Transcript: In a darkened room furnished by a simple table and pair of wrought iron chairs and lit only by a pair of novelty Bauhaus lamps, Billy Corgan approaches a DiS scribe to converse about his new record, Zeitgeist. Corgan is bright and breezy, conversational and fairly charming. Things have started well…
Ah, Mr Corgan. Welcome back. Not brought your friends? No need... no need… just bring those metal riffs of pop destruction. Jimmy, you say? Excellent… can you settle him down, please? He’s getting a little agitated…
Now, Mr Corgan, I expect you’re pleased with your comeback.
“It’s not a comeback, I’ve just reclaimed my right to rock. I wanted my dreams back.”
Ah yes, you’re referring to that full-page advert you took out in the US papers last year. That was, umm, a little portentous, wasn’t it?
“Well, this is the Smashing Pumpkins.”
True Billy, true… but then again, we’re lacking, as I mentioned before, James and D’arcy…
“Oh, so that’s stopped me making albums before – Siamese Dream, please? That was pretty useful, wasn’t it? I recall top reviews in Spin, Rolling Stone, Alternative Press...”
Yes, yes, indeed Billy. Sorry.
“I AM THE SMASHING PUMPKINS. With Jimmy, of course...”
Ah yes, Jimmy, what does he bring to this record?
“Drums, you idiot.”
And you?
“Vocals, backing vocals, bass, guitars, synth, syncopated handclaps, Moog and, um, panpipes.”
Panpipes?
“No, I’m just kidding there. I did put some in Mellon Collie... though. Did you notice them?”
Yes, unfortunately I did. Almost ruined that album for me.
“Man, you musta been pissed with Adore, then.”
Quite liked that one actually, Bill… But to be honest, I’m pretty glad you’ve returned to the rock. Those first songs off Zeitgeist are pretty heavy…
“Thanks, I like to shred…”
Mmm, yes. But it’s a bit like repeating the trick from Mellon Collie… and Siamese Dream, isn’t it? ‘7 Shades of Black’ sounds like it came off the same production line as ‘Jelly Belly’ or ‘Zero’...
“But it holds up well in comparison?”
Well, yeah…
“Cos all you lazy fucking journalists are going to do is compare it to my breakthrough, era-defining psychedelic heavy rock records, aren’t you?”
Yeah.
“And?”
Well, in the immortal words of Sven Goran Eriksson: ‘First half good, second half, not so good’.
“Who the hell is he?”
That’s not important right now. What is more pressing is how, after a good six-song rally in the first half, you let the whole album go to pot from there on in. I mean, why all the ballads, Billy? They really are the definition of meandering suckiness.
“Which ones? They’re wonderful, metal-melancholic lullabies with slight gothic overtones!”
All of them Bill. But in fairness, ‘Never Lost’ and ‘Pomp And Circumstance’ are the worst. I do, however, lay down the wreath of absurdity at the feet of ‘United States’ – that’s ten minutes of unnecessary, grinding, slo-mo dirge, right there.
“I’m famous for my epic rock tracks!”
Mmm. It’s hardly ‘Porcelina of the Vast Oceans’, is it? I guess, however, that you’re at least trying to match the pretentiousness of that title...
“Pretentious? Moi?”
Sense of humour still intact, I see. In fact, you never really...
“...got the credit for our dark-tinged humour, no.”
And of course you appeared…
“…on The Simpsons, yes”.
That was one of my all-time favourite guest appearances on that show; that bit where Homer says: "Thanks to your gloomy, depressing music, my children no longer hope for the future I cannot afford to give them.”
“And, and, I said...”
"Thanks, we try our best!"
“Good times.”
Good times indeed. Anyway, let’s get back to the matter in hand.
“Yes, let’s.”
Do you know what my problem with this record is?
“What, apart from the fact that you think the second half of the record is gash?”
Quite. Ploughing on though, I don’t understand why you need to write a bubblegum rehash of glories old. Zeitgeist sounds like a watered-down version of the best bits from Mellon Collie…, meaning it just ends up being too similar to Machina… for its own good. Fortunately, you’ve managed to remove those horrible metal-electronics that you were using too much around then.
“That was a bit costly, wasn’t it?”
Mmm. ‘Stand Inside Your Love’ was ace though. There’s no lightness of touch anymore, Billy, what happened to being graceful with your bludgeoning guitars? You used to to kiss us before you fucked us with the Fender Blender.
“Nice analogy.”
Thanks, but seriously, it’s all just nerrrr neerrrrrrr nerrrrr kazangggggg! now... It sucks.
“This is hardly a constructive conversation any more, is it?”
