Case review which was negative, but then the album appeared in the year end best. That very well may happen here.
I didn’t find Fiander’s review all that helpful (he basically has one main argument and it seems highly suspect), but at least he was respectful and didn’t display the chauvinism the C.T. Heaney review of Neko Case did, calling her a “pin-up girl” and intimating that she is hyped in large part because of her physical appearance.
Posted by Bravo from Chicago on February 23, 2010 at 7:13 pm
First comment: “short sighted/small minded.”
I couldn’t agree more. You (the reviewer) are an idiot.
Goodbye.
Posted by Ashling from Dublin on February 23, 2010 at 7:41 pm
Although i believe that this is a Newsom album and it screams this. If the album was released by another singer i would have loved the same way, great music is great music regardless of whose is singing! Actually if it was a new artists, man…. i would proclaim this debut album of the year. An artists coming out of nowhere, with such a strong effort and TRIPLE! It would be hard to top this one!
And Bravo, the Neko review was harsh. The guy just talked about her looks and that was it. Glad that the support the album had inside this website was enough to make it appear inside their list. Same to Bat For Lashes, she was rated a 5 and appeared on the list, too. Maybe this might happen to this one, but if it doesn’t i won’t go crazy. What it matters is that on mine, and i’m glad it will be on others too, doesn’t matter if they are critics or average people like us!
Posted by Lena on February 23, 2010 at 7:43 pm
Why DO YOU HATE THE JOANNA NEWSOME. The Joanna Newsome is an amazing angle sent to this earth to bless us with her singy songy goodness. 3 CDs cannot contain her glory. Can The Holy Bible contain the Glory of THE Jesus Christ. Umm no. That would be like Alaska containing the Palin Family. Even in its expansive borders. Your review was not helpfull. I stole this album several months ago because I hard her so much, and think to give her my money would be to defame her small framed wondericity. For SHAME my good man, FOR SHAME!!!
Posted by Jesus Kong Jr. from Hades on February 23, 2010 at 7:51 pm
Hey everyone,
I have to thank you all for the comments. It’s always great when a piece here leads to discussion, and I’m sure Joanna Newsom surely is pleased by all the support.
In the spirit of having an active discussion, it seems like I should enter into all of this. As far as what the review said and what it meant, it’s just above. I won’t address it or jump to the defense of it. It’s there, and I stand by it.
But here are a few things that occurred to me:
Firstly, to Richie, Cal, et al.-
I think the number at the bottom of the page is very much beside the point in all of this. No one is keeping score on this, and reviews aren’t comparative. So what if some album got a higher score? There are countless variables that go into that, and make it irrelevant in this conversation in my opinion. A ‘4’ in this case means ‘unexceptional’, which as a whole is how it strikes me, even if there are brilliant moments to it. A ‘5’, the only other number I considered, means ‘average’. And well, there’s nothing very average about Newsom or her album, is there?
To wtf and others-
I would hope none of us are in this for publicity. I certainly have no vested interest in cutting into Joanna Newsom’s success. And I imagine her career will carry along just fine despite my review. And PM also has its own success, built before I got here and likely to grow with or without my contributions. So let’s not get carried away. As a fan of Newsom’s, not only am I not interested in somehow shocking people into reading a negative review, I was genuinely frustrated and disappointed by the album. That, right there, is the reason for the piece.
Jenny-
I’d be very much interested to know why you think I’m a culture vulture, since that seems to imply that culture is already dead and I am somehow picking at its bones, right? Or am I circling it waiting for it to die? Either way, you know that is not my intention. I would not put the time and effort into writing about music and culture that I do if my only goal was to tear it down in some way. That is a monumental waste of time for me, for you, and for this magazine. Even if we are “defunct anomalies” (another term that I need some clarification on).
Scott-
You raise an excellent point, that is worth paying attention to. Have One on Me, whether success, failure, or something in the middle, does not confirm or negate Newsom as a brilliant artist. She is wonderful, and at times wonderful on this album. It just didn’t hit the mark for me.
Bob-
You also bring up a good point: Triple-albums are hard business to pull off. For anyone. So while the effort is commendable, and we should all have goals so lofty, the album doesn’t hold up over its running time, in my estimation.
Bryan Bond-
I do not expect anything I ever write—this review included—to become any part of history. If this album does, then kudos to Ms. Newsom. My words will be forgotten long before that, so let’s keep some perspective on all this.
There’s been a lot of conversation, and let’s keep it coming. But keep in mind, mine is one opinion. You all are welcome to, and have in many cases loudly voiced, another opinion. Discussing all those, in a thoughtful way, well that’s what makes this stuff important to us, isn’t it?
Posted by Matthew Fiander from Greensboro, NC on February 23, 2010 at 7:53 pm
Way to write the ONLY negative review for this album! Did you only listen to half and give up? An album like this takes several listens to get the full picture..
Posted by Richie on February 23, 2010 at 9:40 pm
The third sentence in the eighth paragraph provided by our illustrious reviewer contains a bit of a Typo. I believe “show” should be written as the past tense “shown”.
—It’s like the critic attempted to criticize and the editor tried to edit, but the review was just too sprawling and unstructured. Perhaps if this polka-dotted charlatan had made it shorter or written it in years prior it would have been reasonably decent… 3.9/10.
Posted by Mistuh Bojangles from Pittsburgh, PA on February 23, 2010 at 11:22 pm
Isn’t it a bit contradictory to call this, the most song-structured of her album’s, formless, yet praise Ys, which is indeed much more meandering and formless?
Posted by Casey on February 23, 2010 at 11:34 pm
Oh my God, Matthew Fiander didn’t like the new Joanna Newsom album! Witch! Witch! See if he floats!
Some of you seriously need to calm down. The guy gave an opinion and it happens not to be yours. If you disagree with him, put up thoughtful posts like some of the other people here have. The comments should be debates about the music, not personal attacks about whether he “really” listened to the album.
My problem with Newsom is that her songs sound like background music for a Dungeons & Dragons gaming session. Silly vocals and silly lyrics do not elevate mildly pleasant musical arrangements into masterpieces.
Posted by Bob on February 24, 2010 at 2:08 am
I agree with Casey. I don’t understand how any song on HOoM could be considered formless, when Only Skin in particular has maybe two to three repeats of any vocal melody in a whole of fifteen minutes, nevermind the constant variation in the instrumentation.
With that said, I also find there to be a few ‘formless’ songs on the album, but I feel it’s more because I’ve listened to then maybe four times each, and it’s hard to absorb two hours. Not to suggest the reviewer didn’t listen to the album much, but it isn’t something to consider lightly, especially when trying to form an opinion on it. Which is why I am sticking to the 60% of the album I am in love with, and withdrawing from a total judgment yet.
Posted by milll on February 24, 2010 at 2:19 am
As much as I hate comments like the one I’m about to post… it really sums up everything about this review:
You guys are RETARDED. No decisions made? ‘Scuse her for not wanting to write “Let’s have some fun, this beat is sick. I wanna take a ride on your disco stick.”
Pop Matters? Not in this case, guys.
Posted by Alex from SC on February 24, 2010 at 4:18 am
who cares about this garbage? SCISSOR SHOCK is making brilliant music no one gives a poop about because of this twee garbage.
Posted by ppoopman from indiana on February 24, 2010 at 4:50 am
I’d like to humbly apologize for my first comment. I was a little dumbfounded at your review after having read it once but I’ve calmed down, read it again, and realized I came off as a scathing idiot.
