I'm From Barcelona: Who Killed Harry Houdini

This 28-strong group from Sweden returns with a strong sophomore album.

I'm from Barcelona

Who Killed Harry Houdini

Label: Mute
US Release Date: 2008-10-14
UK Release Date: Available as import

This is what I’m from Barcelona is known for:

1. For being from Sweden, not Spain

2. For having a lot of members

3. For their catchy pop songs from 2006’s debut Let Me Introduce My Friends

What was more impressive about that album was the way so many musicians seemed folded into a sound not much bigger than Boy Least Likely To. And, yeah, twee’s moment in the sun faded by late ’06, but it’s coming back. Oh, it’s on its way back. (Did you hear “I Box Up All the Butterflies” yet?) So again on cue, Jonkoping, Sweden, churns out all its under-30s for part two.

I’m from Barcelona’s website lists 28 members, including (by the looks of it) twins in identical glasses but different hairstyles. But ten of those just sing, three play saxophone, and though there are a few orchestral flourishes on the instrument list (mandolin, accordion), the group’s really a good-size orchestral indie group with a substantial backup chorus. No need to harp on the numbers, though, despite what misgivings you may have at the very thought of almost thirty hipsters making joyous, ironic twee-pop together. That’s because I’m from Barcelona yields submissively to its main man, Emanuel Lundgren, and his creative vision. This was the case for Let Me Introduce My Friends, too -- Lundgren’s doing the introducing, and these are Lundgren songs we’re singing along to. But if Lundgren still believes the words with which he ends the album, that “In my heart, I’m still a kid”, one thing’s sure: songwriting-wise, he’s all grown up.

The group uses the heft of its many performers to create this warm, inviting wash of sound -- not quite shoegaze, but certainly enveloping. Album opener “Andy” exemplifies the sound, only really hinting at the mass-humanity aspect of the group on the sing-together refrain. The rest of the time, Lundgren’s front and centre, the rest of the instruments flattened into the background. The “me and my friends” aspect of the project continues, you see. (It’s the one thing you sometimes wish for -- more evidence of the obvious power and texture all those musicians could, together, create.)

At 36 minutes, Who Killed Harry Houdini is a succinct second chapter in this altogether charming band’s growing oeuvre. Five of the ten tracks clock in at less than three minutes, too, which allows Lundgren room for a seven minute finale, and a neat songwriting trick. What I’m from Barcelona have almost perfected, on this record, is the extended coda -- that seismic shift, three minutes into a four minute song, in which peace envelops everything. The band does this so well. “Music Killed Me” is exemplary, an otherwise straightforward innocenct singalong that becomes soulful piano ballad, as Lundgren sings, in what feels like a true ending, “If you’re gonna kill me / Wait until tomorrow / ’Cos I kinda like it down here”.

Throughout, whether on longer or shorter tracks, the joie de vivre that has always been so appealing about the group coats everything. It’s charming when, on “Rufus”, they all start clapping together. It’s charming when, as the chorus starts and they all sing together, half of them forget to keep clapping. It’s even charming when, after just a few bars, they modulate a whole tone up. Is it tongue in cheek? I don’t think so; with this band it’s easy to just go with it.

Shiny pieces of melody peek out from the lush pop textures the band’s created all through Who Killed Harry Houdini. In fact, the album keeps up songwriting quality at a surprisingly consistent level, taking a collective breath before barrelling into a series of fine tunes to close. From “Ophelia”’s awkward keyboard switches to the expansive, syncopated refrain of “Little Ghost”, this section of the disc feels like a nostalgic, triumphant encore. It’s not the last one this band will have demanded of them.


So far J. J. Abrams and Rian Johnson resemble children at play, remaking the films they fell in love with. As an audience, however, we desire a fuller experience.

As recently as the lackluster episodes I-III of the Star Wars saga, the embossed gold logo followed by scrolling prologue text was cause for excitement. In the approach to the release of any of the then new prequel installments, the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare, followed by the Lucas Film logo, teased one's impulsive excitement at a glimpse into the next installment's narrative. Then sat in the movie theatre on the anticipated day of release, the sight and sound of the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare signalled the end of fevered anticipation. Whatever happened to those times? For some of us, is it a product of youth in which age now denies us the ability to lose ourselves within such adolescent pleasure? There's no answer to this question -- only the realisation that this sensation is missing and it has been since the summer of 2005. Star Wars is now a movie to tick off your to-watch list, no longer a spark in the dreary reality of the everyday. The magic has disappeared… Star Wars is spiritually dead.

Keep reading... Show less

This has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it.

It hardly needs to be said that the last 12 months haven't been everyone's favorite, but it does deserve to be noted that 2017 has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it. Other longtime dreamers either reappeared or kept up their recent hot streaks, and a number of relative newcomers established their place in what has become one of the more robust rock subgenre subcultures out there.

Keep reading... Show less

​'The Ferryman': Ephemeral Ideas, Eternal Tragedies

The current cast of The Ferryman in London's West End. Photo by Johan Persson. (Courtesy of The Corner Shop)

Staggeringly multi-layered, dangerously fast-paced and rich in characterizations, dialogue and context, Jez Butterworth's new hit about a family during the time of Ireland's the Troubles leaves the audience breathless, sweaty and tearful, in a nightmarish, dry-heaving haze.

"Vanishing. It's a powerful word, that"

Northern Ireland, Rural Derry, 1981, nighttime. The local ringleader of the Irish Republican Army gun-toting comrades ambushes a priest and tells him that the body of one Seamus Carney has been recovered. It is said that the man had spent a full ten years rotting in a bog. The IRA gunslinger, Muldoon, orders the priest to arrange for the Carney family not to utter a word of what had happened to the wretched man.

Keep reading... Show less

Aaron Sorkin's real-life twister about Molly Bloom, an Olympic skier turned high-stakes poker wrangler, is scorchingly fun but never takes its heroine as seriously as the men.

Chances are, we will never see a heartwarming Aaron Sorkin movie about somebody with a learning disability or severe handicap they had to overcome. This is for the best. The most caffeinated major American screenwriter, Sorkin only seems to find his voice when inhabiting a frantically energetic persona whose thoughts outrun their ability to verbalize and emote them. The start of his latest movie, Molly's Game, is so resolutely Sorkin-esque that it's almost a self-parody. Only this time, like most of his better work, it's based on a true story.

Keep reading... Show less

There's something characteristically English about the Royal Society, whereby strangers gather under the aegis of some shared interest to read, study, and form friendships and in which they are implicitly agreed to exist insulated and apart from political differences.

There is an amusing detail in The Curious World of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn that is emblematic of the kind of intellectual passions that animated the educated elite of late 17th-century England. We learn that Henry Oldenburg, the first secretary of the Royal Society, had for many years carried on a bitter dispute with Robert Hooke, one of the great polymaths of the era whose name still appears to students of physics and biology. Was the root of their quarrel a personality clash, was it over money or property, over love, ego, values? Something simple and recognizable? The precise source of their conflict was none of the above exactly but is nevertheless revealing of a specific early modern English context: They were in dispute, Margaret Willes writes, "over the development of the balance-spring regulator watch mechanism."

Keep reading... Show less
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.