Criticizing Still Life

[E V I L]

To all:

I already expressed it here and elsewhere and I'll do so again, and this will be very pertinent (and controversial) considering how this board is full of still life lovers (which I gather from the results of "best opening song in an opeth album" poll i set up).

For me, Still life fails to be "majestic." Musically, sure it's rich, but there's something lackluster about it. Something about the vocals, something about the very nature of the music itself.

It's a concept album, and I respect it and marvel at it as such. It's a story. But it's an "action-oriented" story, it's extroverted, it's a narrative, not of emotion exactly, but actions and their consequences, and the music is oriented around this and is a conveyance for this. It's not like MAYH which tends to be introverted, ghostly, and therefore much more emotional and involving. Still life has a dryness about it, listeners are passive observers of the story, rather than "symbiotic," for the lack of a better word, active participants of the music directly (as in mayh, or BP- which I am plugging here because it is derided in another thread).

Not to say still life is devoid of "emotion," but I think properly understood, it is at best inadvertantly or secondarily emotional, that is, its emotional impact comes through by 1) whatever empathy we can grant the narrator (which for me at least doesn't amount to much since we're talking about a guy in a village or town), 2) the sum perception of the "quantity" of the music, the number of riffs and "changes" there may be in each song.

If #2 is what gets you going, hey, to each his own and whatever floats your boat. I tend to judge music by a different criteria.

Although I love still life too, it's more of a serene kind of respect. If still life is a work of art, it is more a museum piece to be stared at through spotless glass, than a personal device one can work and use over and over again.

Make sense? Good. Flaming and otherwise are strictly Permitted. heheh :hotjump: :hotjump:

 

[Sputnik]

Everybody listening to music in a different way...Its about taste!

I think that Still Life is more emotional than MAYH, but MAYH is very close. Thats only MY taste...

 

[_Transparent_]

sorry for liking still life , i dont mean to offend you by saying i like the album, i just happen to like it it's not my fav album but i dont see whats wrong with it.

 

[S4R]

It's your monkey fuck it anyway you want. Just for those who don't know that's my equal to, whatever floats your boat.

 

[Lina]

EVIL, it's hard for someone to "debate" Still Life's merits with you, because you're not referring to anything concrete, like the riffs, the structure, the vocals, etc. You don't like it because it doesn't give you as great a feeling as some of the other albums. And as you know, feelings are completely subjective. I don't like Katatonia based on concrete musical reasons , but they have many fans because of the feeling their music conveys. To me, Still Life is extremely emotional -- so much, in fact, that I had tears rolling down my face as I listened to it in the dark on headphones in bed last night. What you're arguing is your emotion, and that's fine, but you seem to want to spark a debate.

 

[Alucard]

It's all just opinions, and there's nothing wrong with your's Evil, I just don't agree with it. I personally think that Still Life has some of the most emotional stuff on it that they have ever done.

 

[Villain]

Yup, very well written. You managed to express your feelings in a very understandable way and with very nice metaphors (the art in museum vs. the art in your hands).

I wish I could tell you in such a way, WHY I do like Still Life so much. Regrettably - I can't. But I believe someone else here can and will (hint, hint for you Hoser, Duvall and others).

-Villain (np: The Black League - "The Everlasting Pt II")

 

[Mayh]

I believe that one who is so obsessed with analysing music can´t enjoy it. If you pick at every small thing instead of enjoying the music although it has some minor flaws it will go to waist.

I like Still life and everything opeth has done and I also like to analyse music but to a certain point, but you are of course free to dislike it or not like it as much as the other albums.

 

[E V I L]

Originally posted by Mayh
I believe that one who is so obsessed with analysing music can´t enjoy it. If you pick at every small thing instead of enjoying the music although it has some minor flaws it will go to waist.

I like Still life and everything opeth has done and I also like to analyse music but to a certain point, but you are of course free to dislike it or not like it as much as the other albums.

I'm not obsessed with "analysing music." I do however take care to analyse my feeling and explain the reasons why I may feel a certain way about a certain thing a) hoping others might relate b) hoping others might debate. (yes, yes y'all I am the opethian rapper )


As written, I love Still life, but it's become my least favorite due to the reasons I listed, i.e., 1) it's an extroverted narrative that I can't really associate with as I can, for instance, with the themes in Morningrise. 2) I don't really like the riffs; most of them lack the dynamicism and momemtum those of the other albums have (Compare the riffs in the moor with those of leper, for instance,- sorry I'm away from either of these albums right now so I can't illustrate with examples) 3) The delivery of the lyrics and the "unfolding" of the story verse by verse seem less eventful. (again compare the moor with leper) 4) the vocal performance itself seems the most tame, almost as though Mikael's not into it.

#4 is not obvious but after engorging myself with BP and other albums steadily for sometime and then listening to Still Life again, I couldn't ignore this.

Again, don't get me wrong, I do like the ballads (face and benighted) as far as liking ballads go, and I love serenity a lot, which i regard as wildly emotional (if only because the "action" in the story actually hits its climax and is at its most dramatic, also one of my alltime favorite tracks, btw), but I assert again, that the emotional impact- for me at least- seems to be an indirect one.