But I stand by what I said (minus the offending “retarded” comment). Joanna Newsom has never been about hooks. It’s been about textures, rhythms, lyrics, and pictures. I get ALL of these in HEAPS on this album. Almost every single song here has no hook in it. Just maybe a repeated rhythm, chord structure, and melodically-written harp part. But no “Satisfaction”-type hook, no. You argue that, for 2 hours of formless “meandering” (Is no hook REALLY meandering? Directionless? I ask this seriously!), it just comes across as a great piece of work buried under the weight of unnecessary fluff.
Really? Look at it from my perspective… here we have one of the most talented songwriters and unique singers on the face of the planet. Her writing style is so completely against the grain as far as conventional structures go. It’s like a river. It doesn’t double back on itself, it only keeps moving forward. Some people get uncomfortable with it. Lord knows I certainly had some trouble getting used to it. But once I discovered that the lack of hooks/choruses/poppy-whatevers didn’t mean she didn’t have anything so say, I started listening to her lyrics. Unbelievable. Which is why it surprises me that you say that she’s buried under all this mess when… quite frankly, she’s never stood out this boldly on any of her other albums. This isn’t a collection of meandering walks in the park, smelling flowers and describing the smell. It’s an album full of very intentional journeys that are continuously progressing, with equal weight on every word sung. That’s what I absolutely love about it. There’s no “section” or “riff” to pick out above all the rest of the material (Although there ARE certainly more memorable/favorite parts, when it comes to me). Almost everything here is paid equal attention and, scores aside, you MUST at least give her credit for being able to pay this attention to a 2 hour long album and STILL keep listeners like myself interested. I’m just sorry you didn’t hear it how I heard it. I’m not going to use the ever-implemented “You just don’t get it” here but… perhaps you’re getting caught up in trying too hard in finding something grabbing when the entirety of the work is trying to grab you.
Posted by Alex from SC on February 24, 2010 at 4:52 am
I think you should sit with the album for a while and perhaps re review it. It’s a grower, like Ys.
4/10 is clearly on the stingy side. She deserves better than that.
Posted by billaw on February 24, 2010 at 9:28 am
I put Newsom in the category of ‘IT’ artists out there right now. Just the response to a review on ‘HOoM’ proves that. But it makes me wonder if there’s some sort of critical preferential treatment going on. Do you really think if Tori Amos (the Tori Amos of today) were to try a triple album with most songs well over six minutes (and most of the songs sounding like the ones on HOoM), critics would be applauding, or would they call her move to release a triple album a terrible exercise in excess?
Posted by Shawn from Lincoln, NE on February 24, 2010 at 9:58 am
Martin Bek-
There are moments of fruitful exploration on the album, and I address those, but on the whole the album sounds more to me like constant addition. And if she is constantly adding to this thing, that is not a series of choices, it’s a lack of editing to my ear. I address all this in the review, and you’re welcome to disagree, but big and exploratory aren’t the same thing to me.
John Dover-
I’m sorry if you didn’t feel I was even enough, but I don’t see where I was flippant. I’d be interested to see an example. I respect Ms. Newsom, and always try to give artists the benefit of the doubt. But this one didn’t hold up to me, and I have no reason (or no intention) to be snarky or snide about it.
Milll-
I agree with you about “Only Skin”. However, it is the exception on that album, and at least starts with structure before wandering off. A good chunk of this album seems to just wander in and then off.
Alex from SC-
I am glad you pulled back there, if only for fear of a cease and desist from the Palin camp. I guess you and I approach this music differently. The last two albums, and the best stuff here, are very much rooted in hooks to me, even if the track ends up wandering away. I love to see an artist break free, but I also like to be able to see what they’re breaking free from. I don’t get that here, so there’s no real tension or juice to a lot of it. I see your perspective and respect it, you clearly put a lot of thought and feeling into this, but that doesn’t have to change my perspective.
Billaw and Richie-
Maybe you’re right, and maybe down the road I’ll come around to this album. I hope so. But that doesn’t mean I put any less time into it here, or that I didn’t give it careful consideration. Frankly, I’m happy to see people enjoying it. There’s few things more depressing than a huge work that goes ignored. So I’ll commend her for getting a response out of us all. But that doesn’t change how I feel about the music.
Keep ‘em coming! I’ll respond as much as I can.
Posted by Matthew Fiander from Greensboro, NC on February 24, 2010 at 10:14 am
Thanks for fixing the typo in the Wonder Boys quote. I forgot to say it was the second instance of “you’re,” but you figured that out. As for your review, I see it isn’t very popular but I don’t find it particularly egregious. Newsom is a difficult artist and makes increasingly difficult music. If you want to see a truly egregious review, look at what’s-his-name’s review of the new Gil Scott-Heron album.
Posted by BC from Chicago on February 24, 2010 at 12:58 pm
Everything said, it was actually a very well-written review :). Lots of kudos to you! Sorry to get off on the wrong foot there… Ahem… Excusez-moi. I’m glad you can see where I’m coming from on this. Normally, I’d agree with you on releases like Have One On Me. I’ve got almost no attention span. A friend burned me his copy (most likely illegal copy) and I was expecting Ys-size and then saw 3 DISCS worth. But luckily I had time to sit and listen to it all the way through. Now, I’m not saying it’s an album I’ll put on every day after work but If I had to score it I’d give it an 8.5. I absolutely love it and love that it’s one of the only “giant journey” albums I’ve ever loved listening to. But for what it is: A sprawling, lengthy album, it really grabs me like no other +/- 2 hour long album has.
Anyways, thanks for the clear review and personal response. I had a PARTICULARLY sour experience at strangeglue.com. There was a nastily bad review of a personal favorite album of mine on the website a few months ago. I read the review to find out WHY it was so bad and… alas, all I read was a big basket of cryptic allegories with no real reviewing. Ugh… makes me sick to think about it.
Posted by Alex from SC on February 24, 2010 at 1:22 pm
The album sits unplayed, waiting for its place in my listening schedule, but I’ll share my first impressions when learning of this project. I think there is a real case for its predecessor, Ys, being the best album the Aughts. I can’t recall a time when I’ve sat spellbound at a concert, concluding that the artist is a true genius, as I did when I saw Newsom at the Chicago Symphony Center in the fall of ‘08 (or whenever it was). When I learned that she would follow up a massive conceptual effort with an even more massive conceputal effort, I feared she was on the way to ruining her career. “How do you follow up Ys,” I asked myself, and I’m not sure…but with the way she’s done it I’m wondering how easy it will be to calm down next time and not try to do something even bigger. This is the Flaming Lips syndrome. It didn’t hurt their popularity, but in my mind their efforts since about 1997 to do more and more each time effectively hurt their music. The conceptual obsession with bigger and bigger projects also ruined Sufjan Stevens, who recently made comments suggesting he doesn’t even want to make albums any more. That said, I can’t wait to hear Have One on Me and I hope I like it more than Mr. Fiander does. If I don’t, though, even though I believe that few albums can touch Ys, I’ll survive.
Posted by BC from Chicago on February 24, 2010 at 1:32 pm
“It’s too bad really, that Have One on Me is so overdone because there’s a decent album hidden somewhere in there.”
How generous of you!
In response to this hasty review, I can only think to share a quote from a review John Updike wrote of J.D. Salinger’s “Franny and Zooey” in 1961:
“When all reservations have been entered, in the correctly unctuous and apprehensive tone, about the direction he has taken, it remains to acknowledge that it is a direction, and that the refusal to rest content, the willingness to risk excess on behalf of one’s obsessions, is what distinguishes artists from entertainers, and what makes some artists adventurers on behalf of us all.”
