It's 'role', not 'roll'

thx

um, ive been saying that for years.

but sam that just means, that like all music, you are wrong (for years)

interestingly enough All Music also rates the four previous Sufjan albums 4 our of 5 stars.

S.T. Erlewine loves taking pot shots at the top of the indie world. See his reviews of the last Bright Eyes albums, which are downright cruel. At any rate, some of the negative Sufjan press seems a bit unfair, given that The Avalanche is effectively an outtakes album.

An excellent point. His Bright Eyes review was just about the most outrageous thing I've ever read on a legitimate music site. And while I'm not a huge Bright Eyes fan, I couldn't help thinking that this guys just seems to take pleasure in going AGRESSIVELY against the indie grain.

The last Bright Eyes album is, in my humble opinion, WAY overrated by the indie scene in general. Even Q Magazine gave it 5 stars...which is ridiculous. It's worth 3 at the most.

I think there is some merit to the notion that Sufjan is overrated. He's good, but a lot of wannabe hipsters treat him like he's royalty. He's far from it (for now).

I think Erlewine is on for the most part, except for his "deliberately limited appeal" wording. I wouldn't give Stevens music that description.

S.T. Erlewine's right on in this case, as he was with Bright Eyes. I give sufjan points for lyrics & production value, but I feel like he's a historian and conceptualist more than anything, and at his worst not much more than a murmuring milquetoast. I admire him more than I'm moved by him. Erlewine here [as he often does] is just giving a much-needed sense of balance and perspective to the hyperbolic, sensationalizing music "journalism" surrounding a lot of music today [esp. sufjan].

I'll admit to being a Sufjan fan, but my problem with Erlewine in both this case and with Bright Eyes is that he spends more time arguing against what other people have said about the artist than what their music sounds like. Furthermore, he accuses the artists of presumption that they have never assumed. In the case of Bright Eyes, he attacked the "next Bob Dylan" angle, which is nothing Conor Oberst has ever claimed to the best of my knowledge, and with Sufjan he attacks it as not being as good as Brian Wilson, which isn't really the point. He also takes little shots at the indie establishment, which, while probably valid, come across as smug and resentful. Regardless, I don't think it's fair the use The Avalanche as any sort of barometer for Sufjan's career path, since he's all but admitted in interviews that he doesn't even like these songs very much, hence them not making Illinois. What that says about him as an artist is a completely different debatable point, but outtakes compilations need to be approached as what they are.

Not a single one of those girls is as hot as Katrina Kearns

philabuster has a point

S.T Erlewine is saying what I've been saying for years. Viva AMG.

A touch jealous are we Mr. Tom Erlewine?

He really does like to whine a lot. Doesn't he.

Everything that this guy finds wrong with Sufjan's music is exactly what makes it amazing. He lost any shred of credibility after dissing Seven Swans.

WHEN IS THIS SUFJAN & PUSSYCAT DOLLS ALBUM COMING OUT!

Found this on a music-themed website, kinda long, but basically does a great job of picking apart Erlewine's article and showing him for the bitter, poor writer that he is. The quotes all come from the article itself.

Quote:
Over the next month or so, I listened to it a few times, finding it modestly charming. It was an enjoyable, whimsical oddity, the kind of record you listen to several times and marvel at its ambition, scale, and quirk, yet one that rarely finds its way off the shelf (or accessed from the hard drive, if that's your poison of choice).

RESPONSE:
All at once, Mr. Ermeline is marvelling, finding it modest, and rarely listening.

Quote:
Instead, this Michigan native became an "important artist," turning into an indie cause célèbre last year with the release of his fifth album, Illinois, or in its full title, Sufjan Stevens Invites You to Come on Feel the Illinoise.

RESPONSE:
Notice how the quotes deliver a scoff. Does Mr. Ermeline scoff at anyone who achieves some celebrity in the indie world? Are they all equally sneer-worthy? Or is the idea of an important artist itself the ridiculous concept here?

