Talking about this:
>We must admit she has been very good at absorbing and recycling styles and techniques of modern music in order to impose her personality. If we wanted to analyze Bjork’s career, Madonna could indeed be taken as a model. In fact, Bjork’s strategy (rather than her sound) is the same as Madonna’s. If Madonna is the symbol of alternative, provocation, affront, in a word the punk aesthetics, then Bjork is the symbol of mainstream, alignment, compliance, in a word the return to middle-class values after the punk movement. Bjork does not upset the public, she entertrains it. Anybody who thinks Bjork is a genius should try to listen at least to Solex. Let your ears, not publicity, judge.
Did he try to sounds deliberately awkward?
Even if I know he likes and approves her at the end, I don't know if take this precise statement as "professional" or as an attempt of trolling honestly. It really seems to be. It's just a pure, untechnical, pretentious, way off wrong pseudo social analysis on a objectively exotic artist. Just the fact that he brings Madonna (the symbol of American female singers imperialism) and not even Kate Bush for a concrete comparison argument it lets you understand how far he was gone with his pretentiousness and lack of reliability. And mainly he had not understood what is the Bjork's influence status above all the currents today: hidden, hugely influential, but voluntarily hidden and elusive. No publicity at all, what the fuck was he talking about? Last Bjork's great publicity into the mainstream was made with Dancer in the Dark and Vespertine that came after, literally in the 2000.
Bjork has been able to show a unique personality already in the groups to which she belonged in the past 80s, like the first Icelandic indie rock band The Sugarcubes, the obscure post-punk/no wave band Kukl, and the jazz/post-bop trío Gudmandar Ingólfssonar, where she probably raised her voice in her most extraordinary attitude for the first time. And for her it's just a detail that, in 2010 alongside Italian master Ennio Morricone, she received the Polar Music Prize, which is the equivalent of the Nobel Prize of music.
But I think because it was pretty dated, maybe he wanted to write these names placement right in order to give a little sense to his statement, but he wrong, and at the end he wrote two unintentional horseshit. The correct placement would be:
>If Bjork is the symbol of alternative, provocation, affront, in a word the punk aesthetics, then Madonna is the symbol of mainstream, alignment, compliance, in a word the return to middle-class values after the punk movement.
Scaruffi, get your shit right please.
Also Solex? Really? I mean really a music critique can go so far to sounds original and awkward? No way.
Bump for your own good.
Or maybe he's a Madonna fan, don't know. I just think he has almost no more relevance in the world of musical critique.
>Anybody who takes seriously the critics of this guys is naturally misleading into an unreasonable stupidity.
>people still parrot other people's opinions on subjective matters
>current year
He writes his stuff in Italian then translates to English later, that would explain the awkwardness of his writing at times, English I don't believe is his first language. Yet despite this, he is still the best music reviewer around that actually has some standards, though Anthony is good as far as big reviewers go
>>63171409
>>63171376
Do you think Bjork is actually a better or more serious artist than Madonna?
Are you 12 by any chance?
>>63172060
Do you are a Scaruffi misleaded lurker?
Are you 7 by any chance?
>>63172034
I think Anthony is pretty shit but I'll admit he sometimes surprises me by not liking an obvious internet meme group, or a popular but shit album, when I expect him to follow the herd
>>63172060
Do you actually know who Bjork is?
>>63171409
So how was Bjork alternative and provocative in the terms of punk aesthetics. I know Madonna was because she was all "imma fuck black dudes and shit fuck alla yall", but what did Bjork do?
But how do we feel about Solex? Miles ahead of Madonna definitely.
He's right.
>>63172190
Scaruffi's trolling was enough, please.
>>63171376
He writes in italian.
>>63172264
I'm not saying she didn't do anything, I'm saying I don't know, and since OP feels pretty confident on this, I'm asking.
>>63172324
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Björk
>>63172410
god you like quoting things
come on man, I wanna hear this in your own words; i want your argument
>>63172410
>how was Bjork alternative and provocative in the terms of punk aesthetics.
this was the question, just to remind you
>>63172190
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7GQwqc3BWc
Scaruffi is saying that publicly and lyrically Madonna promoted social change. She was a SJW at a time they might have actually have been relevant. Bjork on the other hand was just some quirky indie chick. Those are a dime a dozen.
>>63172479
>>63172485
When he says punk aesthetics he means the extreme left political side of punk, not musically. That's what aesthetics means. The look; the vibe.
>>63171376
>Did he try to sounds deliberately awkward?
He didn't write that. It was translated from italian by another guy. In his native language it sounds ok.
In his early internet days he used to write in italian, then at some point he switched to english.
>>63172519
He failed miserably referring that to Madonna, that's why it sounds hilarious, or just trolling. Bjork is unequivocally a unique artist who has left surely more artistic influence than any other female artists in the last decades. Madonna is more a symbol of a typical industrialized western icon, the kind of you find on the bottle of Coca Cola.
>>63172675
Well I have to agree.
>>63172675
Madonna during her prime was the subject of massive controversy for using her music for confronting social mores. Bjork was, as he admits, adept at using many different genres in interesting combinations, but she does not confront social issues anywhere near like the scale that Madonna did. That's what he means by
>If Madonna is the symbol of alternative, provocation, affront, in a word the punk aesthetics, then Bjork is the symbol of mainstream, alignment, compliance, in a word the return to middle-class values after the punk movement.
You misinterpreted this as referring to musical genre, and I am ignoring all arguments about that because, frankly, Solex does do Bjork's genre mashing shtick earlier, so she's hardly unique.
>>63172596
In addition to that, he probably wrote that section a long time ago, when Bjork had released only 2 or 3 solo albums.
At the time of Selmasongs and Vespertine he had already started to write in english.
>waaah waaah he insulted my waifu ;_;
KYS
>>63172821
shit did I say earlier? I meant better
>>63172145
I like Anthony. We have somewhat similar taste so that's probably why. He definitely has some hits and some misses though
Two 7s and two 6.5s from Scaruffi is a good grade. It means he thinks well of her as a musician.
>>63172903
Opinions.
>>63172876
It's not about insulting, it's about misleading, it's different.
>>63172957
Fine opinions. But that's this whole thread. And all because whoever translated Scaruffi didn't do the best job, and OP got all butthurt when he didn't understand what was meant.
>>63172938
this is accurate. this kind of grading means he considers her an important artist.
What's really weird is Alanis Morisette's ratings.
>>63172060
Madonna does not make superior music to Bjork you idiot lol.
>>63173153
Scaruffi's not even saying that. He gives Madonna all sixes. He's literally just talking about the aesthetics of their public persona. Musically he thinks Bjork is superior.
>>63173023
My fine opinions is that Bjork can melt up the uniqueness of her voice into something often hardly undefinable. But I think this is not a thread about her, just about that statement.
>>63173498
Still I think he's obviously wrong on that aesthetics discussion, he should have mentioned Patti Smith for a better "punk" aesthetics comparison for example. It may sound like an attempt of misleading, for everyone who reads it. Bjork has never compromised her personal ideas to anyone, that's one of the criteria of being punk actually, while Madonna in the 2000 (at the time of that statement) was already a great industrialized figure of the western world.
