The Sounds: Living in America

Peter Su

The Sounds

Living in America

Label: New Line
US Release Date: 2003-05-06
UK Release Date: Available as import

On the one hand, the Sounds recycle punk, New Wave, disco, and ladle it on thick with the cheesy keyboards. And the sound isn't too sleek or polished, either, so that, despite the cheesy keyboards, the effect is like hearing them, keyboards and all, at a clammy, sweaty club. Considering all the bands trying for the same feel these days, the Sounds do a really bouncing, bopping, rocking pastiche of CBGB's in, say, 1983.

What makes this less fun than it should be is the sense of finite possibilities that informs almost all of these songs. The Sounds kick off "Riot", their evocation and tribute and rebuttal to old school punk, by declaring that "Right or wrong, it's just for fun / Who really cares, we could have a ball".

They then declare that "Sid was not that vicious / He killed his little mistress" and "Johnny's not that rotten / In case you have forgotten". Given that context, the riot they plan to start in the next lines becomes very much a local one, more "That party was a riot" than "White riot, I wanna riot".

Even assuming the truth of their statements (What, Sid only killed his little mistress?) and that punk music or any music can't really change the world, it was still the ignorance of those "truths" that made the original punks so galvanizing. Sure, both Johnny Rotten-slash-Lydon and Joe Strummer later admitted that the Punk Revolution failed, despite their own efforts, to save the world. But it was the belief that it could that helped to make the Sex Pistols and Clash such vibrant forces. They sounded loud and crude, but there was also the mutually acknowledged truth, mutually acknowledged by fans and haters alike, that the anger and volume of their music was meant to be an incitement to action in the world outside a club or bar or arena. If they weren't as dangerous as some feared (or hoped), it was still the belief in their threat that made them, even on purely aesthetic grounds, better artists.

Likewise, even if one doesn't grade love ballads by the ridiculous standard of how faithful the singer is in real life, there nonetheless should be a believable sincerity, at least in those three or so minutes, that the singer is really, truly in love. Even if it's a lie, the lie can still be moving and inspiring if faked deeply enough. Ezra Pound wrote that only emotion endures and, certainly for any aspiring party band (even one as ironic and campy as the B-52's), the emotion of the moment is especially crucial in carrying in the day, in fostering the idea that you can dance this mess around and it will mean something. Even if it's a one-night stand, it's that much more satisfying if you can fake the ache of love.

Which, whether about loving another person or the punk scene or not loving the music business, the Sounds do only once.

Being in love with the lie of love has been a popular entertainment staple since before Shakespearean sonnets to after Dolly Parton's peak, but the Sounds are nearly exclusively in love with that deception. Moreover (as when Maja Ivarsson sings that she needs her baby, but can't bear to tell him, and that "it's great"), they really seem in love with the deception (as opposed to making do with it, à la Shakespeare and Parton), which snuffs the tension between longing and reality.

Thankfully, there's "Rock 'n Roll", about coming to love the means, rock 'n' roll, even more than the end, sex (oh, yeah, or "love"). Sung with appropriate melancholy, there's actually ambivalence and (are you listening, Ezra Pound?) emotion. It's not Yeats's circus animals deserting, but I'm still grateful to have a pop song about the inherent tension of loving art for art's sake, rather than as a distillation of life. I really might love that song.

Mainly, though, besides the sheer catchiness of their songs, what saves the Sounds is their openly adolescent defiance. No doubt lots of fans of the original punks were just kids who understood little and cared less about the class, social, and political agendas of some of their favorite bands, who saw in punk simply a cool look and a way to have an angry good time. Right or wrong, this album is their legacy.

I'd feel funny recommending it, but I'll take this album's high school, pissed detachment over Interpol's art college, affected disaffectedness any day because. Firstly, pissed high schoolers aren't so smug and thus, secondly, pissed high schoolers stand a better chance of getting over themselves and improving. If this were a high school test, I'd give it a B.

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.