Quote:
True, he doesn't make my skin crawl the way that Conor Oberst does, but oddly that's part of the problem. Oberst's strained hyper-sincerity at least provokes a strong reaction, ranging from love to hate. Conor gives the impression that he really means it, man, which isn't something that is easy to say about Sufjan.

RESPONSE:
Translation: I'm annoyed that, on the surface, there's nothing about Sufjan Stevens or his music that lends itself to an easy critical dismissal.

Quote:
Quite appropriately for an artist who is building his career on a schoolboy's conceit of writing albums about every one of the 50 states

RESPONSE:
Was it a schoolboy conceit when James Michener decided to write a book about each of the fifty states? Or when James Joyce chose to write a sprawling novel encompassing the timespan of a single day? Or when Vivaldi composed music for each of the four seasons?

Please notice how Mr. Ermeline peppers his writing with these quick one-offs, supported by nothing, in a facile attempt to rally our scorn against his target.

Quote:
The novelty of his 50-state project paired up against the High Llamas-eseque arrangements helped him become a distinctive figure in the increasingly fractured world of indie

RESPONSE:
The novelty of his 50-state project had very little to do with his becoming a distinctive figure in the "world of indie."

Quote:
yet his miniaturized pop isn't a unifying force

RESPONSE:
Holy shit, art that isn't a unifying force?! How dare he!

Quote:
And that's fine to a certain extent — great music doesn't certainly doesn't need to unite listeners

RESPONSE:
Then what was your fucking point?

Quote:
It's just that the universal acclaim granted Illinois gives the impression that it's a welcoming listen, when really it finds Sufjan Stevens closing a circle, creating a precious world that is insular and also alienating, since he does very little to draw listeners in

RESPONSE:
Oh, so we're blaming the artist for "universal acclaim"? Sorry, did he bestow the acclaim on himself? And where is it written that it's his job to pander to a wide audience, or "draw listeners in"? In fact, what the fuck does that even mean?

Quote:
It's where his novelty loses all charm.

RESPONSE:
Right, because we're back to the pretense that the charm of his 50-states novelty is the one and only reason for his popularity. Gotcha.

What an absolutely abysmal paragraph, and a real disgrace to the idea of writing. Mr. Ermeline does very little to disguise his bitterness with the Sufjan phenomenon, or the fact that he'll spend the rest of the article constructing logical fallacies in an attempt to unseat him.

Quote:
His charm started to show some cracks on Seven Swans, a quiet respite between states albums whose bare-bone nature had little of the flair of Michigan.

RESPONSE:
Really, a purposefully bare-bones album lacked some flair of a previous effort that wasn't purposefully bare-bones?

Quote:
Without this flair, Sufjan seemed like a pedestrian Elliott Smith, only without Smith's haunted grace or natural melodicism.

RESPONSE:
So, basically...he seemed like a pedestrian Elliott Smith? Nice writing again.

Quote:
Many fans and critics find it a sophisticated display of wit and delicate composition, since there is often a tendency to label any album with woodwinds and brass as being sophisticated. But even if Sufjan can play oboe....

RESPONSE:
Translation: Every music fan and music critic who has lauded Sufjan Stevens has done so because his albums have woodwinds and brass, and Sufjan can play oboe. Only Mr. Ermeline himself can sweep past these conceits and deliver the truth behind the oboe.

Quote:
his music doesn't play as sophisticated, because of the school-report nature of his subjects — each song is thoroughly researched, spit-shined, and presented for the class, as if he's reciting all that he learned during his time in the library

RESPONSE:
Again, what does that even mean? Does he rate the story-telling songs on Illinois, the spiritual tunes, the inter-personal dynamics? Or did he just listen to the first half of "Decatur"?

Quote:
Because, apart from the conceit of writing songs about a particular state, there isn't much connection to the sound or feel of the state in question.

