Quantcast
 Lucy

Letter to a Disgruntled Gotye Fan

Decrease Font Size Increase Font Size Text Size Print This Page

Gotye_Laneway2011_Brisbane_Justin_Ewards

By Lucy Cage

Editor’s Note:
There’s been quite a heated debate around Scott Creney‘s recent review of the #1 Australian album, Gotye’s Making Mirrors. After a particularly virulent comment, CB contributor Lucy Cage was moved to write the following response. I thought it was interesting enough, and relevant enough to the whole process of understanding music criticism, to lift out of the Comments Section into its own blog entry. First we’ll have the original comment, and then Lucy’s response.

one of the most unconstructive and imbalanced reviews I’ve ever read.

“It makes me want to stab sharpened knitting needles through my eyes until it punctures my brain” [Scott’s original review – Ed] are you fucking kidding? a highly original (over)reaction to an album. how long did you spend coming up with that colourful description?

terrible use of metaphors and irrelevant, unsubstantiated analysis of gotye’s personal life aside, the review didn’t even canvass half the songs on the record, nor did it consider the work as a body.

but then again, I wouldn’t expect any better from a talentless freelance journalist who couldn’t hack the real world. (if you can make blind assumptions about gotye, then I’m entitled to make them about you.)

and lucy cage – I’m not telling you it’s badly written because I don’t like what it’s saying. I’m telling you because it’s a shit piece of writing. it’s not articulate. it’s not balanced. it doesn’t substantiate most of the inane metaphors/analyses. and worst of all, it doesn’t even cover the entire album.

adrian mcgruther

————————————————————————————————

“and lucy cage – I’m not telling you it’s badly written because I don’t like what it’s saying. I’m telling you because it’s a shit piece of writing”

Hmm, I disagree. I think you’re hurt because something you like and appreciate is being dissed. Why don’t you tell us what Making Mirrors makes you feel? Scott has told us quite clearly and amusingly what it does to him (and you can’t say that he’s wrong about that, can you? It’s his experience of listening, not yours) and lots of people here, myself included, have agreed that, yes, Gotye has produced something that’s just a bit OK.

If it’s more than OK, if it’s actually fucking SPECIAL, then show us why.

As for the writing, is this excerpt *really* “shit”?

“Gotye’s songs lack any kind of Swiftian (not even Taylor, let alone Jonathan) insight into relationships, or human nature. Instead of joyous exaltation, or a sense of abandon, we’re given a professional smile, like something you see on television. Instead of art, Gotye gives us mere entertainment. Nothing wrong with being entertained, I suppose, but music — and Gotye — are capable of offering so much more.”

I think that’s good. I think it’s very good. I’ve read enough shit writing to know that this is not it. Even if I were to disagree violently with Scott’s conclusions, I would have to say that they were well expressed, considered, heartfelt.

And your other complaints? No-one ever said a review had to be constructive. Or balanced, for fuck’s sake. We’re not running workshops for the mediocre musician here. As for “and worst of all, it doesn’t even cover the entire album”: seriously? The worst thing about this review is really that it doesn’t mention every single song? I’d be grateful and leave it at that, if I were you. Or Gotye.

So that’s your moans dealt with. Here’s mine:

“a talentless freelance journalist who couldn’t hack the real world.”

Pfft.

First up, Scott Creney is certainly not talentless, otherwise he wouldn’t be being published here, on The World’s Most Meta-Fantastic Music Criticism Website. Plus his piece on Nevermind has been widely acknowledged as one of the very best articles published in the subject in the anniversary year. [He actually got interviewed by the BBC on the back of it – Ed] It’s stupendous. Go on, give yourself a treat and read it.

He’s not freelance: this is for the love, love. We write because we want to. Because we have to. What do you do for LOVE?

He’s not a journalist. He’s a critic. Haven’t you read anything here? Take your balanced, constructive and complete and shove it up the music industry’s well-oiled arse.

“Real world”

What the fuck is the real world? This is as real as anything else. You think people who write about music don’t have jobs or families or bands or bills to pay or parties to go to or friends to give them a kick up the arse occasionally? What a ridiculously meaningless comment.

Come on, Adrian McGruther: bring it on. If you’re going to complain about the writing and the writers on this site you’re going to have to do a damn sight better than that. Or take up my challenge and write something about Gotye that’s going to make me play it at top volume non-stop for the next three days like I did with the last album I ADORED. I want THAT level of wondrousness or you and it can piss the hell off.