There is an aloofness and distance about Still Life because it's a narrative that primes on actions amongst villagers (townspeople?), rather than the "inner life" of the narrator directly. And the music is oriented exactly that way. All things considered, I feel like a passive observer, a witness, when I listen to Still life.

Taken as a story and the music as the soundtrack, so to speak, of that story, still life is pretty moving as tragedy and epic. But (for me) it's serene. I love it as I do a museum piece.

-- EVIL, non-conformist defender of BP

 

[Duvall]

This is a really interesting thread, and I'd like to see likers and haters of each album come forward and express their views. No "Orchid" sucks kind of stuff, but real, well thought-out arguments.

Still Life was my favourite album for a time. Only recently
I changed that to Orchid, and I'm positive that Still Life will have its rotation again.

I'll be mostly comparing MAYH and Still Life, since they are the two concept albums, both with a clear plot and characters.

I always considered the first two tracks some of my favourite lengths of Opeth music. From the serene beginning of The Moor to the crashing end of Godhead's Lament, it always holds my attention. I find the album quite emotional, but definitely on a different level than MAYH.

MAYH has a feeling of hopelessness and an ethereality (neologism!) to it, given that it's viewed first person from the afterlife, so to speak. Still Life, though played out somewhat like an action movie (though we have no backstory), is more evocative in its imagery, I would say. The lyrics flow in a more sentence/story-like structure than MAYH.

Musically, the album's production and tightness are a notch up from MAYH, because the new members weren't yet settled in for MAYH, I suppose.

What I'm really getting at is that Still Life really has all the elements that MAYH is missing, but MAYH still stands VERY solidly on its own. Still Life's tracks all have an equal weight to them (except Benighted, which always feels cut a little short to me), whereas on MAYH there are a number of small, TOOL-like "Filler" tracks.

Hm, I'm going to listen to both now to get a better idea maybe. Still Life first. I'll get back to y'all on this one.

 

[RETIREDTrapped]

I don't enirely disagree that the story is secondarily emotional, but still, it is very emotional.

'Pale touch, writhing in the embers
Damp mud burning in my eyes
All the faces turned away
And all would sneer at my demise'

or

'Saw her fading, blank stare into me
Clenched fist from the beautiful pain'

 

[Satori]

LIKE everything, the measure of SL's emotion is entirely subjective.

Just thought I'd throw that in before we start mistaking our opinions for reality.

I think there's only one person whose opinion on this subject transcends all others, and I'll give you a hint as to this person's identity: he is still peering through the looking glass.

Satori

 

[Katatonic]

i do agree that still life is one of the most emotional albums opeth has written, but i do not think it is neccecarily the best. it uses great emotional parts in the lyrics, and is well backed up by the music, but i do not think it is better than MAYH or Orchid. Oh, well, this may just be me being wierd again.................

 

[Villain]

Originally posted by E V I L

There is an aloofness and distance about Still Life because it's a narrative that primes on actions amongst villagers (townspeople?), rather than the "inner life" of the narrator directly. And the music is oriented exactly that way. All things considered, I feel like a passive observer, a witness, when I listen to Still life.

Taken as a story and the music as the soundtrack, so to speak, of that story, still life is pretty moving as tragedy and epic. But (for me) it's serene. I love it as I do a museum piece.

After thinking about that for a while, I think I found the reason why I do like Still Life so much: it is not so immediate, personal, but rather distant - AND THAT'S PROBABLY THE REASON I LIKE IT MORE THAN MAYH!

It is like the difference of being a player or a gamemaster in roleplaying games - as a player you can feel the small nuances of the story, the very heartfelt emotions and such; BUT you'll never see the full picture. Now, a gamemaster never sees "inside their heads"; BUT has the whole story folded in his fists, so to say, and when he slowly opens his fingers the events will unfold and grab the players by their balls (duh!). So, IMO MAYH represents a more "player-like" approach to the story, whereas Still Life hints of a wider perspective regarding the story itself, somewhat similar to that of a gamemaster. Needles to say, I often enjoy the latter more.

Probably half of you didn't get what I tried to say...

-Villain

 

[Satori]

Originally posted by Villain


After thinking about that for a while, I think I found the reason why I do like Still Life so much: it is not so immediate, personal, but rather distant - AND THAT'S PROBABLY THE REASON I LIKE IT MORE THAN MAYH!

In time, I think most people will realize that mayh is the greatest achievement by opeth. It just takes a very very long time to appreciate this album, unlike SL and BWP, which are quite a lot more commercially viable. Why do I feel this way? Cuz I think most opeth fans are pretty open minded and that they love the harsh pain/pleasure and the proggy aspects of the band (best demonstrated on mayh). Just a theory. It took me almost a year to fully appreciate mayh, unlike the 2 which followed which took just a week or 2 and then I got kinda sick of them).

mayh is FUCKED UP. I think he put more effort into writing this one than any other and to me it's just sooooo good that I don't expect them to ever reach that level of brilliance and aggression again.