Calling the music on this album “formless” is an utter cop-out - the fact that you can’t (or won’t) come to digest and appreciate the forms presented is only illustrative of a shallow nature which should, frankly, have disqualified you from writing this review.
I, for one, am happily, slowly, wonderingly absorbing every nuance of this “wandering and formless” album on repeat as I sit at my desk. It is growing on me, the dense music permitting small discoveries with every listen. I hope it will do the same for you, and that you might allow yourself to revisit this review in time. Within the artist/entertainer dichotomy Updike presented in his thoughtful review, Joanna Newsom has long since distinguished herself as an artist. She deserves better than this naive, first-listen nonsense.
Posted by Joe from nyc on February 24, 2010 at 4:03 pm
Joe from nyc-
I love Updike and all, but there’s two things that stick out about that particular quote. 1) He sounds more like he’s apologizing for or excusing Salinger’s excess more than he is praising it and 2) It seems like at least a partially self-serving observation to make for a guy who spent 1200 or so pages on the same character. Updike was a genius, without a doubt, but not an untouchable voice of authority.
And you are welcome to think I dismissed this album quickly. I think the review above shows otherwise. That you don’t agree does not make me shallow (and in fact the implication that I might be for having a differing view seems more than a little contradictory) or naive (and I don’t think I’m even sure how naivete fits into the argument).
I appreciate the comment, you clearly put some thought into it. I just don’t see it the same way, that’s all.
Posted by Matthew Fiander from Greensboro, NC on February 24, 2010 at 5:13 pm
Naivete plays into it as a more experienced, patient reviewer would not have given the sprawling, dense followup to “Ys,” a followup for which many people waited patiently (or unpatiently) for over three years, a failing grade on the day it was released. To quote Ms. Newsom’s brilliant closing track, your effort does not suffice.
Posted by Joe from nyc on February 24, 2010 at 5:29 pm
Joe,
Generally we plan ahead so we can run releases, particular big releases like this one, on or around the day they are released. So I did take some time with this well before Tuesday, and carefully assessed the album. If you don’t agree with me, that’s okay. But I wouldn’t be very good at what I do if I let the anticipation surrounding the album affect my opinion. I was just as excited about this as you were, as a fan and not a critic, and it didn’t work out for me. Here’s hoping it does for you.
Posted by Matthew Fiander from Greensboro, NC on February 24, 2010 at 5:46 pm
A bunch of albums (far weaker, believe me i listened to them) received 7 and 8 today. Even Corinne’s the Sea received one (deservedly it was a great album). Someone please re-review this, cause this review doesn’t has 72 comments for a bad reason. Allmusic noticed flaws too, but still they weren’t enough to overtake the album as a whole, they rated 3.5 out of 10. Mat’s score is way too low, for what his review looks like a 6 would fit much better. Joanna is not average, but she’s not unexceptional either. The guy that review Neko’s talked about her looks, called her a pin up, terrible review and yet he rated a 5. Please… i don’t care if this will be inside their top 50 by the end of the year, having a fair reception is much better, and this 4 just doesn’t do her justice.
Posted by Joan on February 24, 2010 at 7:22 pm
As much as I disagree with Matthew’s opinions in this review… how much of a difference would a reevaluation accomplish? My bet is nothing. My guess is that it would simply get washed away in the sea of positive reviews. There needs to be balance here. Don’t take this review as only for balance’s sake but take this review as indication that there ARE differing opinions. And well-written ones at that. It STILL has “Universal Acclaim” on Metacritic. What more do you want?
Posted by Alex from SC on February 24, 2010 at 8:06 pm
This series of comments is fascinating. On one hand, it is good to see listeners/readers that are passionate and involved with the album/review. On the other hand, there is a bewildering sort of groupthink that emerges from many of the comments. When did another publication’s positive review become a form of absolute truth? Why is a dissenting opinion perceived as empirically wrong or the work of a contrarian? The review is respectful and straightforward in its assessment. It is difficult to spot an area of legitimate controversy beyond some fans’ undying (unreasonable) expectations for universal acclaim.
In fact, there is one thing in this review that irks me, and it has nothing to do with Joanna Newsom. The “Tusk” and “Odessa” references do not go on to mention that, in addition to their “charm”, those albums are actually regarded by many as classics, decades after their original failure to connect. However, as much as I love “Tusk” and “Odessa”, it would be bizarre if I thought the reviewer needed to change his mind to fit my taste.
Posted by Thomas Britt from Virginia on February 25, 2010 at 9:48 am
Thomas-
You know, I really considered going down that road with Tusk and Odessa, but worried I might wander too far off topic or unintentionally align a brand new album with established classics.
In fact, I have a strange love for Tusk (in that I’m not a huge Fleetwood Mac fan and it’s the only album I truly love), and a slightly smaller love for Odessa (“Lamplights” kills!). So I’m with you, even if it’s not on the page.
Posted by Matthew Fiander from Greensboro, NC on February 25, 2010 at 10:03 am
this is a comments section, is it not? it’s no wonder you spirited fan boys are digging this album when you’re writing huge, overblown expositions yourselves in defense of it. get to the point!
I’ve only listened to this album about once so far, so i’m not qualified to lay down any definitive criticism yet, but I think it’s pretty damn obvious that Have One On Me is no 9.2. i’m sure that this album is grower, like all you supportors say, but right now - as i listen to the third album - i’m feeling really disappointed and EXHAUSTED.
i applaud you, Matthew, for offering a valid counterpoint to all the gleaming reviews out there. and as a student in PGH, i appreciate the relevant Wonderboys comparison.
Posted by Cameron from Pittsburgh, PA on February 25, 2010 at 10:42 am
OMG Cameron, did you really think that you could listen to an album at once, a triple album by Joanna Newsom and like everything right on or not feel EXHAUSTED. Sorry, it’s not like that. At least (i hope) he listening everything more than 6 times and not at once, then he sure deserves an applause for at least have tried and expresses his point and opinion.
I waited the disc 1 to grow on me (it did when i listened to the third time). Then i finally listened to disc 2 (by third listening too, i already liked that one a lot, maybe even more than the first if possible). Disc 3 was the last and the hardest, it took 5 listenings to finally sink in. This is album is indeed a grower, and after it grows on you it is a 9.2, if not even more. Critics received this album, weeks before the release, we all know that. When pitchfork reviewed it, it had already grown on the reviewer. And all about music is grow, every band or artist i like, i had to listen like 4 times until i liked what they were doing. I never liked things that grabbed me at once, cause after i time i used to got sick of it. It’s funny, cause the music that grows on me, i listen to them for years, and never changes, i still feel the same thing. :)
After everything grows is amazing, like Ys, 2h sounds like half an hour, cause everything is so quick, you are familiar with everything. And Pitchfork best new music, is all about growing. All those albums, you gotta listen to them at least 4 times until you finally get them. That’s why i don’t comment thing right after i listened. Everytime i hear this album there’s something new thats in unveiled. Harmonies, harp or piano notes, the use of sax, strings, Joanna’s vocal, a lyric. Joanna shines on this album, you got to have the patience, i had, and this is amazing now, it connects to you in a way Ys, even being that terrific hasn’t. Yesterday i played Baby Birch 16 times, so far i’ve played You & Me, Bess 20 times. The girl just know how to pass an emotion. I loved the jazzy feel that some of the tracks have, i hope Joanna keep this around. There are so many highlights and so many songs that rank among her best, and the album as whole is right now a 9.4 out of 10, so kinda hard to pick a highlight,but the thing is there is nothing average or ‘unexceptional’ on this. There’s not a single track weak track. You & Me, Bess; Baby Birch; In California; Kingfisher; Good Intentions, if i listed the whole highlights it would basically be the entire album. So Matt has an opinion, i have mine, and i hope people reading this give a few tries (not one, please, really try), tracks will start to grow and when you realize there you are: hooked on a ipod for 2h, feeling like it was only half an hour, and man… that is magical! She is magical, her music connects and transport me to a world a didn’t know it existed. Even with all the troubles, she makes me happy, makes me look at the world with another eyes, that’s not only Joanna, that is the power of music, doesn’t matter who you’re listening to, if critics like it or not, if connects to you, and make you feel something, bingo! That’s one of the most beautiful things about life.