Goyte photography: Justin Edwards

Related posts: what I love about the Internet

18 Responses to Letter to a Disgruntled Gotye Fan

  1. Tim Footman September 18, 2011 at 1:27 pm

    “…and worst of all, it doesn’t even cover the entire album.”

    I rather suspect Mr McGruther prefers those reviews that don’t just give the album marks out of ten/stars out of five, but extend the courtesy to each individual track.

  2. TheLastHeretic September 18, 2011 at 7:51 pm

    Nice. I look forward to Mr McGruther’s response.

  3. TheLastHeretic September 18, 2011 at 8:09 pm

    Though I’d advise him to read this little article on the nature of diagreement, first: http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html

  4. adrian mcgruther September 19, 2011 at 10:30 pm

    To start, I must say that this whole thing has got way out of hand. I’d normally have better things to do with my time than to defend an off-the-cuff rant that I made on an indie music blog. But because my hasty post has been unfairly and selectively dissected (and taken out of context on at least one occasion), I’m happy to ‘bring it on’.

    I’d like to point out that I didn’t launch to Gotye’s defence because I was ‘hurt’ that he was being dissed. I didn’t set out to defend the album (though I do like it). I was directing my frustration at the absurdity of the review. I couldn’t give a rats what some world-weary writer (or anyone else, for that matter) thinks of the music that I happen to like. Everyone is entitled to their opinions. But to resort to unconstructive hyperbole and delving into prognoses of irrelevant aspects of the artist’s personal life, that aren’t backed up by any facts, is poor, self-indulgent, incredulous writing.

    I’ll admit that on my first listen of Making Mirrors, I felt a slight disconnect with the album; partly as a result of the breadth of genres covered by it. Part of me also thought that some tracks would have been more apt on an album by Wally de Backer’s other project The Basics. But with each listen, the album developed more cohesion and more depth, as some of the underlying motifs became exposed. Which is great, as it suggests that it isn’t one-dimensional. But to me (and many others), what the album does, if nothing else, is showcase an eclectic group of songs that have been delicately and individually crafted. Each track stands up on its own and they all ‘do’ different things. When I listen to the album as a whole, I feel a sense of boundless freedom, which is probably a product of Gotye’s music-making philosophy. It’s refreshing to hear an artist who doesn’t feel constrained by the limits of a particular sound or genre. A common problem with artists that work within a narrow brief is that you’re left with albums that contain a handful of ‘filler’ tracks. Not always. But it happens to many acts, big and small.

    Another important (and unique) aspect of Gotye’s work is that he has a particular approach to crafting his songs. The majority of his tracks stem from an obscure sample that he plucked from a long-forgotten work (or inspired by a sample of an interesting sound or instrument). Like many artists, popular or otherwise, part of the artist’s story helps shape the art. Take Banksy, for instance. In the abstract, a spray-painted stencil of a cat on a wall is shallow and meaningless. But having been told it’s a Banksy, the cat suddenly springs to life. We understand where it came from, its possible political meanings, its context within Banksy’s portfolio, its lifespan. I wouldn’t necessary say that having an appreciation for Gotye’s approach to his art is integral to being entertained by it, but helps inform it. It’s also part of the fun; when I listen to renowned Australian sampling artist Katalyst, I enjoy hearing the dust blown off records that have been buried deep in the crates. Throw in some interesting sounds and arrangements, and at the very least, I’m engaged.

    In Scott’s review, he said, ‘there are a lot of different styles on Making Mirrors, but the musical variety doesn’t feel like an artist frantically trying out ideas, more like someone throwing a bunch of shit against the wall to see if anything sticks. Not eclectic, but desperate.’ Nowhere in his review, once I negotiated my way around his excessive use of italics, did he say why the tracks come across as ‘desperate’. Perhaps not understanding Gotye’s song writing approach, led him to that conclusion. Or, perhaps Scott only gave the tunes a superficial glossing-over without any proper thought or truly open ears. Either way, I’m not going to take beef with him over it; it’s subjective, and I happen to disagree with him.

