SOUNDTRACK: DEFTONES-Adrenaline (1995).
My friend Cindy recently told me that the Deftones were playing nearby. I hadn’t realized that they were still together–there was some personnel issues a few years back. But indeed they are and even released a new album last year. So I got their latest album and really liked it. This made me go back and listen to their earlier stuff too.
I came to Deftones with Around the Fur, so this debut album is less well known to me. And yet, there are two songs that I absolutely love on this disc and which easily put Deftones above so many other heavy bands of the era (I’m not willing to say nu-metal because it’s stupid and Deftones transcended the genre from their first album). “Bored” and “7 Words” are masterpieces of controlled rage and tension. “Bored” opens the album with this aggressive guitar noise, letting you know what you’re in for, but the chorus shows how Chino Moreno is a master of his diverse use of vocal styles. Especially after a few soaring choruses (he has a great singing voice) when he whispers the final verse.
The way “7 Words” open is practically like Jane’s Addiction–an noisy aggressive guitar with a big bouncy bassline and some intricate drumming. Chino’s voice comes in like an impatient whisper. It’s a great start. Then when the chorus comes in (basically just the word Suck repeated over and over), the guitars bring in a Soundgarden vibe. It’s really a great track, wonderful to crank loud. And there’s no long ending. It’s just done.
The rest of the album plays some interesting textures and sounds. They are a very riff heavy band with a lot of screaming (that would change over the years), but they are never ordinary. Some of the tracks aren’t as memorable, but it’s a consistently interesting album. And, for the time, it was quite original. The way the riff plays against the vocals on “Minus Blindfold” is very challenging. The opening guitar riff of “Root” is very punk but the discordant guitars are really very metal. There’s some great moshing riffs on the album (“Nosebleed”) along with some really interesting guitar sounds (see “Engine No. 9”). And the drums really stand out for all of their intricacy. Not all of the songs pack the same punch, and, after knowing their later stuff, the album is a little samey, but it’s a good start and a great opening salvo.
[READ: February 20, 2013] “Hideous Interview with Brief Man”
My friend Andrew sent me this and described it as a mash up and David Foster Wallace and H.P. Lovecraft. And indeed it is. Although I admit my Lovecraftian knowledge is there, it’s not very deep, so I’m not exactly sure how Lovecraftian this is, but it is definitely Wallaceian, as you can tell by the title.
And indeed, the story is constructed like a story from DFW’s Brief Interviews with Hideous Men: there’s a series of answers and a series of questions posed just as the letter Q.
It took me a couple of questions to realize that the Brief Man being questioned is Wallace himself and as the story comes to an end, it becomes apparent that this is an interview with Death. It’s a fascinating idea, one that will likely ruffle the feathers of Wallace fans. And yet Mamatas has done some of his homework about Wallace.
There’s some obvious parts, like titles from his books being used in the answers, although they do work very well in context and flow naturally. The less obvious sections seem very true to the spirit of Wallace. The writing style doesn’t really ape Wallace or his interviewing style which I think is addressed by the comment: “there could be no worse fate than being known for exactly the sort of person you actually are.”
During the interview, the Q asks about Wallace’s laconic nature (as opposed to his loquacious demeanor) and wonders if it has anything to do with the Midwest. And right away there are endnotes. The endnotes are pretty interesting and while I can’t exactly vouch for their veracity vis-a-vis Wallace, they do seem philosophical and linguistic at the same time. The meaty philosophical stuff occurs in the middle. I rather like the answer: “I doubt that any philosopher can really answer any philosophical questions, all they can do is use language to rephrase philosophical questions in such a way that preclude the answers they’ve already decided to dislike and distrust.”
The interviewee breaks with the rules by asking a question and gets chided for it but begs a chance to ask just one question: What did Danforth see in At the Mountains of Madness that drove him insane? (There’s your Lovecraft). I actually don’t know if Wallace read Lovecraft (which I know isn’t the point of this at all). There’s also a strangely coincidental mention of Sherlock Holmes (see yesterday’s post).
The final footnote talks about Near Death Experiences which I also found fascinating.
There is something inherently creepy and unsettling about this piece.
Leave a Reply