Posted by Lena on February 25, 2010 at 1:10 pm
Still waiting to hear the Newsom LP, but the album it reminds me of the most is Prince’s triple album from 1996, Emancipation. Prince screwed the pooch a long time ago, so it’s no wonder that no one mentions that album, but it’s one of the few triples in recent memory that sounded great at first and fifteen years on just doesn’t hold up.
Posted by BC from Chicago on February 25, 2010 at 1:38 pm
BC from Chicago, Joanna’s album is much closer to 69 Love Songs or Sandinista! and Tusk. You know why the last two? Both followed masterpieces (London Calling & Rumours), the artists decided to expand their sounds, be ambitious, and they received a mixed response back in the day. These days they are classics. Have One On Me, like every triple album, takes a few listening until it finally sinks, and don’t try everything at once, just take a step at a time and it’s going to evolve into something amazing. This album will not be regarded as her ultimate masterpiece (It is Ys, or even Mender), but it’s part of Newsom’s golden years. It’s her third straight release i rate 5 stars, it’s terrific. It’s that rare triple album that works, it’s cohesive, it’s a lot at first, but you just can’t live without later.Even if you don’t like everything… there’s plenty to love and enjoy, the lows that might exist to you on this record, won’t be enough to take down the highs, there are a lot. Have patience, cause everything comes to those who wait. You are going to be rewarded!
Posted by Lena on February 25, 2010 at 5:31 pm
Kudos to Matthew for responding to the criticism over his review, and a very gracious and thoughtful response at that. I was over the top a bit in my response for sure. That said, I do think that her new cd will be an historical landmark, and that’s the only reason anybody would ever remember anybody else’s review on anything….Matthew is correct there. And I could not bear Joanna’s 1st 2 cd’s for the record…it is the transformation in her voice and presentation that has made the remarkable leap. And for the record, my review is up at http://musicoasis23.blogspot.com. So you can rip me like most of us have done to Matthew!
Posted by Bryan Bond on February 25, 2010 at 7:49 pm
I really do think that YS was the album of the decade. Putting aside issues of taste, no other album of the last decade came so fully formed with such a distinct and coherent sound. Whether you “like” YS or not, anyone with ears cannot deny the fact that the level of writing (both musically and lyrically) as well as the production is absolutely staggering.
The reason I raise the issue of taste is because this review seems to rely too heavily on its author’s subjective experience of the album. Some may claim that we can’t escape subjective responses, that there’s no such thing objectivity in matters of taste and so on. I disagree—there are many artists that I don’t like (including some cultural giants) and nevertheless I wouldn’t rate any of their albums with a 4. Reviewers must try to strike a balance between their personal taste and a more objective, professionalized approach to what they hear. Which brings me to to Have One on Me.
This album may not be a perfectly constructed masterpiece as YS, but it’s still head and shoulders above any singer-songwriter album I heard in the last few years. And if this album is looser, freer and sketchier than YS, it’s only to its advantage, because it shows most clearly Newsom’s many different facets and idiosyncrasies. I can’t think of any recent songwriter whose chord progressions can be as fascinating as those of Herbie Hancock (in a very different way); whose use of voice brilliantly draws on, alludes to, but also offers a re-vision of her brilliant precursors Joni Mitchell and Kate Bush; whose harmonization and melodization would most likely soon to be included in music courses syllabi. So 4? I don’t know Matthew, perhaps give it another serious listen or two? This rating seems awfully detached from reality.
Posted by Shlomi from Israel on February 26, 2010 at 5:33 am
Shlomi-
That was a hell of a thoughtful and interesting comment. You raise a lot of valid points and, in some ways, I agree with you. But I think you and I see criticism differently. I want to put the work in a context (cultural, historical, whatever) but in the end I can’t be responsible for anyone’s view of it but my own. If I was being unfair in some way in the review, that’s one thing. But it doesn’t read that way to me.
That being said, you may be right and this very well be head and shoulders above other singer-songwriter albums. But that has no bearing on how I see this album. This stuff isn’t comparative, at least I try not to approach it that way, so I have to approach this album on its own terms, and I don’t think it really succeeds there.
There’s also this argument about the album being a grower, which you and others have hinted at or said outright. I agree. And I have not listened to this album for the last time, and maybe someday I’ll come around to a more favorable view of it. But even if my opinion on the album changes, that doesn’t render the one above invalid.
I also think we’re all a little too hung up on the values assigned at the end (or beginning of reviews). The number given, in my or any other review, is pretty trivial compared to what’s being said about the album, and the conversation it opens up. I am truly glad we’re all talking about this album, it’s clearly made an impression quite a few.
Posted by Matthew Fiander from Greensboro, NC on February 26, 2010 at 11:15 am
Lena: Thanks for your comment! I think I misstated myself in my half-formed thought about comparing Newsom’s album to Prince’s Emancipation. I didn’t mean to suggest Newsom’s triple won’t hold up in 15 years…I just meant that it, along with 69 Love Songs or Sandinista in its original vinyl incarnation, is one of those massive 3-part projects. Sandinista is probably my favorite album of the ‘80s, and I do tend to love these gigantic projects that others find unwieldy and interminable! Gosh, one of these days I will finally play my copy of Have One on Me…the listening piles keep growing taller. Nice discussion, everyone.
Posted by BC from Chicago on February 26, 2010 at 3:56 pm
“This stuff isn’t comparative, at least I try not to approach it that way, so I have to approach this album on its own terms, and I don’t think it really succeeds there.”
First of all, if you approach any album “on its own terms,” the album would necessarily get a perfect grade. Semantics aside, though…
In order for gradings to have any meaning at all they need to be “comparative,” in the sense that they exist relative to the overall environment in which they operate.
In school, an “A” is only meaningful because it recognizes the effort required to achieve that grade relative to the effort required to achieve a “B” or a “C”. Two students in the same class can’t get the same grade for vastly different quality work. If they do get the same grade, then the grading becomes meaningless.
Popmatters.com recognizes this in its “music ratings” page that explains the various ratings; almost every rating description has “comparative” language, ie, they state that the rating evaluates the album at hand relative to other artists in the genre.
Shlomi has it right - there is objectivity in music. A (professional?) music reviewer should know this better than anyone. There are different levels of compositional skill, musicianship, lyricism, etc. If you, personally, find an album to be terrible despite the fact that it is loved nearly unanimously otherwise, you should put your review on your own personal blog rather than an “international magazine of cultural criticism” with tons of informed readers telling you how ridiculous your point of view is. Because, objectively, your rating is ridiculous.