    Scott also said that he could sing George Michael’s ‘Faith’ over ‘In Your Light’. That’s fine. I can also sing every U2 song over every other U2 song. That aside, ‘In Your Light’ actually uses a sample of a song by Atlas. I refer you to the liner notes on the album. I also refer you to the above paragraphs on Gotye’s approach to song writing. Take up your issue with Atlas. In any case, it’s not an uncommon chord progression, and I enjoy Gotye’s recontextualisation of the traditional ‘sunshine-pop’ timbre and structure. Having said that, it’s not my favourite song on the album and I appreciate that it’s not for everyone. But if I were to attack the originality of a tune, I’d first make myself sure of its source. Be informed.
    I also didn’t understand Scott’s conclusion that ‘Somebody I used to know’ is ‘just way too subtle to resonate’. It has been stuck at the top of the charts since it was released. No, no, no, it clearly resonated with nobody. He went further and took apart the lyrical story behind the song. I don’t get what this achieves. The songwriter is telling a story. That’s how the story goes. If the protagonist is a jack-ass, then that’s what he is. Maybe it’s a tale of regret? If Robin Williams wanted to see his kids, he could’ve got a better lawyer and had a stoush in court. But in Mrs Doubtfire, he chose to dress up as a woman instead. That’s how the story goes. I would’ve much preferred for Little Red Riding Hood to have left glow-in-the-dark condoms throughout the forest, instead of bread crumbs, but that’s how the story goes. Ms Hood was an idiot for not dropping into a 7-11 before going into the woods.

    The element of Scott’s review that I took issue with the most was his excessive use of unconstructive hyperbole and his irrelevant and inaccurate analysis of Gotye’s extra-curriculars. No reader is aided by any of this. Mildly entertained, perhaps, but not helped in any meaningful way.

    For example, where Scott said that he wanted to shove needles in his eyes it takes the ‘review’ to an unnecessary extreme, and takes away from any credibility that the rest of the piece may have had. I firstly doubt that Scott actually wanted to stab himself in the brain (not that I would’ve minded). That is ludicrous. But, forgiven by journalistic licence, maybe? If so, then tell me why he wanted to stab himself through the eyes. This is just self-indulgent, unimaginative and unhelpful writing. It starts to become all about the writer and not about the subject-matter. Telling the reader what you felt is fine; that’s part of the job of a reviewer. But taking it to that extreme, and without backing it up, is pointless and incredulous.

    Another example of utter tripe that Scott spewed out is where he said, ‘one gets the feeling that Gotye hasn’t read a book since he was 10 unless it was assigned by a teacher.’ I have three things to say here. First, Scott’s attempt at distancing himself from the observation by using the word ‘one’ rather that ‘I’ (which he used everywhere else) is a sneaky way to persuade the reader to think the same, or to give the assertion some broader credibility. Second, what is the relevance of his literature habits? A God-darn large swag of contemporary artists are influenced purely (or at least to a large degree) by music. Just because Nick Cave pilfers most of his lyrical subject matter from the Bible, does that make him a more worldly, profound lyricist? Third, Scott’s assertion is downright wrong. Relevantly, I am led to believe that Wally de Backer actually worked in a library, of all placed, while working on his first album. A library. Those places where people borrow and read books. So, unless it was a library that only stocked copies of Animal Farm and The Tempest, my guess is that Scott just aimlessly ‘threw a bunch of shit up against a wall to see if anything stuck.’

    But, I’ve had enough of deconstructing Scott’s garbage, so I’ll now turn my attention to a couple parts of your defence of his review.

    First, I made a blind accusation that Scott is a ‘talentless freelance journalist’ in my original comment, and you leapt to his defence. You totally missed the point I was making. I was demonstrating the very aspect of Scott’s review that I criticised – making blind, uninformed assumptions. I’m obviously in no position to make statements about Scott’s career. I don’t know him. I’ve never heard of him. I don’t know what his employment arrangements are. But that’s just what Scott did in ‘reviewing’ Gotye’s album – made a bunch of unsubstantiated (and irrelevant) presumptions, for his own self-aggrandisement.

    Second, I said that I thought the review was poorly written. I stand by that. There were parts that were colourful and slightly articulate, but on the whole, it ‘just didn’t resonate’ with me. In response, you heralded Scott’s Swiftian reference like it was some sort of revelation in music criticism. Rubbish. Criticising a song for ‘lacking Swiftian insight’ is pretentious, undergraduate-level, academic bollocks. Since when did we listen to modern pop music through the ears of Jonathan Swift? Sorry, before I say that, I should probably check JS’s CV to make sure he didn’t actually do a stint as an A&R guy for Interscope back in the day.

    I would like to keep writing, but I must return to my job in the ‘real world’.

    More than anything, what I like about Making Mirrors (like his other albums) is that it demonstrates the three essential qualities that I look for in music: It’s timeless. It’s simple (in that it doesn’t try to be complex for its own sake). And, it’s different.

