I feel bad for spreading gossip. I feel bad for going out of my way to talk shit or make fun of public figures, sometimes. Sometimes, however, people are just begging for it. Let's take Lars Ulrich of Metallica, for example. Since the Napster days Ulrich has become more of a punching bag the more he makes public appearances on behalf of himself or the band. Everyone loves to make a jab at him for reasons good and bad. I won't defend nor feast on his P.R. decisions, but sometimes things come along and you merely want to ask, "WHAT WERE YOU THINKING?"
In A recent interview posted on Blabbermouth.net (which can be read here) Lars talks with Classic Rock magazine about the band and what could be their most controversial release, St. Anger. The album serves as enigma to most fans. Why? is a commonly asked question in regards to this period in the band's career. A movie, Some Kind Of Monster, was released and could possibly give fans some leads, along with countless interviews.
What puzzles me the most about the interview is this particular passage:
Classic Rock: Is it fair to say "St. Anger" is your worst album?
Lars: I think it's fair to say that some people think that.
Classic Rock: Would you agree with them?
Lars: I can't. The way I view the world, I can't rank them from best to worst. That kind of simplicity just doesn't exist for me. If I was 14, I could probably do it. Now, the way I see the world is nothing but greys, mainly.
According to Lars, he has no favorites. His age, his wisdom has allowed an inability to rank Metallica albums. Now I understand that bands remember their albums much differently than their fans, and his comment does not regard the importance of individual albums, per se. It would appear as if Mr. Ulrich's grey vision levels the playing field for all his musical efforts. That is to say, by using the logic from the afore mentioned passage, Mr. Ulrich sees no difference betwen St. Anger and Master of Puppets. Of couse I'm sure he could refute that easily and say his words were taken out of context. It's not juvenile to ranks albums if there are clear examples of a band's best efforts, and we can all agree, experiment or not, that Metallica has made better albums than St. Anger. The above comments come off as condescending than a diss to the mob of '14 yeard olds'. It's potentially immature and juvenile to rank things, but in the case Metallica's catalogue, it's pretty clear that there is a hierarchy in regards to quality. Your earlier material brought you fame and fortune. Your later material brought you fortune due to your longevity and established fan base. (I even bought St. Anger, and promptly traded it in for store credit)
Now I know Mr. Ulrich will not come across my writings anytime soon (unless he turns out to be a totally über-narcissist who google searches his name ever day to see what people think of him), but I have this one piece of advice, which you probably know already. Being in Metallica, you will likely come out victorious as even your biggest critics are some of your biggest fans. But as your albums, your achievements, are displays of your personal experiences, those albums do the same for us.
To further prove my point, I conclude a viral video making fun of St. Anger. The snare drum is replaced with a steel folding chair.
No comments:
Post a Comment