In Somebody's Place

I come not to praise Coldplay, but to bury my head in the sand about them.

I listened to that free cd that I picked up, and I have to say that I'm not sure if I'm in a different frame of mind from any sort of critical standpoint, but it definitely gave me a lot to think about from an intellectual standpoint.

I think that the reason that I've always seemingly disliked Coldplay and bands like them has grown more out of a sense of mistrust of them. What I mean is that they attempt to straddle a line between being hip and being popular, and in my backwards, teenagerish way, I feel like those two aspirations have to be contradictory in some manner. The underlying problem, however, is that bands like Coldplay see what someone like U2 has achieved, and they feel like that combination of hipness and popularity is not only possible, but pretty much assured.

However, I feel like U2's place in that regard was earned. In other words, they started out as the scrappy underdog, and gradually transformed themselves into the stadium rock darlings, while maintaining at least some of their credibility, and demonstrating more that they had always written those kinds of songs, but that now they were actually marketing them that way as well. Whereas Coldplay just started off as Achtung Baby-era and never let up.

It probably doesn't help that for some, the parallel for Coldplay has always run closer to Radiohead, and that band has had an even more uncharacteristic arc. They started off as the epitome of mainstream/stadium rock, strengthened that somewhat, and then regressed to a stage where they have almost peaked in hipness and popularity, but not for any music that they actually make anymore. What I mean is that everyone knows who Radiohead is, so they have the popularity, but no one actually listens to Radiohead's current music. Additionally, they have all of the credibility of a hip band, but I don't think anyone finds their music to be all that challenging anymore. (To be fair, I'm interjecting my own opinions as if they were globally shared, but I don't think I'm going too far, either)

So where does it stop? I saw that WU LYF was on Letterman the other night. Does that say anything about their hip/pop quotient (which I just made up)? Is this even a discussion that a reasonably developed man in his 30's should be having anymore? Of course it is, because it smooths out that man's identity, and I haven't even really made my point through all of this.

The Coldplay cd was ok, but the impression that I kept getting was that they were trying, and I don't want to hear that in my music. I don't want to hear you reaching for either aspect of the quotient, I just want it to happen. The lead track is over 5 minutes long, and should have ended after a little over 3 minutes. Beyond that, it's a little self-indulgent, and then I discovered in the liner notes that it's intended to be a call to arms over the issue of fair trade. Then comes a cluster of the actual "singles", and then comes a run of slow-building songs that also go on a little too long. Only a band trying too hard would track an album like that, and it drives me crazy. Space out the rockers and the ballads, front-load the album like anyone halfway sensible, and bury your little pet causes towards the end of the album.

Don't make me hate you instead of just mistrust you, Chris Martin. You seem like a decent enough chap from the time that I saw you on Colbert.