I too love the Lashes!

Jason

totally tripindicular!

viva la lashes!!!!

a lashes post on the three imaginary girls site?

i thought we would be making fun how full of themselves and how mediocre their music is not supporting them.

a lashes post on the three imaginary girls site?

i thought we would be making fun of how full of themselves and how mediocre their music is not supporting them.

Ok, Curt, I'll take the bait :) Many people are not fans of the P.T. Barnum-inspired self-promotion (and, yes, that is a dig that Lashes fans are suckers).

Maybe, as Sarah says, it's okay to love them, but it's also okay to point out that the only thing memorable about the band are the antics. A band writing good songs wouldn't need to put forth that much effort to get people to pay attention.

Awww, Sero(tone)in, that was such a cleverly placed jab that I can hardly take offense. The way the band has "suckered" me in to believing in their music is that they believe it, too. They believe in the proper construction of a simple pop song. I thought it made the most sense when they were on Lookout! and toured with Ted Leo; their music is even more easily misinterpreted when viewed as a major label release. The writing of sweet simple love songs is not a new idea, but the tradition of doing so has somehow become the property of mainstream homogenized music. So, yes, I'm a sucker for the idea that the Lashes wanted to throwback to a simpler era of self-expression.

You're not the first to disagree and certainly not the last, but you're the first I've seen to dispute their praise so sweetly and smartly.

personally, i think we rule.

i think you rule, too c:

Aw thats so sweet of the Lashes! Their live show was one of the best I've ever been to, no exaggeration

Wait, wait, wait a minute, Serotonein. Think about what you're saying here. Whether or not you like The Lashes music, *NOBODY* can say they're more gimmicky than Radiohead. That band has essentially evolved into a brand name for hipster gimmicks: Thom Yorke's habit of typing messages like he's 13; all those "enigmatic" videos and stills that don't really provide glimpses of songs or insight into the band, but show things like Yorke singing into a microphone in a mannequin head; the oh-so-carefully crafted design/image. Oh yeah, there's that whole thing about giving away "In Rainbows" for free, too, which, come to think of it is certainly the biggest music-industry gimmick of the year, and possibly our lifetimes.

It's only that Radiohead (cleverly) pitches those gimmicks to appear mysterious, sophisticated and smart -- essentially playing on the vanity of every hipster doofus in the world who thinks they're too smart to be tricked into paying attention to a band's gimmicks -- that they're not called out in the same way as The Lashes.

I'm not saying it's even possible to compare The Lashes and Radiohead's music. All I'm onto here is that NOTHING The Lashes have ever, ever, ever, ever, ever done is on par with Radiohead's deep bag of gimmicks. So, write off The Lashes for making funny little posters and its antics, but you're gonna have to take Radiohead out of contention for any sort of credibility when you extend that argument outward.

I think they are marvelous in every single way. Nothing in this town makes my heart fuzzier!
My personal opinion is that if you don't like having fun like you are 5 years old again, you probably don't like the Lashes. But that is just a matter of opinion, either way.
I also like how the Lashes awesomeness and good energy attract awesome people to them. Hey, I've definatley met a handful of best friends at Lashes events. But anyway. You're welcome, Lashes!

Hmmm. I think I prefer the Stoics. :)

"a throwback to a simpler era of self-expression" - really?! out of the mouths of publicists, truly... and it's ridiculous to pretend that sweet, simple pop songs aren't available in the indie world. hell, that's the domain of most of the bands covered by this site. again, it's okay to like them, but stop pretending they're some standardbearer against the onslaught of pre-fabricated pop artists.

as to the inept postulating by the grim, radiohead made $3 million off the online release of a new album (all of it going directly to them), plus it's going into record stores next week. maybe you can look at it as gimmicky, but no band of that popularity had ever tried something like it before. it was successful & points to new avenues in distribution models available to bands in the future.

also, i never claimed that the lashes were more gimmicky than any other band; definitely calling bullshit on that strawman. it's just that their gimmicks aren't very good & more important (stating yet again for emphasis), they've relied on their silly antics to make people notice them more than the music they write. radiohead write good songs. no gimmick in the world will make people continue to buy their albums unless they have the goods to back it up.

you're not even close to making a credible argument after acknowleding that you can't compare the music because that's the only point that matters.