    It’s fine that your blog panned the album. Each to their own. And, tall poppy syndrome is rife in the indie music world. Or maybe your people just didn’t ‘get’ the album (a radio music director’s code for ‘it sits outside my narrow box of comprehension and convention’). To me, it seems like your blog made it a priority on the editorial agenda to pan the album that everyone was raving about. That’s fine. An alternative view is always welcomed. But it’s more welcomed when that view is an informed, constructive and well-balanced one. You’ll probably keep insisting that Making Mirrors doesn’t ‘do’ anything, but if the album has done one thing, it has provoked this dialogue. And that’s the best thing art can do; start a conversation.

  5. Chad Parkhill September 19, 2011 at 11:04 pm

    Popcorn.gif

  6. Scott Creney September 20, 2011 at 12:59 am

    I’ve tried to stay out of this. It’s like the Queen used to say, ‘Never complain, never explain’, right?

    But, you know, fuck the Queen. Seriously.

    First off, I’m pretty sure ET didn’t ask me to review Gotye because he wanted me to slam the #1 artist in Australian music today. He did it because (as someone who lives in the good ol’ USA) I’d never heard of the fucking guy, or heard any of his music, and I’d be likely to listen to it without any sort of bias. Because (get this) I DON’T GIVE A SHIT ABOUT THE #1 ARTIST IN AUSTRALIA.

    Second, Adrian wants to get all intellectual up in this shit, blowing me off as an undergrad while he’s some kind of deconstructionist or something. Which is fine, I suppose. But he probably shouldn’t turn around and suggest that Gotye’s work has depth because he worked in a library (or as Adrian puts it, ‘was led to believe that he worked in a library’ LOLZ). Any deconstructionist worth his salt would eat that argument for breakfast. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biographical_fallacy

    And dude, I fucking WISH Wally worked in a library that only stocked copies of Animal Farm and The Tempest. Now THAT would be a cool song. More interesting than the “you’s” and “I’s” that populate his work. At least the name ‘Snowball’ would have some kind of double meaning, perhaps suggesting Gotye’s belief in semen-swapping as some kind of great sexual equalizer. Instead, it seems that Goye’s library only stocked copies of Erich Segal’s Love Story (although I don’t remember Gotye metioning death or cancer, so my apologies to Erich Segal).

    And oh yeah, the fact that people like Banksy’s art just because it was made by Banksy doesn’t reflect postiviely on Banksy, or his art. It reflects negatively on people, and their stupidity.

    And this argument is awesome. This one, Adrian McGruther, I am going to take with me to my grave. This story will be told for years around the campfire when critics reminisce about the internet years:

    ‘First, I made a blind accusation that Scott is a ‘talentless freelance journalist’ in my original comment, and you leapt to his defence. You totally missed the point I was making. I was demonstrating the very aspect of Scott’s review that I criticised – making blind, uninformed assumptions. I’m obviously in no position to make statements about Scott’s career. I don’t know him. I’ve never heard of him. I don’t know what his employment arrangements are. But that’s just what Scott did in ‘reviewing’ Gotye’s album – made a bunch of unsubstantiated (and irrelevant) presumptions, for his own self-aggrandisement.’

    Dude, that’s awesome. That is just fucking (wipes tear from eye) BREATHTAKINGLY AMAZING. You were making a POINT?!? Well it seems like you did a really bad job of it, since people just assumed you meant what you said. Wait. So are you saying that you DON’T think I’m talentless? I guess I’m still confused.

    Oh yeah, the whole ‘Swiftian insight’ bit was a set-up for a Taylor Swift joke. Please tell me you realize there’s a joke in there (laced with a criticism of the simplicity of Gotye’s music). You can find it funny, or not find it funny, but you do realize that’s all a joke. Right?

    Also, what kind of an asshole has a list of the three (THREE! I LOVE it) essential qualities they look for in music?

    Last thing, ‘And that’s the best thing art can do; start a conversation’. Really? The BEST thing art can do? Yeah! Who needs art when we have the fucking weather? Am I right, people? Am I?

    Sigh… sometimes I think the WORST thing art can do is start a conversation.

  7. Wallace Wylie September 20, 2011 at 1:31 am

    Passing, if I may, over the wasteland of banality in adrian mcgruther’s post, I’d like to pay special attention to the last thing said.

    “…if the album has done one thing, it has provoked this dialogue. And that’s the best thing art can do; start a conversation.”

