Re: Strange Angels

[claris!wombat@decwrl.dec.com (Scott Lindsey)]

In article <8911150007.AA06220@GAFFA.MIT.EDU> nessus@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Doug Alan) writes:

> Am I the only one disappointed with Laurie Anderson's latest album?  In
> my opinion, her first album was her best, and each succeeding album
> has gotten progresively worse.  The latest one is particularly boring.
> Oh, well.

No... I've got a friend still trying to decide whether it ranks higher than
_Mister Heartbreak_ or not.  Personally, though, I see it as an attempt at
artistic growth by Ms. Anderson.  _Big Science_ was definitely a work of art,
but like many great works of art, it's not one I can live with day to day:
it is reserved for contemplation (read: I can't sit and program with it in
my headphones :-)  I think that Laurie is trying to continue to produce that
which is art and that which is musically familiar and pleasant.  Not an easy
task, so perhaps some standards were compromised... personally, I liked it
on first listening than I did _Mr. Heartbreak_ on first listening... and it's
something I *can* listen to while doing something else...

One *might* say that Kate's albums have gotten progressively boring since
_The Dreaming_ and be right *in a very naive sense*, but, like Kate, I think
that Laurie has added depth to her artistry.  _Strange Angels_ contains some
snippets of pure genius.



Scott Lindsey     |"Cold and misty morning. I heard a warning borne in the air
Claris Corp.      |    About an age of power when no one had an hour to spare"
ames!claris!wombat| DISCLAIMER: These are not the opinions of Claris, Apple,
wombat@claris.com |    StyleWare, the author, or anyone else living or Dead.