Talk:Modern Life Is Rubbish/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Seems to me to be a very well written article and I only have a few minor quibles:

• "[Blur] were sent by their record label Food on the Rollercoaster tour of America". - think a bit of clarification is needed here. Was 'Rollercoaster' the name given to a Blur headline tour or was it a package tour a la Lollapalooza?

It was a tour with a few other bands incl. My Bloody Valentine, Jesus & Mary Chain and a couple of others... indopug (talk) 15:44, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

I'd like to see something in the article cearing this up.Cavie78 (talk) 15:53, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Done. indopug (talk) 06:06, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

• "Homesick, the tour "instilled in the band a contempt for everything American", Cavanagh later wrote; frontman Damon Albarn, who "started to miss really simple things [about England]", listened to a tape of the English pop group Kinks throughout the tour". - Think this sentence is a bit long, I'd be inclined to split after "...everything American".

Seeing how this is a compound sentence with a semi-colon and everything, I think it reads ok. I tried rephrasing, but I needed to get all these related ideas together in a single sentence, so I guess this works. indopug (talk) 06:06, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

OkCavie78 (talk) 13:12, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

• "SBK's strategy was to list the album at a developing-artist price (around three dollars less than standard), an intensive tour in 1994 and to target modern rock airplay with debut single "Chemical World"." - send the band on an intensive tour..?

Done. indopug (talk) 15:44, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

• "Q's David Roberts, by way of a favourable four (out of five) star review, called Modern Life "an energised, infectious romp around contemporary little England, by way of an exuberant trawl..." - two "by way of"'s in the same sentence.

Done. indopug (talk) 15:44, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

• "series of pleasant surprises and offers numerous signs that great things are to come from Blur". - would make more sense to say "pleasant surprises [that offer]" in my opinion.

Done. indopug (talk) 15:44, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

• "In early pressings, the demo version of "Chemical World" was mistakenly included in place of 'Chemical World (Reworked)', which was based on the original demo arrangement and rerecorded at SBK's insistence." - bit unclear what 'Chemical World (Reworked)' refers to - is it just the professionally recorded version of the song on the album or a rerecording of that version?

Thanks for noticing this; the paragraph in the Track-listing section was around from before I started working on this article. I think I can rewrite this by tomorrow, digging up info from a few sources. I can also probably include the "Popscene" bit here if you like. indopug (talk) 06:06, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Done. indopug (talk)

• Might be a good idea to provide a quote about why "Popscene" isn't on the album, or at least make it more explicit that it's a non-album track.

According to the band, "if you didn't get it the first time, you fuckin' ain't gonna ever get it again". (something like that). But I think that's more relevant to the "Popscene" article. I think the fact that the single is mentioned mostly in the Background section along with Leisure should make it clear that it isn't on Modern Life. indopug (talk) 15:44, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

I see what you mean but I still think a sentence is needed given that it appears on American pressings.Cavie78 (talk) 16:46, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Again, I'm not sure what you mean; nowhere is it indicated that "Popscene" was meant for Modern Life. I think "SBK added additional songs to the track-listing—including "Popscene"" makes it clear that it was mostly just tacked on to the American version, rather than imply that the song was meant to be on the album. indopug (talk) 15:06, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

It's not a deal breaker or anything I just think that someone coming to this page might well wonder why "Popscene" wasn't included given that the article states that "the new release showcased a significant change in musical direction, as Blur traded their shoegaze-derived sound for one influenced by 60s British guitar pop." and then goes on to say that Modern Life... was influenced by the likes of The Kinks and was a change in musical direction towards "classic British pop".Cavie78 (talk) 15:50, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Done. indopug (talk)

• Not a big deal but I'd like to see more professional reviews in the infobox if possible?

I've found five reviews of the album; the three with star ratings are included in the infobox. I haven't yet found the Melody Maker review, but that'll be included when I do. indopug (talk) 15:44, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Ok Cavie78 (talk) 16:46, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Added Chicage Tribune review; didn't notice it's star-rating. indopug (talk) 06:06, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

• Would be good to mention the Starshaped documentary, perhaps in the first paragraph of the 'Aftermath and legacy' section?

I haven't found much about info about it in the sources I've researched. I haven't seen the DVD, so there isn't much I could source directly to the documentary either. indopug (talk) 15:44, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Couple of references here and here If you like Blur I'd recommend getting hold of a copy by the way! Cavie78 (talk) 16:46, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for those, but I really didn't find anything worth adding to this article. indopug (talk) 15:06, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

It covers Blur's early career including Modern Life... so I think a brief sentence in the'Aftermath and legacy' along the lines of "In September 1993 Blur released the video Starshaped, documenting the band's first few years of touring and recording and featuring music from Leisure and Modern Life Is Rubbish." would be helpful.Cavie78 (talk) 15:50, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't see how that sentence you wrote is relevant to Modern Life; just because music from this album is also found elsewhere doesn't mean that needs to be mentioned here. Also, since it was released a month before the Sugary Tea Tour, it obviously wouldn't have info about what happened after the release of Modern Life. Also, while events shown in Starshaped might be relevant to Modern Life, I haven't found any source that describes the release of the video as important to the album; when I get around to actually watching Starshaped, I can probably use it as a source for some info about the time. Right now, those two articles isn't enough to source anything worthwhile. indopug (talk) 06:06, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I'm happy to leave it for now if you feel that strongly. My thinking is that it's named after a song on the album and (if I remember rightly 'cos it's years since I watched it) includes footage of hte band around the time of the albums recording and release. It also might include footage from the Reading festival appearance you mention - one of the sources says it's from 1991 the other says 1993 (again I can't remember but, as it came out in September and the Reading Festival takes place on the the last weekend in August, I would have thought it was 1991) Cavie78 (talk) 13:12, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

And that's it! Let me know when you'd like me to take another look. Cavie78 (talk) 14:19, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

• Forgot to say!!! A 'Personnel' section is needed - album articles can't technically be above 'C' class without one (see WikiProject Albums)

Yikes! I thought we were done here; I can only add this tomorrow (I don't have my CD with me right now), so we will have to wait. Even though, I never understood why a personnel section should be mandatory (or even recommended); its kinda redundant to the CD itself, and websites like allmusic list it anyway. And it doesn't provide any additional critical analysis to the reader. Oh well... indopug (talk) 15:56, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Yeah sorry about that, it slipped my mind when I did the original review. For the record I know what you mean about it being redundant but thems the rules. I've done Personnel sections on some of my articles if you want to have a look and save yourself some time here. I usually give the cd booklet as the ref. Cavie78 (talk) 16:05, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Done! indopug (talk) 16:05, 10 February 2009 (UTC)