Posted by Joe from nyc on February 26, 2010 at 6:04 pm
It’s OK BC from Chicago!! =) i also overreacted a little bit calling something that you “just can’t live without later”, it’s my way of saying this is awesome, my favorite album of they year, and of this new decade so far! I hope you enjoy as much as the others. I hope you also gets the Sandinista! comparison, cause i mention that today at another website, and people thought this was a punk rock album. So anyway, i hope you like this, and others too. It was a great discussion, so good that i forget the fact that Matt didn’t like the album that much, is kinda like suddenly this reviewer-public wall was broke you know, Matt looks like one of us who expressed his opinion and we are here discussing ours. I guess the fact that he came over here and talked to us, helped a little bit. Nice that he stands by his opinion and didn’t take it back when everybody started complaining. I guess this the album review with most comments on the history of this website. But anyway, instead of wanting a new review, i just hope one day, like matt said, he listen to this album again, and this finally grabs him. That would be cool, he didn’t have to come over here, tell everybody, or make a new review, only sit and enjoy. I guess this is why Joanna shares her music, to be enjoyed. It’s not about the reviews or the fans.
This album connected to me in a way none of her previous had before. This is the album that made me finally put her inside the ultimate female singer/songwriters of all time like. This album is like Kate Bush and Joni Mitchell (During her jazzy For The Roses-Court & Spark-Hissing years), Kate Bush during her Kick Inside and Sensual World days and even Laura Nyro during her own golden era. But overall this is Joanna, it is a Joanna Newsom album, no one could do this today except her. The use of sax, the lyrics, the melodies, the harp, the piano, that voice… oh that voice, that makes some people kill themselves and make me feel the luckiest person on this world to be able to listen to this and actually enjoy it. She connects to me in a way nobody did before, it’s kinda like: she joyful, and she brings me joy, she makes me sad, she makes me feel, it’s many different emotions. The sax during No Provence, and You And Me Bess, the harmonies on the title-track, all the happiness inside Good Intentions Paving Company, Baby Birch and all that simplicity, and feel of lost, suddenly evolves into a powerful ending. The slower tracks of the end, i can’t listen to disc number 3 without feeling something, especially sadness, and that makes me want to listen to everything again, and feel happy when she is, romantic, joyful, sad, relieved, shy, free, everything. She’s special. She’s different, she’s Joanna Newsom and man i love her. I’m stoping now, cause i wrote a lot, and some people will read this, listen to the album and won’t feel what i felt and then i will be in trouble. That’s my opinion and if you feel like that too, cool, if you don’t, that’s cool too, i just hope you find something that makes you feel this way too, cause that’s what music is suppose to do, not make money or rule the charts, or the best metascore of the year.
Posted by Lena on February 26, 2010 at 6:16 pm
Joe-
I appreciate your perspective, and your analogy with grading. However, there is something ironic in wanting me to recognize Newsom’s uniqueness, but evaluate her record based on a genre she is, apparently, also a part of.
But I can’t compare Have One on Me to any other album, because it’s aims aren’t the same as any other album. Clearly, Newsom has a whole lot of ambition, and wanted this record to succeed in certain ways. I recognize those, and though I applaud her intentions, I don’t think she achieves them. So, regardless of what it says on the ranking page, that is where my scoring came from.
Now, the only trouble with your grading analogy is that I don’t see this as a grade. Have One on Me isn’t 40% good or interesting or whatever else you want to put there. It is, though it’s a lovely sound with a half dozen very good songs, unexceptional as a whole. To me. So just because I approach something on its own merit, doesn’t mean I let it run the show.
I’m also not really in competition with other reviewers. I respect well-considered opinions, and I’ve read quite a few on the other side of the fence. Good for them, and good for Newsom. In the same way my review doesn’t invalidate theirs, whatever mounting number of positive reviews there may be doesn’t negate my opinion. Because, while we all approach this stuff from a point of objectivity (that’s true) it always ends in subjectivity. The way you or I choose examples (in review or in the comments page), order them, add inflective phrasing, explicate them, and bring them together into a conclusion, even the way we listen to and intepret music in the first place—that is very much subjective.
And not for nothing, but I think discussion of my credentials as a critic is really beside the point in all of this. Let’s focus on the music we’re talking about. All the stuff outside of that is exhausting for all of us, and unnecessary.
Posted by Matthew Fiander from Greensboro, NC on February 26, 2010 at 6:39 pm
I wrote the 5th comment (gosh, way back when!), sympathetic of the reviewer’s points but surprised with 4/10. I had no idea that checking the ‘Notify me of follow-up comments’ would fill up my inbox the way it has.
What this lengthy (and generally good humoured) thread proves is that whatever your feelings, this album is worth talking about, and Matthew’s slightly contentious review has provided a starting point for some interesting contributions.
Actually from my point of view, long may others continue to dismiss and downrate Joanna Newsom, because I know that if ‘everyone’ liked her, I’d probably be listening to somebody else. But for now, with all the over-hyped mainstream pop and rock music, we have somebody of genuine artistry to enjoy.
ps A week into my listening, the album becomes even more lovable.
Posted by Mark F from UK on February 26, 2010 at 7:30 pm
Mark F: I agree. If I hadn’t have read something along the lines of “Joanna Newsom: considered by many to to be a songwriting genius, considered by others to have the most annoying vocals in the world” I probably wouldn’t have TOUCHED Ys.
There are horribly written/very obviously not-based-on-anything-valid bad reviews and then there are concise, well-written bad reviews. I’ve said this before but thank you, Matthew, for not writing “This well-worn path of hollow musical prowess did not lead me into a magical land of Narnia, where the honey melodies are collected by the harmony bees and deposited into the songwriting hive.” Hell, here’s a direct quote from one of the most horribly-written bad reviews I’ve ever read: “Generic pop rhythms beget uninspired electronic melodies with nary a single desire to pull the listener through the magical wardrobe. Imagine that book as told from the perspective of the child who wasn’t allowed to go to Narnia, instead having a head pop around and ask “are you still okay?” every minute: this is the experience of the album . . . When it comes down to the bare facts, and to put it rather flatly - unless they’re wishing to research a dissertation on generic composition and complacency in music - no one really needs an album like this in their lives. Kill the lion, crown the witch, drown the children. Why should we be the only ones to suffer.”
Posted by Alex from SC on February 27, 2010 at 7:08 am
Not a bad review, but I think you miss the point of the current Joanna Newsom. Musiscians grow and change. Joanna isn’t the cute, shy folk-girl of six year ago. Ofcourse she didn’t come with an another Milk-Eyed Mender after releasing an album like Ys. I think Have One On Me is a great ‘sequel’ (see the ‘’) to Ys. Ys was way more compact and subtle, but HOOM sounds way more mature in my opinion. Her voice has seriously grown (almost sounds like Kate Bush!) and even my mom likes songs like ‘81! Come on people, allow Joanna to have success. She deserves nothing less after releasing another (triple)-album. A 4/10 is ofcourse an opinion, but I’d rather laugh about it and point to the other media (even Pitchfork is right this time, hallelujah!).
I mean, listen to a song like Kingfisher. How could anybody who likes music (and I think we all do) nót absolutely love a song like that? :)
Posted by Lars from The Netherlands on February 27, 2010 at 10:28 am
poor poor poor review - this is clearly a fantastic album
Posted by john from derbyshire, uk on February 27, 2010 at 5:15 pm
Good grief, the Straw Men are out in force today in these comments, aren’t they? Just because the reviewer doesn’t like the album doesn’t make him small-minded, impatient, stupid or an attention seeker. It just means he didn’t connect with it. He didn’t spit in her face or kick her granny down the stairs.