Radiohead v. the Lashes is the new Romney v. Obama. Yawn. It's only ideological anyway.

What I really want to know is if anyone has called the numbers that the ad claims (in tiny, tiny text) are Paris Hilton and Joey Fatone's cell phone numbers and if they actually are real.

Come on. I'm just addressing your main idea that bands resort to gimmicks in lieu of talent. You've repeated that in two separate posts about The Lashes. We get it. I'm just saying that if you're ready to condemn The Lashes, you're going to have to bring down Radiohead. Period. That independent release thing they did wasn't a new model for distro. It was a publicity stunt that worked very, very, very well. It might help fans' sense of self-importance to wrap it up as some huge "experiment" or a "revolution," but the bottom line is, if this digital distro method worked so well, and lined the band's pockets with cash, as you so claim, it'd be a very small step for the band to continue this with a physical release. You don't need a label to secure distribution for a release of this magnitude; everyone is going to want it in their stores. You don't need a record label press a pile of albums because, as you mentioned, the band raked in millions upon millions that it doesn't have to share with anyone. And God knows, you don't need a label hyping up this album because, this whole online distro thing got the band attention it can't buy. If this was as remotely successful as everyone wants to think it was -- and remember, last I heard Radiohead was staunchly refusing to reveal how many albums it sent out, let alone its net profits (let me know if this has changed) -- the band would be business morons not to put out the physical album themselves.

As to your "it's only the music that matters" thing, I agree with you, though I don't understand why that didn't apply to your initial tirade against The Lashes that opened up this whole can of worms.

You're free to like Radiohead and hate The Lashes. That's just fine. Everyone has their own taste. But when you start acting like anyone who enjoys The Lashes' music is a brainwashed rube who's inherently stupid enough into getting tricked into liking them, and acting like you're more intelligent because you're into Radiohead, it turns you into the worst kind of indie-rock snob.

Again, if you can explain why Radiohead's unceasing flow of attention-grabbing gimmicks addressed in my last post are any different than The Lashes, I'd love to know why. Making little artsy movies, posting in enigmatic prose, teasing fans with bits and pieces of songs for months on end, wrapping your band in layers and layers of mystery makes it seem to me as if you're putting a lot of effort into getting people to pay attention. And like you said "A band writing good songs wouldn't need to put forth that much effort to get people to pay attention. A band writing good songs wouldn't need to put forth that much effort to get people to pay attention.".

curt was surprised that people weren't slagging the lashes, and i gave my take. the line about suckers was pretty clearly said with a smile. i don't get why everyone but you understands that.

my point, which you still fail to understand, is that i dislike when bands get people to pay attention to them only through their antics. bringing up radiohead remains useless in this context. everything they've done may be messing with their fans, but it's still only their fans (or really obsessed haters, apparently) who are paying attention to what's posted on the website

look at my bio - i clearly believe in good and bad music. you call me a snob; i just say i have taste :p

Out of the mouths of publicists? Really? Last time I checked, we don't have a publicist. Maybe that's why we have to resort to these gimmicks all the time.

Radiohead did what they did to sidestep a dying, increasingly irrelevant industry and put out the product that they wanted to put out. I guess we're trying to do that too, knowing fully well that we're not the first band to try doing business this way. Hell, radiohead was far from the first band to do it too, but they did it really, really well. What about the donnas? Or the pharcyde? Or the eels? All gimmicky bands, all putting out self released efforts in the last year.

well put eric. 10 bucks says that angry blogger guy serotonein(clever, really!) wouldn't know a lashes song if it kicked him in his tummy. heck, i didn't even know we wrote songs. i'm too busy coming up with crazy marketing campaigns.

well put eric. 10 bucks says that angry blogger guy serotonein(clever, really!) wouldn't know a lashes song if it kicked him in his tummy. heck, i didn't even know we wrote songs. i'm too busy coming up with crazy marketing campaigns.

unhouselike unbeseemingness draperied isogenous overrapture hurtlingly divinator puzzleation
Bicycle Retailer and Industry News
http://www.musiciansgallery.com/start/choirs/rossica_choir.html

i think al dawson said it best.