Sorry, you’re right. It’s a decent album, okay? It’s just not heavy enough to impress me anymore, nor visionary enough to compete with the new breed, nor packed full enough with great pop tunes to make me enjoy it on a Sunday afternoon. Oh, and the cover looks like an outtake image from Planet Of The Apes, rendered in a hideous graphic novel styling. In fact, rather like this ill-conceived piece of writing: it’s just become a bore.
“Let’s end this here, shall we?”
Let's.
You know
I'm sure I typed in drownedinsound in my broser and not pitchfork. guess not.
Agreed
What an awful review.
i guess
you'd better start an online petition then.
i'm already bored of "i'll review this review"ers and it's only comment 2.
are you auditioning
to write for pitchfork or something?
lol
whats wrong with pitchfork
pitchfork...
Ironically, Pitchfork's review of the album sounded like what Gareth was after, except without all the muffling of words that autofellating tends to cause.
To be honest
...when I started reading this review, I expected to hate it, but fair play Mr Dobson, good stuff.
Pretty much what I expected from Corgan, although I'll probably end up buying it.
Damn my sense of completism!
I'm sorry
what?
O God it's pitchfork all over, i have just read a review and have no idea why it scored a 5!!!!! just that it scored a 5.....
I heard this album n score it around 6 so yah good score, shite review.
What the hell
are you crapping on about?!
there was enough
in there to explain why it got a 5, you've just got read between the lines. He's not reviewing the latest Dyson for "Which Vacuum Cleaner?" magazine you know.
I think it was important to get across the point in the review that Corgan is a money-grabbing, egotistical, pathetic excuse for a man and one who does not deserve anyone's money for his latest pathetic attempt to revive former glories.
Come now..
get off the fence.
calm the fuck down mate.
"pathetic excuse for a man"? jeez...
let's hear your classic album. you don't have one? i see...
Nope, that's true,
but I have also produced significantly fewer albums of half-ar$ed, badly sung, insipid, derivative sh1te in a single-minded bid to make as much money as possible in the last 10 years.
So that kind of evens it out in my mind...
you're so right
doing nothing is better than doing something.
the review
was funny and different from normal, which for me made it more interesting.
boo hoo.
Poor review
Why even bother writing it? You acuse Corgan of pretentiousness, which is pretty ironic considering the state of this review.
The album is pretty good overall, personally i'd rate it as a 7.
Corgan has got it wrong...
With this album. It's absolute rubbish. When he asked the others to play in the chicago new paper advert and they said no he should have said ok, i'll do a solo lp with Jimmt instead. Loud guitars can't hide the lack of decent melodies or song structure. I'm choosing to remember Machina as their last offical lp.... RIP Pumpkins.
He is
a pretentious fuck though, right?
Oui henri
Yeah i'd say the Corg is pretentious, but then he has a great back catologue of work too... does the article reviewer?
This isn't an actual interview - right?
Not an actual review either - just someone trying to write something smart. And you think corgan's got an ego problem?
DiS is just getting worse and worse every day - in fact, more and more like NME. Smart ass reviews that don't actually review anything.
shut up
.
erm, why?
exactly?
lol @ the hardcore fans coming out of the woodwork
funny piece gareth - good work.
i liked
the review, it was funny in places and said enough about the album for me too. Just cos its tongue in cheek doesn't mean the critique isn't there.
meh.
It's a shame Ian Richards didn't review the album (he reviewed the Paris performance). The show review got my hopes up for a straightforward and thoughtful take on the album, rather than a wank-off with about three sentences of useful criticism.
Ignore those tarts...
It's a good review.
everyone who criticises reviews
on these comments should either a) grow up or b) put their head in the oven and turn it on.
Or write one themselves
Gash!
Gareth - very good, clearly wasted on many of these proles.
The first four tunes are massive, just feel the rest sounds like poor man's QOTSA.
The live set is currently mindblowing though.
Ax
Oh dear god....
... this review is conceited dogshit.
There's just no need for this kind of wank to be written. You'd think good music criticism was as hard as rocket science the way this guy is going on.
don't listen to the goths
I liked your review - it made me smile and was a useful vehicle for comparing what Corgan's intentions must have been with the fucking dog's mess that this record is.
goths?
Nah man... A casual listener to the Pumpkins at best.
I just wanted to know what I should expect from the album— I'd heard better than expected from some critics and from some friends who like the band more than I do— and was disappointed to find that I had to draw that information from a couple sentences wedged into a lengthy warmed-over "Billy's Enromous Ego" joke that would have worked about 1/2 dozen Corgan-related releases ago.
That's all.
what...
... is sweet Jehovah's holy name just happened here???
god
this is just like pitchfork. someone sack this dobson. i'm gonna write to the editor.