Posted by sean on February 28, 2010 at 9:20 pm
pitchfork did give it a 9.2
that proves they are complete morons with no taste
this album is such an extreme disapointment
i thought YS was one of the best albums of the decade
but this is just bland, utterly predicatable, and pretentiously reaching
4 OUT OF 10 IS RIGHT ON
THIS ALBUM IS A HUGE DISAPOINTMENT
Posted by Daniel from chicago on March 1, 2010 at 2:49 pm
A lot of talking, but in the end, what counts, is the personal listening experience. HAVE ONE ON ME grows (in my ears) with every listening, and songs you seem to file under NOT NECESSARY in the beginning start to be really exciting after a while. it is all a question of nuances,small details, tiny twists in the voice. SO WONDERFUL! Why has no one discovered that JS has studied Claude Debussy quite intensely, and one can hear that in some mysterious ways. At this moment, this is my record of the year!
Posted by Michael Engelbrecht from germany on March 2, 2010 at 11:35 am
This album doesn’t disappoint at all! Pitchfork gave 9.2, but get ready, there are 16 other music critics that gave this an higher rating! The other 35 gave the album positive reviews. Are they morons with no taste? i don’t think so, you’re the exception… not them, or the crazy fans that came over here to say how much they loved this album and didn’t agree with this. You can say that you don’t like it, i can’t argue with that, but please… don’t act like you have the universal opinion or your opinion is the ONLY and CORRECT one. There’s no right on. I’m not saying that my opinion is the ultimate one either, but if you see the other reviews and the reaction that most fans ad people are having, there is like an infinite bigger chance for you to like this album, instead of call it a disappointment, i’m using logic. Pitchfork wasn’t even the best review, or the highest rating. Rolling Stone, hated Ys, had mixed feeling towards the Milk-Eyed Mender and yet they rated this a 3.5 out of 5, more than PopMatters and they didn’t even complained about the length on their 7 lines review. This album is amazing, people are loving. Out of 46 reviews i counted to date, this is the ONLY negative one so far. And after i saw the Rolling Stone review yesterday i can say it will be the only one.
Posted by Joan on March 2, 2010 at 11:42 am
Joan-
You may be right about the critical response. Maybe mine will be the only negative review (though I think the word “negative” hangs mostly on the ‘4’ that sits at the end). But I’m not sure if your request to “[not] act like you have the universal opinion or your opinion is the ONLY and CORRECT one” is directed at me. I hope not. Because I haven’t, and wouldn’t make that assertion. I think many of the reviews on this album are quite excellent, and have no interest in blindly disparaging other critics the same way I assume they wouldn’t do to me.
I also think that we should let the album’s merits—whether they appeal to us or not—rest finally with the music. Sure, it sounds contradictory coming from a guy who dropped 1000 words or so on the album above. But I don’t expect my or anyone else’s opinion to be confirmation of the album’s worth, just merely a single expression of it. And I don’t think that the number of reviews in favor of an album—this whole strange metacritic movement—can serve as empirical evidence to prove the album is great. Greatness of this kind isn’t proven with statistics. It’s felt in the music. I am truly glad you and others felt it here. I just didn’t.
Posted by Matthew Fiander from Greensboro, NC on March 2, 2010 at 12:19 pm
Wow wow, No Matt i wasn’t talking bout you! I was talking about Daniel, that came over here, calling pitchfork morons! Sorry if you thought it was you! I don’t like this album cause every critic, except you, liked it. I used the metacritic thing as a way to say that Pitchfork is not moron because they like it, cause a bunch of others liked it even more. Sorry if you thought it was about you. I’m thankful that your unfavorable review is at least a great written one. Not a Rolling Stone bad review, like the one they gave to Ys. I was talking about Daniel, that came over here with this Right On thing, nice he agrees with you, but the same way you are not stupid cause you didn’t like it, so is not pitchfork and all the other critics because they like it. I believe everyone has an opinion, there’s nothing definitive. I just said that because of the reaction of fans and critics, there are BIG chances you will like this. It’s nothing definitive, but i’m just being logical. There are chances you don’t like it, but looking at the numbers they are small. Listening to the album they are even smaller, but you still might not like it. I’m glad you didn’t give this a 10 or a 9 just because many others did, you’re behind your opinion and that is awesome.
Posted by Joan on March 2, 2010 at 12:58 pm
Joanna, my dear young woman, don’t take it too hard. Your work is ingenious. It’s quality work. And there are simply too many notes, that’s all. Just cut a few and it will be perfect.
Posted by Werlon from US on March 2, 2010 at 1:05 pm
Joan-
My apologies too then, if I jumped to conclusions. I’ve really enjoyed reading your posts, and thoughts on this, and just wanted to make sure I was keeping the right tone in all this.
And I understand your logical point, and hope someday I do come around a bit more. I certainly think the album is a fascinating document, the music, on the whole, just doesn’t hit me yet. Here’s hoping it will. Cheers!
Posted by Matthew Fiander from Greensboro, NC on March 2, 2010 at 1:08 pm
Matt you know… i was a jerk on previous comments. I was one of this crazy Joanna Newsom supporters asking to another review. Reading those comments right now, i feel like a jerk and i then laugh a little bit. Maybe it was because your review was one of the first to come out and i thought this was going to be the end of a great reception, i don’t know. What i wanna say is that is true that one day this album might hit you, but if ti doesn’t… well, it doesn’t matter. It won’t matter if you believe you tried the hardest. Reading your review i believe you did, and as a fan i can see you are disappointed with this release. The thing is that we live in a Metascore nation. When people go to Metacritic they don’t read the review (although there is a link that redirects to this page), all they see is the yellow 40 and a small comment. They don’t care about the reviews, only the points and your review is holding Joanna’s score back. And that is awful, cause that is what Metacritic is all about: scores. I like to read the review, to see the context, to understand why a critic like it, why he didn’t you know. And that’s how i feel about your review now, is a great negative one. When people see the 40, they believe in the stuff you said: they believe it’s like 40% good, and that’s not the truth. Each website has a way to review and rate something. You explained to us that to PopMatters a 4 means unexceptional, while to other websites it means 2 stars, or “an awful album”. I have seen a lot of reviewers that pointed the same problems as you, but they rating system is different. Like Heather Phares of allmusic, she talked about issues you spoke too… still she rated 3.5 stars, why? It’s allmusic’s rating system that is different to yours, and yet you guys agreed a lot. If the thing i cited before, a 4 out of 10 means 2 stars out of 5, the latter would be allmusic’s final rating, but it wasn’t. Because of your review, i learned that scores matters, but they are not supposed to be the most important thing on a review. The words mean a lot more. And reading your review, i can see that you think this album is a disappointment, but has good moments, it is worthy. When i read a lot of reviews i swear i’m reading a 5 stars one, still the reviewer gave 4. So screw ratings! The words are supposed to be important.
Right now i believe you tried. One day it might hit you, if it doesn’t that’s okay. I guess that it was great to discuss about this album, but i guess you never thought that this review would cause a lot of fuss. I’ve never seen such a number of comments on this website when it comes to reviews. This i like a new record breaking number of comments. And while i believe that all these comments would actually give you a lot of headache, you you sure did deal with you the right way. Your comments were cohesive and always supporting your original opinion. I read a lot of reviews made by you, and believe i was one of the few who asked to the guy who gave Ys a 10 to review this one and called you the wrong reviewer, i guess that was the stupidest thing i could have ever said, ever! I regret and i’d like to take it back, reading other reviews made by you, you sure know how to write and build a great review, even when we don;t agree with you. It doesn;t matter if this album won’t be inside PopMatters top 50 albums of 2010 (although that would be great), stand by your opinion man. I’m pretty sure if you made a comment saying that now you like the album and you’d like to take it back since most people and critics like it, people (including myself) would be crucifying you for taking it all back. I just admire you more because of that. I do love this record, album of the year to me (and that’s a strong competition). But i won’t take your merits, you’re good, and although Joanna said she doesn’t use internet anymore, she would be proud of her fans to come over here and defend her using their teeth and nails, and proud of you for not disrespect her while reviewing her album and standing by your opinion. She sure knows how to deal with constructive criticism, and right now i’m learning this too. Sorry if i wrote i lot, that’s what i do when i start writing things that come to my mind.