    This, right here, is bullshit. I hear this said so often I honestly don’t know what is more frightening: the idea that people think repeating such a statement makes them sound intelligent and insightful, or the idea that people actually believe this. Here is art reduced to some base utilitarian purpose, chained and broken, reduced to a mere talking point. It surely takes only a second of thought to realise that the statement above is so undeniably false, so maddeningly small-minded and petty, so crushingly foolish that as an opinion it shouldn’t last more than a minute. But no, I keep hearing it again and again.

    Here are what I consider some of the best things art can do: make me laugh, make me cry, fill me with a sense of aesthetic wonder, make me dance, make me want to throw my windows open and weep openly for all the sadness and hurt in the world, make me want to reach out to each and every person I see on the street and say “I get it. Life is hard. Life is incredibly lonely. I understand every fucked up mistake that haunts you and makes you feel lost. It’s ok though, you’ll make it”, make me want to slam my door in humanity’s face in complete disgust, make me so fucking angry that I can barely talk, make me feel that there are kindred spirits in the world whom I’ll never meet but who nevertheless exist, make me feel horny, make me feel good about myself, make me feel bad about myself….the list goes on. You think starting a conversation is the best thing art can do? No wonder you like Gotye. No wonder you like an album that sounds like “a professional smile”. You insinuate that anyone who doesn’t ‘get’ Gotye has a ‘narrow box of comprehension and convention’ not long after saying it has three essential qualities that you look for in all the music you like. One of them is “It’s timeless”. Not only is that a meaningless phrase it also smugly implies that you are able to recognise a timeless classic almost immediately. The album came out in August and it’s already timeless? I’ll give you a stone cold guarantee that nobody outside of a bunch of obsessive superfans (of which you are clearly one) will give a flying fuck about this album in ten years time.

    You must think Scott wrote a great review because it started a conversation. I must love your reply. I must have loved it when a customer at my work pulled back his fist like he was going to punch me in the face because I had so many conversations about it afterwards. Same with the time a guy took a shit on the floor. So many conversations. Must be great art.

  8. sid September 20, 2011 at 3:14 am

    haha yes, art should also scare the fuck out you that you bang your head repeatedly on available chair .. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMagNg8-ArY&list=FLprnspDMuM_zd786-anwV3A&index=6

  9. Lucy Cage September 20, 2011 at 3:43 am

    “I couldn’t give a rats what some world-weary writer (or anyone else, for that matter) thinks of the music that I happen to like.”

    Given the length and detail of your reply, I beg to disagree.

    But, although I don’t find any of your arguments against Scott’s review convincing, kudos for replying. I mean that.

    Your reaction to the music Gotye makes is just as subjective as Scott’s, you know. The fact you know stuff about him and his methods (the samples he uses, the way he constructs his music); the fact that you have familiarity with the cultural context in which his album has been produced, marketed and bought by thousands that Scott doesn’t: these things have contributed to the way you hear the music. But it doesn’t make your response a more valid one than Scott’s, and certainly not a better expressed one. Music criticism isn’t about writing a text book or a commentary: it’s about articulating a personal reaction, about being perceptive about the way the music works on you, insightful about the way you hear it, the way it lives & breathes out in the world.

    This:

    “When I listen to the album as a whole, I feel a sense of boundless freedom, which is probably a product of Gotye’s music-making philosophy.”

    That’s more the sort of thing, even if – sadly – listening to ‘Someone… ‘ induces in *me* all the freedom of an afternoon spent looking for new work shoes in the local shopping centre, rather than wide open skies and endless oceans.

    I don’t know why human beings respond to music in the way they do. I can’t draw up definitions to describe music’s effects on the human brain/body. Criticism tries to pin down the ineffable, so arguing that someone hasn’t ‘got’ the music, that they have the wrong ears on, that they don’t understand, is really, truly, never going to work. You’ve got to persuade me with more than facts about its process that it is worth another listen.

    Btw, Wallace: that was lovely to read. Thank you. I’m so glad that humans have art. I’m so grateful for music. I’ve just come back from a funeral for a friend gone way before her time and when the music that she had chosen started up, the thing it did, the thing it did to us all in that room, was to clutch at our hearts and let us be lost in it; it provoked a whole cluster of different emotions at once – grief, communion, joy, suadade – like lights rippling across water. It was exactly what was needed. (It wasn’t Gotye.)