^
I just have. How can he possibly be funny AND review the thing at the same time?
great review,
accurate score. job's a good'un.
The reviewer got fired
ALL DiS staff
just got fired.
we're bringing in the guys from Q since people seem to want extra-safe "this is track 1 and it sounds like this.. this is track 2 and it sounds like this.. this is track 3 and here's this month's list".
worst cover ever
.
worst cover ever
.
Well I thought the interview was very nice
...and if you haven't got anything nice to say, then don't say anything at all.
Mums have all the best lines
"Well
in the immortal words of Sven Goran Eriksson: ‘First half good, second half, not so good’.
“Who the hell is he?” "
Anybody who works that sort of line into a music review must be a genius!
Being a fan boy n all
in the relief of this album not being as bad as I feared it might be, i forgot to notice that its not all that hot either. I got grubby paws on it a while back, and havent listened to it since...
I quite like the review, cause despite the album being average it still hurts my heart for someone to slag the Baldy, and a meticulous examination of this album probably would've resulted in a clinical butchering. Instead its amusing.
Funny review
in a way
Well....
I'm not the biggest Pumpkins fan in the world, though I do like them, so I like to think that gives me a bit of objectvity here. While the review was reasonably funny, well written, and enjoyable etc., I didn't get what I wanted from it really.
As something to kill the last few mins of work on a Friday before going home time, it was OK, but its not really a useful review.
It's like buying a ticket to see Schindler's List but accidentally getting one for Jurassic Park.
I respect a reviewer that tries something different
because it takes a lot of guts, and could really go badly.
But this is just a bit too pretentious. I'm not a Pumpkins fan so I'm not stating this as an opinion of bias, but you haven't managed to put any thought into my head about what any song sounds like.
As..
...someone said, I appreciate people trying new things in reviews.
But for such a big comeback, of which many people would be curious to what extent the Pumpkins have moved forward/backward etc, this review is absolutely god-awful to read.
I wouldn't mind the idea if it read well. But like, it really doesn't..
???
worst review I've ever read in this site, quite possibly the worst I've read in my entire life. My head is actually hurting after this.
and I read NME, so I'm used to this level of predictable unfunny pretentious shite.
usually I come to DiS for fair and well written reviews. Guess that will have to change.
Not that anyone cares, I'd give Zeitgeist a 7.
Well...
To be fair "Well, in the immortal words of Sven Goran Eriksson: ‘First half good, second half, not so good’." made me chuckle at work.
I think it's an interesting enough piece, might be worth someone sticking a proper review up to go with it though.
I think 5 might be a little harsh, but it isn't a classic.
As a fan up until this album
I couldn't care less about the quality of this review; the quality of the album is infinitely worse. Nothing is near the equivalent of "Zero" and even the oft-maligned "Machina" was far superior. "Zeitgeist" is a good way to nail a coffin shut and head out on money-grabbing festival dates to fans who "just want to see their hero." Forget it, a total waste of time. 5/10 is generous.
Good review
It doesn't matter how big-a-band they were, the new album is dull and Dobson's review conveyed this excellently. Just because it wasn't in your typical format it doesnt mean it neglected to address the album's failings. Compared to - say the review in the Guardian - this actually expressed (implicitly) what I felt when listening to the album. Dobson appears to be a fan of The Smashing Pumpkins' old work, and is desperately trying to find the elements that made them such a great band in the new album. In doing so he highlights exactly where Corgan has failed; and has written a more accurate review than those that say "Corgan was always overrated, this album's boring blah blah". As an afterword, this is another example of why it's a bad idea for these bands to reform - it always leads to dissapointment.
Im not defending the writing here but..
People dont like anything that isn't the norm. I hate pretentious writing but who cares with this album. Does it honestly deserve to be talked about? I think DIS are right to totally take the mickey. Corgan has with the record. I mean how many different commercial versions with different bonus tracks are coming out? He must need the money or maybe the cost of hiring the rest of the band for the next 'real' record is higher than he thought.
I thought the writing was funny
Maybe I'm just a cynic.
As for people bitching about the score, have a look at metacritic.com. Corgan's latest guitar-powered fuzzy turd rated a 56. That's six spots from the bottom of the bowl. Right down there with Linkin Park and the Happy Mondays.
RstJ
We...
...shouldn't write reviews of albums that pretentious people don't care about?
There goes the NME.
This review fucking sucks
You ass! You completely put down Billy, and you obviously don't know good music if it bit you in the ass. This is the worst review I ever seen, I expected a 10, Billy Corgan and The Pumpkins are just as amazing as they was back in the 90s, you really shouldn't be writing fucking reviews when you obviously have no idea what you're talking about you retarded douche bag!