Posted by Joan on March 2, 2010 at 1:58 pm
get over pitchfork people,
they are not the holy grail by any means,
its a political system
subject to the same coruptions.
though im glad and sad to see that they have such an influence on the opinions of people (much like fox news) and that I stand apart from it.
time will show, this will be a forgoten album (a triple album of bland folk music, in the age of the mp3, come on)and if it makes the top 50 of any album of the year list, it just attests to the curent musical climate.
listen to YS again then this, if you only see 0.2 difference your blind and deaf
Posted by Daniel from chicago on March 2, 2010 at 2:16 pm
Dear Joanna Newsom fans:
I’m writing because I’m concerned about you, many of you are starting to get annoying, in the preachy christian fundamentalist sort of way. I’d like you to step back and consider….
If someone doesn’t find Joanna that special that does not mean they are an idiot.
If someone finds her voice grating that does not make them shallow.
If someone finds the album too long, that does not mean they are clueless.
If someone says that this music isn’t for them, that does not mean they are missing something from their soul or they only listen to American idol
If someone writes a negative review that does not mean its a bad review, or they should look for a new job, or they should just do what every other reviewer does.
Basically, lighten up, she is just a singer-song writer that YOU enjoy, and other people may not.
Posted by Geoff from Guelph, Canada on March 3, 2010 at 2:04 pm
4/10? Sorry dude, you just lost all credibility. And I mean ALL credibility.
I get that some people don’t like her work, her voice, whatever. But don’t let preference one’s preference get in the way of one’s objective viewfinder.
To rate this as a “poor album” (even if not your favorite), it demands at least admiration for its scope and ambition. Frankly, I think you’re in the wrong business
Posted by Ryan on March 4, 2010 at 12:26 pm
what an excessively negative review.
Posted by J. Bell on March 6, 2010 at 12:34 am
Embarrassing review and rating.
Have One On Me is A MASTERPIECE!
Posted by rob from The Hague, Netherlands on March 6, 2010 at 1:51 pm
Now before you completely go crazy, I love a lot of indie music. But the hipsters have officially hit rock bottom. Joanna Newsom and the praise given to her is just ridiculous. She is NOT Joni Mitchell or Bob Dylan, in fact she is an average artist and possibly the most overrated artist out there. She epitimizes everything wrong with the current generation of hipsters. Her songs are overstuffed, her lyrics fit in perfectly with the rest of the indie stuff as they try to be pseudo Romantic/poetic, but end up being cliche. Sorry but just because she throws in more words than the average artist does not mean you can call her profound. And the problem is not that her voice is bad, it’s just unappealing and she tries to do too much to sound profound (notice a trend?). Dylan wrote 10 minute epics and sounded coherent and maintained a message, Newsom does not. Plus everytime I’ve seen an interview she sounds cocky, just like a lot of the current crop of singer/songwriters, problem is she can’t back it up. Oh and LOL at anyone mentioning pitchfork or the reviews that follow pitchfork’s lead, because if Joanna truly did make a Joni Mitchell esque album, or anything concieved as “dad-rock” they would have slammed it or at least made note of it, no matter how great it truly was. I used to laugh at hipsters but now that is getting old and they have truly become pathetic. I have high hopes for a Spinal Tap esque hipster movie, it will be hilarious.
Posted by Alee from Chicago on March 10, 2010 at 8:19 pm
The issue with this review is that it’s clear that enough time was not spent with the album to really appreciate what Newsom was aiming for. What disappoints me as a fellow critic is the fact that this reviewer and several others have criticized Joanna for everything EXCEPT the music itself. We are critics of music…not the way an artist looks or how they choose to package and/or compile a CD. If she had cut the album length then it would not have been true to her vision and we shouldn’t question that because if The Beatles were still recording and doing triple CDs no one would dare criticize them for that. And before one gets sanctimonious for me to equate her art to theirs, then please recognize that it isn’t Joanna’s art that is the issue, it’s our submission to it. I ignored most reviews of the album that came out 2-3 days after it was released because that was way too early to fully digest two hours worth of music.
Frankly, I applaud her for having guts to release it this way and bring focus back on music and not just everything else that’s packaged as music. She should not be crucified by impatient critics who can’t bother to listen through it all or wish she’d just do shorter ‘pop’ versions. Quit trying to re-shape her into our own understanding and appreciate her just as how we did for Joni Mitchell and Tori Amos.
For the record, I awarded this CD 9.25/10 after two weeks of listening to it. The title track and “Good Intentions Paving Company” are, so far, the best two songs I’ve heard all year and, let’s not kid ourselves, come year-end list time the album will top most or be close enough to merit its place. Even the pro-metal site rateyourmusic already has it atop its chart so far!
Posted by Neil Morgan from Kingston, Jamaica on March 18, 2010 at 8:11 pm
I’ve followed the discussion sparked by your review your review with some interest. Your feelings about the album are one thing- every reviewer should have a point of view.
But you back up your opinion with assertions that are demonstrably wrong.
There ARE real structures here. This is not a collection of formless songs and to say so is not an opinion- it’s just incorrect. Better to say that the song structures are not yet apparent to you as a listener, but to claim otherwise is false.
Your use of the Wonder Boys quote isn’t quite apt either. This is an album of choices- a fully realized, recorded and released album consisting of choice after choice. Grady Tripp is paralyzed by indecision and unable to let go the process of working- his book keeps growing with no end in sight and sits hidden in a box under his bed. In no way is that the case with Joanna Newsom and this album.
You also make a few disclaimers about comparative reviewing- how it’s not valid- and how this cannot be compared to any other album- but you devote the second paragraph of your review to a comparison of this album and Ys.
I like that you’ve responded to the criticisms of your review. But I like even more the passion with which her admirers are defending her.
If the worst thing you could say about this album is that there is too much of it- for many of us it’s a colossal gift that rewards repeat and careful listening.
I look forward to hearing more of Have One On Me’s many layers and the secrets contained within.
Posted by David from New York on March 19, 2010 at 1:48 pm
Too bad we can only see 100 comments! I wish i could see the other 8!
Posted by Joan on March 20, 2010 at 5:56 pm
After living with this album for over a month—and it’s the album I’ve played the MOST in that month—I gotta chime back in and say I agree with the review. This is the most boring album I’ve heard in years. What a colossal dud.
Posted by BC from Chicago on March 25, 2010 at 3:46 pm
Excuse me Alee! First of all she can BACK IT UP. And second she never sounded cocky, and you ara proving now that you never read anything about her. TIME magazine called her a classical harpirst and she said that in NO WAY she was at the same level of them, it would be a bad thing to say she is. She’s a very grounded, down to earth person. She thanked her band like 10 times during her concert, she has a sense of humor. And please, Dylan wrote POLITICAL stuff, he never a wrote a 10 Minute personal song. Joanna is a confessional singer/songwriter or a storyteller, she tell tales, and happenings related to her life, you IDENTIFY with that, you don’t LEARN something. Joanna is becoming the most influential singer/songwriter since Bjork and PJ Harvey and people are not going to laugh at her cause she made something Mitchell-esque, she made a sound of her own. This album has hints of many previous singer/songwriters, but at the end is a Joanna Newsom record, it’s her sound.
