Last month the White Stripes released their sixth album, Icky Thump, to mostly positive reviews and strong sales. So, the music must be pretty good, right? Rolling Stone‘s review seems to think so, but while reading their review I noticed that their main critique seems to be not the music, but the lack of a message. For example, the critic (Robert Christgau) said:
Still, what do the White Stripes have to say? What do they stand for? Why do simple pop fans care about minimal Jack and his mythical sister, Meg?
[…] The other part of the answer, sad to say, is that this cultural breakthrough is almost certainly an accident. That’s because Jack White is less a songwriter than a sonic architect. Compared even with Lil Jon or Avril Lavigne, what his hits have in common isn’t anything he stands for.
After this, Christgau does begin to critique the album proper, but what did he accomplish with this little sideshow? It does not give any real insight into the album, but instead tells the reader that Christgau feels all musicians must have a message, as though one cannot produce compelling music unless it is at the forefront of a great political or social movement. I’d be curious about where this attitude comes from. Was it Bob Dylan? Though Dylan has always resented being tied to any social movements, he is well-known for the protest songs of his early career, and Rolling Stone did give Dylan 10 spots on its list of the 500 greatest albums, and 12 of its 500 greatest songs (including the top spot).
Providing an interesting contrast to Rolling Stone‘s review is a review by John’s Music Reviews (which is also the simplest-titled blog I’ve seen). Not a single mention does John provide of the White Stripes’ politics, though he does agree with RS that the band is slightly overrated.
A music review focusing on music. Imagine that…