Last weekend I stumbled on both a live performance of The Cure on that British show Jools Holland hosts and the song “Friday I’m in Love” on the radio, and I wondered whether this band was due for a Critical Upgrade.
I’m aware that to our chubby, sexually ambivalent, 17-year-old readers, the notion that The Cure would need a Critical Upgrade is preposterous, but it’s time I – and others within the Halls of Rock – re-evaluate our grudging admittance that The Cure is, as one might put it, “As good as that pussy shit gets.”
The first video, of course, is “Boys Don’t Cry”, and dating back to the band’s initial, awkward appearance in my music-loving life, I had to give them credit for this one. Great ascending chords, nice drum hooks, and more importantly, a tremendous display of inverse balls! I mean, what better way to be a pussy, if you’ll excuse my French, than to shove it in people’s faces? Surely boys cry, and some of us cry more easily than others, even us tough guys. Their other minor hit, “Killing an Arab”, was pretty cool too. I was hip deep in my Camus phase, and what Camus- and rock-loving freshman didn’t dig the insider knowledge of that song?
A friend in college had their first 2 albums – I think they were imports, and that was cool too, but once I caught a few looks at this Robert Smith guy and heard enough of his whining vocals, I quickly tired of the band and felt a bit ashamed for liking those early singles. The chubby, effeminate frontman in baggy clothes, make-up, and teased, dyed-black hair was not my idea of a rock hero. Hell, I’m just a make-up kit and box of Clairol away from achieving that Look! I need to aim higher. (Please note, today I do not support such pussyphobic beliefs; I share so that others might confront their own pussyphobia.)
I once dated a woman who was into their “dark, difficult” album, Pornography. She was crazy, wild, and so confused I felt like “the strong one” for once in my young dating life. I respected the fact that “Pornography” was dark and difficult and that she was strong enough to love it for all it was, but it was the beginning of the end of my ability to like this band even a little bit. As much as I would love the movie Edward Scissorhands, seeing a bandful of that character, dressed in black, playing Miss Huntenpeck synth parts and Roto-toms…Ugh! Around this time, I thought, Robert Smith sorely needed a wedgie.
It must have been around 1990 when the band put out a remix album and a video came out for some quirky little number with Smith singing “underwater,” in a Sigmund and the Sea Monsters-like set. The band’s greatest hits album might have come out around this time too (maybe the remix was part of the greatest hits album – I don’t know and refuse to look it up right now). This song was so good I started thinking that I needed to find a copy of the greatest hits album – maybe find it at a yard sale in a town far, far away from my own, so that I could buy it anonymously, without the likely shame that would accompany my buying it in Philadelphia and having some watchdog of close-minded types like myself of old – like Townsman dbuskirk – report, “Did you hear what Mr. Moderator bought today!”
Well, I think I’m getting real close to walking into a local store, plopping that greatest hits CD on the counter, and maybe even paying with a check, so that the clerk needs to see my ID! That, or maybe I’ll order it through Amazon. Meanwhile, what do the rest of you think, is The Cure “As good as that pussy shit gets” or can we say that they are simply “Very good,” and leave it at that? I look forward to your responses.
mod, are you asking us to convince YOU to upgrade them in your perception?
i ask because, as far as i know, the cure has a pretty high critical reputation and don’t appear to be in need of a critical upgrade.
I’m pretty sure it’s not just in my perception, but it goes without saying that Critical Upgrades/Downgrades are often in the eye of the person who launches the piece. What I’m concerned with is what you feel about their critical status? I know the band is popular, but I’m not sure they’re even ranked by critics as highly as their fans think of them. Isn’t the general critical perception of them not much more than a more polite way of what I’ve expressed, that they’re “Godfathers of Goth” or some other marginalized status? They don’t get the critical acclaim of a band like REM or a less-successful band that hit in the ’80s, like The Replacements, do they? I think critics take someone like Bjork more seriously than The Cure. I’m suggesting that the eyeliner limitations need to be wiped clean, that The Cure is simply a really good pop band, kind of like The Byrds of their this era.
hmmm….
i must say i’ve always felt in the minority for not being a huge cure fan precisely BECAUSE i’ve always perceived a great reverence for them across the board: among adoring fans, yes, but also among artists as diverse as dino jr., madonna, and bjork herself, and also among critics.
as for my own feelings on where they should rank, i think ‘boys don’t cry’ is one of the better albums made in the 80s, and their resurgence in the early – mid 90s was pretty impressive because they maintained continuity with their past while continuing to explore a bit. i think robert smith is an eloquent lyricist, emotive vocalist, and a very good songwriter who is even capable, at times, of writing songs that transcend genre.