And to Daniel that said that this will be forgotten. Ys was released 4 years ago, people are still talking about it and still placing it inside End of the Decade lists, since the album entered more than 60 End of The Year lists. This album will make inside a LOT of 2010’s top 50 lists. Sorry but what” attests curent musical climate” it’s your beloved mp3 age that. Thank God that are artists like her and any others that release ALBUMS and not 3 singles and 10 fillers. So, as much you don’t like it, get ready to see this album making big by the end of the year, after a month it still holds the highest metascore of the year based in more than 20 reviews. Even Beach Houses’s Teen Dream or the new Gorillaz managed to hold her back. Guess this triple disc masterpiece will stick around and it already is one of this decade’s early classics. It is cause no one is managing to beat this, so while no one does it, Joanna has the best of the year (and that includes the new MGMT and CocoRosie, since both have leaked already)
Posted by Lena on March 25, 2010 at 6:30 pm
Lena wrote, “Dylan wrote POLITICAL stuff, he never a wrote a 10 Minute personal song.” Well, I’ve been laughing for 10 minutes now, because you’ve obviously never heard of “Sad-Eyed Lady of the Lowlands,” just to name one.
Posted by BC from Chicago on March 25, 2010 at 7:53 pm
Yeah after listening to this album online and not really enjoying it, my wife bought it for me on vinyl (not knowing my feelings for the album) and you know what, it’s still just as ponderous and boring of an album with uninspired, tedious music and lyrics. And the packaging, oh seems like someone is full of herself, take a step back honey this “one” stinks.
Oh yeah and to everyone hoping or saying this album is growing on me. Wake up. Music isn’t a mold or disease. Music is supposed to slap you in the face and wake you up, but maybe it’s too late and you’re already dead, but there are even better soundtracks for being dead than this one.
Posted by daniel from chicago on March 26, 2010 at 9:15 am
This is not an album that everyone will like it. I adore it. daniel didn’t like, but his wife bought the vinyl, so she likes it.
And music grows on you. If i only liked music that slapped in my face i would be listening mainstream Pop Music 24/7.
Every critic acclaimed artist had to grow on me. Some examples like: Bjork, PJ Harvey, Tom Waits, Dylan (Lena shouldn’t be saying stuff she doesn’t know, he does write persona and relatable music!), Joni Mitchell, Tori Amos,Laura Nyro, Pixies, Newsom herself, Portishead, Flaming Lips, Sonic Youth and the list goes on (there are 678 of them, everyone and everything i have on my mac 33,442 songs).
It grew on me and on many other people, but it doesn’t mean that it will grow on you, that’s only a possibility, the same way that is not cause this album is receiving raves reviews, that you’ll love it.
Posted by Joan on March 27, 2010 at 6:10 am
it is crap!her voice is like nails on a blackboard
how can anyone get past the voice , let alone the simple musical arrangements
Posted by robi robinowitz from troy,ny on March 30, 2010 at 11:48 am
Absolutely agree with the review, one of most lifeless and boring albums I’ve had the displeasure to sit through. I couldn’t make it all the way through the first cd in fact before feeling my eyes droop, my attention wane and zzzzzz… Shut up and play your harp Joanna.
Posted by Chet Fakir on March 31, 2010 at 2:05 pm
I fucking love this album.
Posted by Winthrope III from Sioux City on March 31, 2010 at 10:00 pm
“And please, Dylan wrote POLITICAL stuff, he never a wrote a 10 Minute personal song.”
Huh? “Visions of Johanna,” “Desolation Row,” “Sad-Eyed Lady of the Lowlands,” “Lily, Rosemary, and the Jack of Hearts” (which is vaguely reminiscent of some of Joanna’s compositions, I think), “Highlands,” etc. etc. Dylan has written some intensely personal epics throughout his career.
I’m not sure why this is being discussed here, though. I love Joanna, but as a lyricist, she’s not in the same stratosphere as Dylan.
Posted by Ty on April 1, 2010 at 9:12 pm
I’m a Joanna fan too, and i agree with Ty. To say that she’s on the same league of Dylan it’s stupid and unbiased. I do believe she is one of the best lyricists of her generation and the best female singer/songwriter to come out last decade, but to say that she’s right there with Dylan, no way. No one will ever come close to him, he changed music, he’s right there with the likes of The Beatles, Rolling Stones, Bowie, The Clash, Beach Boys. These people are like untouchable, cause they are so influential and they did a lot for music. What Joanna might achieve is something near the female singer/songwriter goddesses like Joni Mitchell, Laura Nyro, Kate Bush, Rickie Lee Jones, PJ Harvey, Bjork, but then even though i believe Have One On Me is her third terrific release in a row, she has a small discography. I wanna wait for more albums until i can say that she is RIGHT THERE WITH THEM.
Posted by Joan on April 3, 2010 at 8:00 am
Geoff from Guelph put it perfectly. So what, if we don’t like Joanna Newsom, we like American Idol and Nickelback? You people seriously need to get over yourselves. Here is a list of ten current artists who are better than she is:
Radiohead, Gorillaz, Modest Mouse, Wilco, The National, Deerhunter, My Morning Jacket, Broken Social Scene, Grizzly Bear, and Ramona Falls.
I could go on forever, but I won’t. The girl is mediocre. She warbles out these annoyingly precious stories over fairly average harp playing and orchestral arrangements. Expand your horizons.
Posted by Bob on May 7, 2010 at 1:53 am
Looks like you messed this one up.
Who says you’re supposed to listen to an album the whole way through, especially when it’s over two hours long?
Why else would someone choose to put an album that could fit comfortably on two discs into three, in neat, six-song groups?
The amount of quality, replay-worthy material here is staggering. Why cut anything when everything works this well?
Posted by Andy on August 11, 2010 at 10:44 pm
This album blows ass, no mater how long or short you want to listen to it, boring, uninspired crap fest
YS is one of the best albums of the decade
This is one of the worst.
Wake up
Posted by Daniel from Chicago on August 12, 2010 at 2:11 pm
Oh Please. You people get a life. This is one of the best albums of this year, her tour got everyone talking, he we are in August and people still commenting on this. Here we are in August and i’m still listening to this one. Have One on Me is a masterpiece, a magnum opus, after seeing her live, only made it even better. If anyone blows ass over here are the losers that didn’t like it and still come around… please. I never felt like i wasted 2h on this album, it was always worthy and nice to see music critics agreeing, it must kill many of those who hated it seeing it gettin’ a good amount of accolades by early july, wait til the end of the year, european critics gone crazy over this one, americans were enthusiastic and she’s been touring, only receiving more and more attention. People kept talking about how “the album” is dead. Joanna, Flying Lotus, Janelle Monae and Arcade Fire proved this year that sales might be dying, digital singles increasing, but a terrific album, with a terrific flow and terrific material sonically and lyrically it’s impossible to beat. This is being a great year to music and she’s been part of this (a year when even M.I.A. screwed things up!), she’s not only making a classic album by herself (if you start using your brains, it’s been almost 6 months and NO OTHER ALBUM by a singer/songwriter has received so much attention), she’s being part of year that is in its way to become a classic and of the greatest of music like 71 or more recently 1991. What i don’t get it is how in a year with so many terrific releases by so many diverse artists, people still find time to hate on Joanna Newsom… it’s beyond me, maybe it’s what fans of hers love to say: “Joanna is so irresistible that even when you hate her, you need her”. I don’t totally agree on that, but some of your people are giving me a run for my money to change my mind.
Posted by Joan on August 22, 2010 at 8:11 am