You are
Billy Corgan.
Well,
American at least. I bet he thought that post really, like, owned and stuff.
What's that, Billy?
Little Jimmy's stuck down the well?
The funny part of all these comments
is that Pitchfork only has a couple (infamous?) reviews in this tongue-in-cheek style.
I can't comment on the album because I've only heard the very 5/10 single.
Oh and what I meant to say is
that based on that sub-par Machina single Tarantula (and the way Billy just pronouned it on that Live Earth crap "tar-ran-tool-la" and his "just kidding" remark about every one "paying" for the album) Zeitgeist probably deserves this sort of roasting.
So, Yay! for Gareth
And, Nay! for Billy.
Despite my pumpkins bias
I don't think the review focuses enough on the merit of the record objectively. Seven Shades is one of the best songs they've done, and if it sounds like it's off the same production line as Jellybelly, it's because it's of the same caliber. I'll agree that this album is, in the most part, a misdirection. It's like Pumpkins meets Van Halen. However, the only real tragedies are the TFE style ballads, which are admittedly terrible. I think the album is easily worth more than half marks, but if you're going to lump it next to the best albums ever recorded (SD & MC:IS, imo), then it's going to be hard to take stock of it on it's own merits.
could someone please review this album?
quit trying to be a comedian and review some fucking music. This goes for the people jumping to criticise the reviewer aswell.
the album's a six for me, personally.
It's an atrocious album
but worse than that, it's a terribly depressing listen because it's not uniformly awful. I find the heavier tracks completely contrived; it feels like the amps have been turned up to cover poor songwriting; or perhaps they got so wrapped up in attempting to recreate the earlier Pumpkins sound that Corgan didn't have time to actually develop the songs to any degree.
The depressing bit is actually That's The Way, which is head and shoulders above everything else on here. It demonstrates the value of actually having a good song underneath it all; even though the aesthetics of the track are - gasp - all a bit Machina (layers and layers of bright, trebly guitars and synth), it comes across as more convincing, uncynical, and outright fun than all the other tracks combined.
The rest of it ranges from boring (7 Shades of Black) to awkward (Doomsday Clock) to downright embarrassing (United States; For God and Country; Pomp and Circumstance). The bottom has been falling out of Corgan's songwriting for some time; sounds like he's finally hollowed out.
Any time I feel like listening to newer SP stuff, I'm going to put on the oft-neglected Machina II. Stuff like Dross and White Spyder really put this album to shame.
Thanks
for giving me some direction on the song to go for. I pretty much agree with everything you said. Gareth's review is great, much better than most of his stuff. I really don't see how anyone could not get a sense of the record from this. It talks about the songs loads! Just because it isn't addressed directly at the reader it doesn't mean that the music is being ignored.
Oh, and am I the only one that really likes Machina?
P.S. HI GARETH
Oh, fuck
I forgot to mention that the vocals on this album are INSANELY loud at certain points. On first listen, when the "we are stars" bit came in on Starz I actually Lolled.
Hi!
Oh, you meant the other Gareth.
On the subject of 'reviewing the review;' stuff like this is fine when it's funny and still manages to talk about the album itself. And it's especially appropriate when you have a situation like this where there has been interesting stuff going on behind the scenes; it feels like this record has been cursed with The Hand of Corgan. So yeah, s'all good.
The vocals are indeed TOO LOUD; and I like Machina in parts. Age of Innocence is one of the best songs what they ever did done wrote, with their minds.
shit me
why would anyone who can't sing for toffee actually turn the vocals UP?? Corgan's more of a deluded fruitloop than I gave him credit for...
not heard the album
but I like the review.
Stupid people think it's cool.
Smart people think it's a joke; also cool.
Wellbutrin CR
The press is a vampire.
let's pray that BC does
not read the reviews.
He has soul, and is quite
sensitive. If anything,
maybe this round of
press will humble him
a bit. It's time to give
back. See: todd rundgren
and ric ocasek for
poitners. BC will make
a great records.
cs
More time could have been spent explaining...
... that 'Pomp & Circumstance' is utter cock; that the mixing on the vocals is horrible on all bar a couple of songs; and that 'Bring The Light' features one of the best solos ever.
i find it
slightly interesting that this review (and the one on pitchfork) both singled out the album's lack of "lightness" or orchestration...i thought these were reasons the pumpkins were derided the first time around? we all know the score with billy corgan, but i dont think an entire review should be dedicated to his prick-like tendencies. they should be noted sure, but the album, actually, isnt that bad.
im no hardcore
pumpkins fan at all, but most of the reviews come across as a corgan biography post-pumpkins, rather than a record review..