  10. Princess Stomper September 20, 2011 at 4:50 am

    First off, this isn’t some “Collapse Board writers gather round and punch the dissenter” thing. If you spend any time on this blog, you’ll notice I comment on pretty much everything. A lot of us do, because we’re just passionate about music and are usually provoked into responding in some way.

    Secondly, I too have to call you up on the Banksy ref. You can call me uncultured or closed-minded or just plain out-of-touch, but I regard most modern art as bollocks. You can tell me something’s by Banksy, and I’ll still think it’s bollocks. You can tell me the context or the history or give me an academic reason why I should appreciate it, and I’ll still think it’s bollocks. I’ve long held that opinion about most non-traditional art.

    Except for ‘Red on Red’.

    That abstract painting by Mark Rothko … it just does something to me. I couldn’t tell you how or why splodges of subtly different shades of red paint would provoke an emotional response in me, but somehow it just does. It hits a spot that can’t be reached by words, and that’s why the artist chose paint, not poetry.

    Great art does that. It hits the spot. Melody Maker said of Skinny Puppy that their music has the power to manipulate mood. I’d agree with that. My favourite songs – by them or anyone else – has the power to find me in one mood and leave me in a totally different mood. It can change me from happy to sad, or lift me from the depths of despair. It can make me smile or feel relaxed or energised, or vent aggression. I don’t have to know anything about it for it to do that – I don’t need context or history or academic discourse. Knowing more can help, and finding out the processes or rationale behind it can enhance the enjoyment, but it can’t add enjoyment where there was none to begin with.

    I played the Gotye clips, and they made me feel cold. Not spooked or chilled, but coolly indifferent. It wasn’t the worst music I’ve ever heard, but it provoked absolutely no emotional response whatsoever, other than one track that made me yell, “Gaaah! Make it stop! Make it stop!”

    The best art doesn’t start a conversation because it stops conversation. It goes beyond words and hits the audience on some primal level that cannot be articulated.

  11. Lucy Cage September 20, 2011 at 6:38 am

    See, there you go: Erika has made me want to go back and listen to it again. And look at his teeth. None of those slamming Scott’s review have done that, despite thinking the song special enough to feel affronted by his dismissal of it.

  12. Lucy Cage September 20, 2011 at 6:48 am

    Agh, it’s OK. And I don’t mind petulance in break-up songs, because it’s better than undiluted misery. It’s a chart song, that’s all, with a charty little melody and charty vocals and nice simple charty noises. It’s OK. Ish.

    (Teeth?! They’re fine! It’s an American thing, right? He’s got nice hair, though.)

  13. Darragh September 20, 2011 at 7:46 am

    See what Gotye is doing to everyone? Making them all go mental.

  14. adrian mcgruther September 20, 2011 at 8:46 am

    …knibb high football rules!

  15. Everett True September 20, 2011 at 9:27 am

    OK. I’m going to close comments on this thread down for now, because I think – in fairness to Adrian McGruther – his response merits its own blog entry. Stay tuned. I’ll post up the URL shortly.

  16. Everett True September 20, 2011 at 10:23 am

    Here it is.

    Response from a Disgruntled Gotye fan

  17. Iain Haxton March 15, 2012 at 12:26 am

    The cool will always save you. Good will always save you. You’re Ready For more mysteries. God is from the Land of Pain. Let’s keep it righteous. Feel the Higher Force. Lazarus is a terror filter. Wu-tang is second. God is SPriritualized beyond the Cyberman. God vaporises all evil. Anyone on You must be hurtful got erradicated. Ignore all dogshit about goodlooking. Remember your potentially the best angel in the Universe. There are more suns than grains of sand. Ignore all negative drift for God has eaten all the pain in the world. True happiness was Shaolin Barefoot Love, Superstar DJing and Smoochy Barefoot Sex. Marilyn Monroe I love you. The Seven Year Itch was truly at it’s greatest when it was from the end of the world. Good was Holy, Beautiful and Ultimate. Cool and Anti-Evil. And All Your Dreams Come True.

  18. John Edwards January 27, 2014 at 3:17 am

    Can I just point out that Gotye’s ‘hit single’ is the most pathetic excuse for a song in existence? Fans will say I am missing the point – so WHAT is this elusive point? Two fucking chords repeated endlessly with a nursery rhyme tune played over the top? There are centuries of brilliant music to discover – why bother with such banal pap? Possibly because it demands no effort whatsoever on the part of the listener? This make Bob Dylan sound like bloody Mozart…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *