This is my first ever post about John Maus, on another forum, before Mausspace... some really interesting conversation came back from people who heard it even then...
Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2006 3:06 pm
Posted: Sun Nov 26, 2006 11:56 pm
It took this Ariel Pink cohort five years to write and record his debut album, and only five minutes to become more annoying than Ariel Pink.
For me, this is just too weird. The first couple of tracks make this the most skip-able album of 2006.
Apparently, Maus spent five years working on this album, which is a shame because, frankly, its awful.
There isn't one song you could call 'good' on the whole album.
Overall, I can't recommend this album even as a novelty listen. Maybe I just don't get it. It seems as if Maus sabotages practically any hint of an interesting melody, lyric, or instrumental part with a blatantly grating one at almost every turn.
Maus's baroquely deadpan voice - and thats being polite - effectively spoils many a song. Some will hear a little Nick Cave in it; others will hear a man crapping out of his mouth.
-Drowned in Sound
If it is supposed to be funny, it is not. If it is meant seriously, then Maus needs some SERIOUS help.
With recommendations like that, how can you not grab this??? oh, and for the record this is awesome with a capital A.
Amazing album. FIN.
(someone else posted this) - Tue Dec 19, 2006 7:51 pm
- "i still don't know about this album. i'll be kind of digging it, and then it will make me physically naseuous."
(then later, the same person) - Wed Mar 14, 2007 5:20 am
- "jesus, this album has grown on me so much, though i still can't stand how it makes me feel." *
Two pages later
Person a) Fri Mar 16, 2007 3:34 pm
I'm not as a big a fan of John Maus or Ariel Pink or Holy Shit as a lot of people on here but they've all made records that have some brilliant songs on
They're all fairly self-indulgent albums but from the way they make music I don't think you'd get the moments of genius without the parts that are a bit embarassing
Person b) Fri Mar 16, 2007 8:25 pm
yo you realize human behavior is based around narcissism and we live in an inherently selfish and hedonistic society right
Person a) Fri Mar 16, 2007 10:05 pm
I don't believe that
(a) our society is inherently selfish and/or hedonistic
(b) human behaviour is based around narcissism
(c) the basis of human behaviour or inherent values of modern society necessarily have a bearing on great art anyway
Person b) Fri Mar 16, 2007 10:07 pm
art = society in one form or another so therefore the values and thoughts which make society(define this as narrowly or as widely as you want) function are naturally important to art
Person a) Fri Mar 16, 2007 10:13 pm
Art is a creation of a society, whether it's reacting to or against it, but I don't think the nature of a society automatically justifies or even explains any given piece of art. Especially as the best art is often from people trying to actively step outside of that society in one way or another
(this went on for another few pages....)
Then, I came in a few years later.... Sun Jul 10, 2011 12:03 am
I love how this came up in a John Maus thread circa 2007. It's like you pre-empted Mausspace discussions before Mausspace existed. YOU GUYS!
* person from way up the page:
Tue Jul 12, 2011 10:26 pm
I loved Maus, but I don't think i fully fully appreciated him until I saw him live. Seeing where his energy comes from and his personality really elevated him to a new level for me.
- basically, Songs was a curiosity. It had terrible reviews, and hey, who doesn't like an outsider?! On first listen I was blown away... the same on second...and third... that's when I started to talk to people about him.