RESPONSE:
I guess he missed where the entire album is full of Illinois lore. Its people, its events, its geography, its history...I mean, Mr. Ermeline, what was he lacking?

Quote:
Stevens never taps into the musical history of a state

RESPONSE:
Oh, okay, that's where he went wrong.

Quote:
And since that baroque folk-pop isn't all that distinctive on its own merits — it certainly doesn't have the complexity or range of Sean O'Hagan's or Jim O'Rourke's work, to name two contemporary touchstones — he needed a hook like the states project to make himself stand out from the pack.

RESPONSE:
As the rest of his non-sensical arguments run dry, we see Mr. Ermeline revert to the old crutch: Sufjan is only popular because of the 50-states gimmick. Something he hasn't deigned to prove in this article, much like the rest of his points, but which he asks us to accept at face value. Great writing, indeed.

Quote:
And there's also a suspicion that without the 50 states project, Stevens just doesn't have that much to say; certainly the monotonous nature of Seven Swans and the cluttered Avalanche suggest as much.

RESPONSE:
A themed album, previously conceded by this writer as bare-bones, and a collection of B-sides prove that Sufjan's creative capacity is nil without his precious 50-states charm, which, we should remember, is the lone reason for his popularity.

Quote:
His pretension — his convoluted song titles, his cloying song about Saul Bellow, his adolescent fascination with John Wayne Gacy, Jr...

RESPONSE:
The convoluted song titles are an attempt at humor, the Saul Bellow tune is a B-side, and what, approximately, makes his "fascination" (defined by writing a single song, mind you) with a serial killer adolescent? The song seeks to understand his motives, to find some sympathy inside the insanity, and this is the work of a teen? How so, Mr. Ermeline? Alas, in accordance with the rest of his article, he doesn't bother explaining this adjective.

Quote:
Appropriately, his lyrics often read like the work of a gifted but sheltered high schooler

RESPONSE:
Which lyrics, how so?!

Quote:
and it's all wrapped up on albums with stylized childish artwork, hand-drawn pictures that inadvertently wind up enforcing the impression that Stevens is an overgrown teenager.

RESPONSE:
A wonderful conclusion to this well-thought-out piece, implying that a few pictures, drawn in the spirit of whimsy, seal the deal on Sufjan's immaturity.

In sum, Mr. Ermeline's article is a collection of unproven accusations, unmerited bile, and unprofessional criticism. He should really be ashamed of this lousy effort at writing.

"unproven accusations, unmerited bile, and unprofessional criticism."

Because someone can rebut a person's criticism with counter-criticism does not make it unproven, umerited, nor unprofessional.

I think Mr. Erlewine did a fine job outlining why many of us cannot stand this guy.

Whoever wrote that critique of Erlewine's reviews has a lot of time on their hands.

He might not be the greatest writer in the review business but he's on with general idea. Too many people are on the Sufjan and Bright Eyes bandwagon that they get a little upset when anyone says something bad about either.

And in response to another comment, Bright Eyes is CERTAINLY not the next Dylan. I know he never said he was, but it's still valid for Erlewine to point out that whoever came up with that label is dead wrong.

"he's just not that into you."

"Found this on a music-themed website"

what website?

Erlewine wrote what had to be written about Bright Eyes. Someone had to stand up to the sycophants. For a band that is as reviled as Bright Eyes amongst most people I know, you'd never know it from the press. No one even comments on the dislike. It's like 50% of the so-called "indie hipster" population's opinion is completely discounted. Erlewine took a stand against the mainstream press and said enough is enough and wrote what a lot of us think. The guy is NOT the next Dylan.

And remember that Tom Erlewine doesn't speak for the whole staff of AMG, many of whom like Sufjan Stevens. Tom Erlewine's taste is usually pretty impeccable, and I think it would be hard to impeach him on that.

When did Sufjan fans become so defensive?

Seems more like Sufjan-haters are the ones on the offensive.