Satori

 

[Till Fjalls]

Originally posted by Satori


In time, I think most people will realize that mayh is the greatest achievement by opeth. It just takes a very very long time to appreciate this album, unlike SL and BWP, which are quite a lot more commercially viable.

Again, this is totally subjective. I agree that MAYH is their greatest achievement, but I fail to see how SL is more commercial. It took me a few months to get into MAYH and really love it. It took me from the release date (NOV??) until June of the year following to get into Still Life. And I still love still life. So it wasn't any easier to get into, that's for sure!

 

[D Mullholand]

Originally posted by Satori

In time, I think most people will realize that mayh is the greatest achievement by opeth. It just takes a very very long time to appreciate this album, unlike SL and BWP, which are quite a lot more commercially viable. Why do I feel this way? Cuz I think most opeth fans are pretty open minded and that they love the harsh pain/pleasure and the proggy aspects of the band (best demonstrated on mayh). Just a theory. It took me almost a year to fully appreciate mayh, unlike the 2 which followed which took just a week or 2 and then I got kinda sick of them).

I disagree about the "proggy" part. MAYH is not proggier than Orchid or Morningrise, it's like a transition to the really progressive stuff. Still Life and Blackwater Park are more progressive. The commercially viable thing is nonsense. Illusion, because of the introduction of recurring riffs, no ?

----------------------------------------
NP: Gentle Giant - The Power and the Glory

 

[Satori]

Originally posted by D Mullholand
I disagree about the "proggy" part. MAYH is not proggier than Orchid or Morningrise, it's like a transition to the really progressive stuff. Still Life and Blackwater Park are more progressive. The commercially viable thing is nonsense. Illusion, because of the introduction of recurring riffs, no ?

----------------------------------------
NP: Gentle Giant - The Power and the Glory

I don't think commercial viablitiy is an illusion due to the recurring riffs. I have fresh people listen to the albums and SL is by far the easiest one to make some sense out of and get into, and bwp perhaps even more so. Mayh is not as easy of a listen by any stretch.

To me, SL and Bwp are not nearly as insane overall as mayh, in fact, some parts of these albums are very repetitive and a hell of a lot more structured.

Mayh is just whacked from beginning to end, with perhaps the exception of Credence, and that's not a bad thing.

To me, prog is better defined by songs that repeat parts as little as possible and have more parts over all. In that regard, mayh obviously stands out. So does morningrise, I just find morningrise more on the straight and narrow whereas mayh is very omni-directional and just completely insane from beginning to end. That's my 2 cents anyway.

I'm a little shocked that you think bwp is more proggy than mayh, I really didn't think anyone thought that, including Mikael himself as evidenced in intererviews he did in regard to bwp. In fact, the title track is probably the least progressive tune they ever did and it bores me to tears. It's cool, but I need more diversity than this to make my intellect and emotions bleed.

Satori

 

[D Mullholand]

Originally posted by Satori

To me, prog is better defined by songs that repeat parts as little as possible and have more parts over all. In that regard, mayh obviously stands out. So does morningrise, I just find morningrise more on the straight and narrow whereas mayh is very omni-directional and just completely insane from beginning to end. That's my 2 cents anyway.

I'm a little shocked that you think bwp is more proggy than mayh, I really didn't think anyone thought that, including Mikael himself as evidenced in intererviews he did in regard to bwp. In fact, the title track is probably the least progressive tune they ever did and it bores me to tears. It's cool, but I need more diversity than this to make my intellect and emotions bleed.

No problem, tastes differ and definitions suck ! For me, progressive has to be something more than extensive inclusion of as many parts as possible. A much more intriguing way is working with as little material as possible, and expanding on the themes when needed, and introducing new themes when needed. Blackwater Park (the title song) is a great example - they introduce a couple of riffs in the beginning, then after the "contemplative" and "drugged" interlude, they throw mutated musings on the same themes, but with increasing aggression and emotion. That is progressive, and emotional. MAYH is emotional as hell, I love that album too, but there are imperfections in structure.

D Mullholand
----------------
NP: Dodheimsgard - 666 International

 

[Satori]

I really get off on the structuring of mayh, and I wouldn't regard them as imperfections (interesting choice of word, hmm).

To me, prog is defined by the "journey". A journey goes somewhere. The tunes on SL and BWP are journeys too, but they tend to be in loops which repeat themselves. Every time something repeats, to me, the journey is taking a step backwards.

I think that with SL and BWP, Opeth have obviously become quite a lot more commercial (which probably explains their current popularity with teens who would otherwise be listening to any of the other prog-death acts). When I was a teenager, I liked Metallica, but now in retrospect I don't really know what the hell I was thinking. I guess when you're young, things just sound fresher and you're more easily impressed by everything. After getting heavily into Yes and Genesis (and even Gentle Giant, cheesy as it is), it takes a hell of a lot to impress me these days.

Satori