archive : A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z sdtk comp
Cover Art Joan Of Arc
How Memory Works
[Jade Tree]
Rating: 4.6

Id: What the hell is this that we're listening to?

Ego: It's How Memory Works by Joan of Arc. You probably wouldn't like it very much.

Id: Damn right, I wouldn't like it. It's barely listenable! They're taking some great indie-rock sounds-- chimey guitars, cheap synths, the occasional weird rhythm, and autistic wordplay-- and totally ruining them with their arty pretension. Lemme see that CD case. Hmmmm... wasn't Tim Kinsella the guy who used to sing for Cap'n Jazz? His keening caterwauling may have been more acceptable within the whole emo-rock thing, but here it's just irritating.

Superego: To me, it sounds like Joan of Arc are trying to jump on the post-rock bandwagon but not quite succeeding. I'd posit that they've been listening to way too much Gastr Del Sol, judging from the oblique acoustic guitar figures in "To've Had Two Of," "A Pale Orange"'s percussive bursts of metallic static, the tape- manipulated drum break in "A Life Cumulative," and the sad piano coda "A Party Able Model Of."

Ego: But you've got to admit that things get better in the second half of the album. "White Out" and "God Bless America" actually have some energy and melody to them.

Superego: True, but most of the time they seem too content to twiddle about with dull elliptical guitar chimes and pseudo- ambient tones.

Id: Damn right. Not enough actual songs here to balance out all the lame "experimental" stuff.

Ego: At least they're trying to experiment with their sound and do something a little different. Just because they happen to miss more often than they hit doesn't make them any more or less pretentious than other post-rock types.

Superego: The one thing I worry about is that the post-rock movement might be hurt by How Memory Works. Mainstream publications have been trying to fit post-rock into a conventional genre mold: a scene (Chicago), a flagship band (Tortoise), and a reference to a past sound ('70s prog). Although their hyped "crossover" release (Tortoise's TNT) got mostly mixed reviews. All it takes to sink a genre is a bunch of imitators jumping on the bandwagon, and this album could be the start of it.

Ego: Don't you think you're overreacting a little bit? I think it's refreshing to hear a band so clearly and innocently in love with sound and its endless variations. Besides, just because they share some characteristics with so-called post-rock bands doesn't mean they're trying to imitate post-rock bands. While this album may not be all that attractive, you've got to admit that Joan of Arc are honestly trying to find new avenues of sound, and this is a step in the right direction.

Id: Hmph. I guess so. But that doesn't mean I have to enjoy it. You artsier types can listen to it all you want, but I'm going over here to try to repress the memory of having listened to it.

Ego: Hey, you can't do that. That's my job.

-Nick Mirov

TODAY'S REVIEWS

DAILY NEWS

RATING KEY
10.0: Indispensable, classic
9.5-9.9: Spectacular
9.0-9.4: Amazing
8.5-8.9: Exceptional; will likely rank among writer's top ten albums of the year
8.0-8.4: Very good
7.5-7.9: Above average; enjoyable
7.0-7.4: Not brilliant, but nice enough
6.0-6.9: Has its moments, but isn't strong
5.0-5.9: Mediocre; not good, but not awful
4.0-4.9: Just below average; bad outweighs good by just a little bit
3.0-3.9: Definitely below average, but a few redeeming qualities
2.0-2.9: Heard worse, but still pretty bad
1.0-1.9: Awful; not a single pleasant track
0.0-0.9: Breaks new ground for terrible
OTHER RECENT REVIEWS

All material is copyright
2001, Pitchforkmedia.com.