tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34024688.post7395713052016437338..comments2023-12-06T02:32:38.548-06:00Comments on Teenage Kicks: Rewriting HistoryMichael Atchisonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05149731312548258515noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34024688.post-1511203293605121682008-10-28T08:34:00.000-05:002008-10-28T08:34:00.000-05:00I agree with Andy and Kevin that some albums shrin...I agree with Andy and Kevin that some albums shrink over time (Tracy Chapman's debut was a classic the first time I heard it; twenty years later, it's a very good singer-songwriter affair). My point, perhaps not stated clearly enough, was that Tim hasn't. It's greater today than it was in 1985.Michael Atchisonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05149731312548258515noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34024688.post-5841564615566261622008-10-27T15:29:00.000-05:002008-10-27T15:29:00.000-05:00'tim' is a classic and 'pleased to meet me' is too...'tim' is a classic and 'pleased to meet me' is too . . . really so many pretenders following in their shoes . . . they actually were YOUNG angry sensitive and articulate (not just clever) . . . AND a real band . . . i'd like to thank trip for taking me to see the replacements back in the day . . . they were very very great on strictly their own terms . . . what an inspiration . . . and ps. i'd like to personally award rolling stone 4 LESS stars years later . . . it looks like a rolling stone can indeed gather moss . . . but it smells like something entirely differentAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34024688.post-2124366757882321722008-10-25T12:38:00.000-05:002008-10-25T12:38:00.000-05:00Andy Whitman hits it on the nose.What is classic a...Andy Whitman hits it on the nose.<BR/>What is classic and/or great is often fluid. Even within a week, let alone 23 years.<BR/>I ejected The Fine Art of Self-Destruction by Jesse Malin no less than eight times, then filed it for a few months then had the gnawing sense that Trip couldn't be THAT wrong about somebody, could he? <BR/>Then I listened to the whole thing, initially as a battle of wills. And for some reason it clicked. <BR/>A review on the first eight listens would have been a bridge-burner. <BR/>Today, a love letter.Kevin McClatchyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03151365844476910157noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34024688.post-29771214607958936352008-10-23T08:37:00.000-05:002008-10-23T08:37:00.000-05:00Without delving into the Replacements controversy ...Without delving into the Replacements controversy (I love some of the albums, like some of the albums, and even think a couple are mediocre messes), I do think it's possible for reviewers to revise their initial impressions.<BR/><BR/>It works both ways. When Radiohead's "Kid A" was released, I was initially put off. I thought it was a misstep, a new but not necessarily better direction after the brilliance of "OK Computer." Now I think it's a 5-star album. Similarly, I wrote a 5-star review in Paste of Over the Rhine's album "Ohio." That's not a 5-star album. It's good, but not that good, and if I could do it over I'd knock off a star. <BR/><BR/>My point is that it's not that surprising that a re-released album might receive a different rating than the original review. Reviewers change, and the way we hear albums changes as well.Andy Whitmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04010130934552315074noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34024688.post-49105553906325159042008-10-21T22:49:00.000-05:002008-10-21T22:49:00.000-05:00I have to disagree. I've always thought Tim was a...I have to disagree. I've always thought Tim was a good solid record, but not a classic. Then again, that's always been my take on the Replacements - even after seeing a classic show at the Blue Note in Columbia Mo in 91. Sorry for the heresy.<BR/><BR/>It is interesting that the RS rating of the record has dipped over time. It would be interesting to see who wrote the original review.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34024688.post-90794217588012195492008-10-20T19:28:00.000-05:002008-10-20T19:28:00.000-05:00They just didn't like the new packaging is all.They just didn't like the new packaging is all.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34024688.post-6786531054627487482008-10-20T15:22:00.000-05:002008-10-20T15:22:00.000-05:00Not only that, the original 1985 Rolling Stone rev...Not only that, the original 1985 Rolling Stone review gave Tim 4.5 stars. It got worse in the intervening 23 years?Trip McClatchyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10915624243906432064noreply@blogger.com