I never thought of them as a Pussy Band. This may be due to West Coast POV. Androgyny was not really equated with Pussy. Rather it was a “new wave” of rebellion. Eyeliner and teased hair was just a new way to piss off your parents. So there were balls behind it.
Not to say there weren’t pussy bands- The Smiths, ABC, Human League et al.
Also The Cure’s dark and psyche swirling sounds were great pre-goth stoner soundtracks. And as we all know, pussies don’t get high. Fuckin’ pussies.
Also- Albums like Disintegration are albums and may not translate on a greatest hits. My personal favorites are Boys Don’t Cry, Disintegration, Wish. Wish got a short shrift from the critics. It is a swell throw back to their earlier poppier days without being a retread.
I’ve always felt that the first Cure record is a classic of its era, not exactly a masterpiece but very good. At one time I had several other albums, including Pornography, that I picked up cheaply somewhere, but personally I could never get into those records.
That said, is it possible to understand on this list that different pop-rock bands might have different audiences in mind, and that maybe that difference is fine? Granted, the Cure is certainly not for male listeners heavily invested in traditional notions of maleness. But they weren’t trying to be, were they? They seem to have reached their target audience pretty consistently. So there’s a distinction here between whether they did well what they were trying to do and whether you don’t approve of what they were trying to do.
I really love:
boys don’t cry
seventeen seconds
faith/carnage visors
charlotte sometimes(single)
the head on the door
in orange(concert)
I really don’t love:
the rest of it
Mwall wrote:
True, but I’m way beyond whether I approve of their approach or not. What I’m concerned with is whether the quality of the music is better than some folks (myself included) might have initially considered. I have no interest in challenging those who already love them, by the way.
This band’s rated just as you’ve always had them pegged: as good as it gets for that stuff. They’ve got some fun songs. Some of their contemporaries with greater critical acclaim need to be brought down to earth like The Cure, not them elevated artificially.
I also haven’t listened to them with any regularity since i was about 20.
I think they are a band you can grow out of easily.
Same thing with Love and Rockets and the Violent Femmes(who only have 1 album).
Though curiously not Bauhaus, Souixie, or Joy Division.
I wonder what the difference is.
I can’t speak for Bauhaus and Souixie, but Joy Division never sounds as if the members are wearing Garanimals. (My thanks to E Pluribus for the Garanimals reference.)
Sorry for the pince-nez, but it (and its British counterpart Three Imaginary Boys) both came out in 1979. In any event, it was definitely made in the ’70s and it sounds like it (in a really good late ’70s UK post-punk sort of way). It has more in common with Gang of Four, Wire, early XTC or even the darker/moodier Buzzcocks material than anything they would ever do later. Personally this is one of my favorite records of theirs. I’m also a big fan of the following:
Seventeen Seconds
The Top
The Head on the Door
Japanese Whispers
The last one I listed is a collection of singles released between 1983 and 1984 and best represents their poppier side, I think. In general, though, I think they were pretty great up to Wish and pretty craptastic since then (though the last, s/t album wasn’t too bad).
With all that said, I’ll pull out one of their records on occasion, but like shawnkilroy said, the records by those other bands listed (as well as The Chameleons and Echo and the Bunnymen, to give 2 more examples) have more appeal to me now than The Cure. Perhaps it’s because I listened to them a lot in high school and college and perhaps it’s because like The Smiths (who I always liked more), they’re music made for people of a certain age and disposition whereas those other bands aren’t. I don’t have the answers, but I’m just guessing here.
Also, to respond to some additional comments in this thread:
Do you mean to suggest that you think Violent Femmes only released one album or just one GOOD album? Just curious. I’m thinking you mean the latter, but I’m just wondering.
Oh and Mr. Mod, the song you were thinking of from 1990’s Mixed Up is “Never Enough”. It’s not on the greatest hits collection that came out in 1986 (Staring at the Sea) but it is on more recent Greatest Hits discs, including a subsequent best-of for their post-86 material that covers up to 1997 or so.
To me, Disintegration hasn’t aged as well as some of their other work due to the synth sounds and what not. With that said, songs like “Lullaby,” “Pictures of You,” “Lovesong” and “Fascination Street” (its singles) hold up really well on their own as they’re all on the hits album I mentioned above.
Thanks, Matt. Good overview and commentary. Sad to learn that “Never Enough” is not on the GH album, but I won’t shoot the messenger.
You’re welcome Mr. Mod. I will also say that if you like the band’s more immediately accessible, poppier side, either Staring at the Sea or the disc titled Greatest Hits (look for the one with a bonus disc of acoustic versions of the same song) will serve you well. The latter also contains “Never Enough” IIRC as well as some of the earlier hits. A check of Amazon reveals this to be true:
http://www.amazon.com/Cure-Greatest-Hits/dp/B00005R09Z
Mr. Maudlin suggests:
Eyeliner and teased hair was just a new way to piss off your parents. So there were balls behind it.
I propose:
If there were balls behind the Cure, they were on a nik nak shelf on the wall next to an expensive and exotic museum quality vintage guitar no one plays. This was the first band where I realized that some Darwinian shift had occurred, and that I and my fellow Cro-Magnons would only ever be but so succesful at the small talk at future Neanderthal soirees. I could never get into them, partly because their fans always seemed to be grasping at something I never saw or heard, and seemed unable to perceive the far-more-ballsy androgyny of 7 or 8 years prior. And as Mr. Ismine was saying the other day about others, their sound just never got me in past the door. And to whoever was asking why is the Cure largely inert as historical fodder, while Joy Division is still “current” or what not? Boy, just look and listen!
No doubt that Joy Division is in a league far above The Cure. And sure the androgyny of 7 or 8 years prior had more balls. But if you live in the desert in the 70s and know not of androgyny until the heavens open up a portal via MTV- then The Cure is likely your first exposure to the concept.
I’m not a Cure evangelist by any stretch, I just never lumped them into “pussy shit” based solely on their Look.
He who smelt it…
Mr. Maudlin goes with:
He who smelt it…
I wonder:
Are you under some misapprehension of what a nik nak shelf is? Or perhaps chachkas involve a whole olfactory element “out in the desert”?
I like seeing a bit of smoke arise from this Critical Upgrade discussion on The Cure. Keep it coming, and I really ask people to focus on the humble upgrade I’ve proposed. I don’t think I’m asking too much.
Maybe I’m getting too far off the subject, but I just want to clarify something I said earlier. THE VIOLENT FEMMES is a perfect album. Every song on it is great. The album’s sound and production are completely unique to anything before or since. It has a timeless quality; it came out in 1982, I didn’t hear it till 1988, and I know college age people now who just caught on to it now and enjoy it and hold it in high regard. The band never did anything else that even came close..and ya know what?
They didn’t need to.
Makes sense to me, Shawn. Thanks for the clarification.
It’s a dry heat.
I would agree though that the music has little tiny balls. My point was that “balls” were behind their Look and schtick. At least the perception at the time was such rather than “these guys are pussies.”
Does anyone HATE The Cure?
It seems to me that everyone has agreed to hate their fans, but attitudes towards the band are vacillating between indifference and grudging respect.
I liked the early singles, especially Jumping Someone Else’s Train, which I think is perfect. I found the subsequent dark period unconvincing. I liked it when they rediscovered pop again, and Friday I’m in Love always sounds good when I hear it, though they went too far with Lovecats.
Recently I watched a concert film of theirs on TV. It seemed to be in the ‘filmed live outdoors somewhere in Europe’ genre invented by Pink Floyd. They played what sounded like the same song for over an hour. Very disappointing.
I think the overall critical consensus vacillates between grudging respect and ‘how can we miss you when you won’t go away?’ I find it hard to believe that Smith still maintains the hair and lipstick routine, which is more than a bit unseemly for someone in his late 40s.
BigSteve, I think you have summarized the discussion well. I hereby declare a mild Critical Upgrade with all the warnings you and others have mentioned. These guys are The Byrds of this era.
Thanks for clarifying, shawnkilroy. I don’t disagree with a word of that statement, though I will add that I like a few of their subsequent albums (especially III).
call me thick, but i need the “they are the byrds of this era” thing explained to me…
Re: “Byrds of this era”
Both The Byrds and The Cure, as I’ve lately determined, crank out some nice, evocative songs that sound alike and get tired if I have to hear too many in a row. Both The Byrds and The Cure are bands that I find to be on the wussy side, musically, yet they cook up a pleasant, head-bobbing groove. Both The Byrds and The Cure have highly devoted fans who are capable of reading more into their lyrics than I ever will. And so forth. I mean to compare them in a mildly complimentary way.