There's lots of good music out there. You can skip right over Sufjan if you like.

I'm looking forward to his upcoming shows and whatever new music Sufjan creates.

michigan and seven swans are good, but illinoise is a wanky dogshit trainwreck with boring instrumentation.

this is for people who have never listened to Van Dyke Parks and randy newman. people whose record collections dont predate the year 2000, frequent starbucks and love NPR.

that line in John Wayne Gacy:

"And in my best behavior
I am really just like him
Look beneath the floorboards
For the secrets I have hid"

GIMME A FUCKING BREAK SUFJAN. GACY RAPED AND MURDERED LITTLE BOYS. YOU ARE A CHOIRBOY.

barf.

I just don't want this thread to end. Let's argue about McSweeneys now.

Where's BBBCult when you need 'im?

A dogshit trainwreck? That's even better than a catpoop hailstorm!

turds 'n' violence
turds 'n' violence
turds and violence

This AMG review is unbelievable. It has triggered even those who love Sufjan Stevens to say things like, "I'll admit, I'm a Sufjan fan". Are you kidding me? If someone said they didn't like the sound of your voice would you start talking with a different tone?

This review tries desperately to strike a chord of discontent in it's readers in order to either A) garner attention and/or B) fool readers into believing this reviewer has shown us the light and we are idiots for praising this album.

There are clearly critical statements that you could make about Sufjan Steven's. His music certainly isn't for everyone, no music is. My problem with this review is that countless statements in the review are without merit. For instance: "Stevens never taps into the musical history of a state -- never touching Chicago blues or jazz, or Michigan soul or rock". Because Sufjan is playing music he must write songs about music? The inane logic behind this statement almost made me crap my pants. I could continue to cite others but no one has probably reached this far into my post anyways.

That being said, I'm disappointed that I've even taken the time to give any sort of attention to this review as I'm pretty sure I am giving this guy exactly what he wants - A voice.

God, please some of you get over this anti-stevens bandwagon. A person writes some amazing albums, gets popular, becomes part of youth vocab and as predicted is automatically shut down. I can't stand to hear about how Stevens was 'sooooo 2005'. His music is amazing, pehaps 'sexed up' by the media but none the less his music is beautiful. The reason it is so hard to get anywhere in the industry these days is that artists who do manage to make it are automatically past their tenure after a short ride of success because apparently they don't deserve anymore than that. Its just short sighted ignorance. Enjoy the music and stop worrying about being the first to hear the next big.

God, please some of you get over this anti-stevens bandwagon. A person writes some amazing albums, gets popular, becomes part of youth vocab and as predicted is automatically shut down. I can't stand to hear about how Stevens was 'sooooo 2005'. His music is amazing, pehaps 'sexed up' by the media but none the less his music is beautiful. The reason it is so hard to get anywhere in the industry these days is that artists who do manage to make it are automatically past their tenure after a short ride of success because apparently they don't deserve anymore than that. Its just short sighted ignorance. Enjoy the music and stop worrying about being the first to hear the next big.

God, please some of you get over this anti-stevens bandwagon. A person writes some amazing albums, gets popular, becomes part of youth vocab and as predicted is automatically shut down. I can't stand to hear about how Stevens was 'sooooo 2005'. His music is amazing, pehaps 'sexed up' by the media but none the less his music is beautiful. The reason it is so hard to get anywhere in the industry these days is that artists who do manage to make it are automatically past their tenure after a short ride of success because apparently they don't deserve anymore than that. Its just short sighted ignorance. Enjoy the music and stop worrying about being the first to hear the next big thing.

God, please some of you get over this sufjan stevens bandwagon. A person writes some dumb albums, gets popular, becomes part of youth vocab and as predicted is automatically praised as infallible. I can't stand to hear about how Stevens was is 'sooooo amazing'. His music is adolescent, overly 'sexed up' by the media and far from beautiful...

you say tomato, I say tomato.