Proposition: Destroyer's Rubies as Golden
There have been giddy rumblings around the internets these days that Destroyer’s Rubies just might be Dan Bejar’s breakthrough album – the indierock success that had been promised by critics following the almost flawless Streethawk: A Seduction, but that was skillfully dodged by Bejar with the equally ‘difficult’ This Night and Your Blues.
While the album does indeed have the potential to reach the modest levels of success that indierock stardom entails, I would describe it less as a breakthrough than as a greatest hits compilation. Instead of moving along the trajectory set by his last two albums (the logical conclusion of which would clearly have been an acapella interpretation of the Fall back catalogue) Bejar has decided to distill the most successful moments from all of his previous albums, although Streethawk and Thief in particular, to make a musical collage instead of a straightforward song by song ‘hits’ compilation.
In some ways, Rubies is almost a parody of a Destroyer album. As a recent near blindness inducing attempt to literally apply Carl Wilson’s version of the Destroyer drinking game to the album has proved, it is perhaps the most self-referential, pop-culture appropriating, baaa and daaa chorused, Bejarism-infused, and clichéd Destroyer album yet. The hooks and melodies even quote from earlier Destroyer songs this time.
But it is precisely this distillation of the Destroyer discography that makes this album so great. In my opinion, it’s of less importance that this is a (potential) breakthrough album than it is that it's also a gift to the long-term Destroyer fans. You know who you are: the ones who defended the sprawling This Night as a cutting parody of rock music wankery; who saw Your Blues as a damning critique of the cheap emotionalism and fake authenticity of the singer-songwriter genre; who secretly wished that Bejar never left the claustrophobic bedroom recordings circa Ideas for Songs. Deep down, Rubies is what you were secretly hoping for. Nothing is unnecessary, the pop-hooks are pristine, and all without sacrificing the infective lyricism, thematic absurdity, and ever-present critique of Bejar’s own place as singer and songwriter in a largely miniscule corner of the music industry.
Destroyer – Painter in Your Pocket (2006)
Destroyer – Loves of a Gnostic (1998)
I’ve put these songs up as a kind of comparison: the former from Rubies and the latter from 1998’s City of Daughters. Loves of a Gnostic still stands up on its own as one of the best Destroyer songs, but the difference that is most apparent between these two songs is that Bejar is decidedly more of an authoritative presence in Painter in Your Pocket. No longer the reluctant and embarrassed singer-songwriter, he has taken on the persona of the self-confident rock & roll front-man. Sure, it’s all theatre, but after watching No Direction Home recently I detected a not-insignificant touch of Dylan in Bejar’s reclusive/drunken performance on the last New Pornographers tour.
[Destroyer’s Rubies comes out on February 21; you can preorder here.]
While the album does indeed have the potential to reach the modest levels of success that indierock stardom entails, I would describe it less as a breakthrough than as a greatest hits compilation. Instead of moving along the trajectory set by his last two albums (the logical conclusion of which would clearly have been an acapella interpretation of the Fall back catalogue) Bejar has decided to distill the most successful moments from all of his previous albums, although Streethawk and Thief in particular, to make a musical collage instead of a straightforward song by song ‘hits’ compilation.
In some ways, Rubies is almost a parody of a Destroyer album. As a recent near blindness inducing attempt to literally apply Carl Wilson’s version of the Destroyer drinking game to the album has proved, it is perhaps the most self-referential, pop-culture appropriating, baaa and daaa chorused, Bejarism-infused, and clichéd Destroyer album yet. The hooks and melodies even quote from earlier Destroyer songs this time.
But it is precisely this distillation of the Destroyer discography that makes this album so great. In my opinion, it’s of less importance that this is a (potential) breakthrough album than it is that it's also a gift to the long-term Destroyer fans. You know who you are: the ones who defended the sprawling This Night as a cutting parody of rock music wankery; who saw Your Blues as a damning critique of the cheap emotionalism and fake authenticity of the singer-songwriter genre; who secretly wished that Bejar never left the claustrophobic bedroom recordings circa Ideas for Songs. Deep down, Rubies is what you were secretly hoping for. Nothing is unnecessary, the pop-hooks are pristine, and all without sacrificing the infective lyricism, thematic absurdity, and ever-present critique of Bejar’s own place as singer and songwriter in a largely miniscule corner of the music industry.
Destroyer – Painter in Your Pocket (2006)
Destroyer – Loves of a Gnostic (1998)
I’ve put these songs up as a kind of comparison: the former from Rubies and the latter from 1998’s City of Daughters. Loves of a Gnostic still stands up on its own as one of the best Destroyer songs, but the difference that is most apparent between these two songs is that Bejar is decidedly more of an authoritative presence in Painter in Your Pocket. No longer the reluctant and embarrassed singer-songwriter, he has taken on the persona of the self-confident rock & roll front-man. Sure, it’s all theatre, but after watching No Direction Home recently I detected a not-insignificant touch of Dylan in Bejar’s reclusive/drunken performance on the last New Pornographers tour.
[Destroyer’s Rubies comes out on February 21; you can preorder here.]
31 Comments:
D's Rubies is definitely Destroyer's best album to date. Lyrically, I get the feeling that he has scrapped the dictionary for sincerity and intelligence. He's also, arguably, learned a lot from Carl Newman about writing pop music (while still managing to be Destroyer through and through). European Oil is the high point of the album for me.
Great post Ian.
I think you've hit the nail on the head, Ian. Brilliantly put: it's like a Greatest Hits record, but using new songs instead of the actual "hits". The first time I heard it, my reaction actaully was, 'Wow, it's such a "classic" Destroyer album!'
If one was inclined to overthink this sort of assessment, as several of us are, one might even say that Dan is making us to actually re-think the concept of the "Greatest Hits", by crafting a quasi-Hits album utilizing the same ingredients as his prior work, but recontextualizing them into totally new songs. It's sort of the same way that he brought on Frog Eyes for Your Blues, and completely turned the song arrangements upside down, which, for me, made me rethink my idea of "A Song" completely, in that, I realized it's not the recording of the song that one necessarily connects with, it's the song itself.
Or something like that. I don't know, it's late!
Oh, yeah, and then there's "Sick Priest Learns To Last Forever," ahem.
I dunno, I think there's something about this "greatest hits" reading that minimizes Dan's accomplishment. I’ve been listening a lot to City of Daughters lately, - I’ve been preferring it to Streethawk, - but there’s not too much there that suggests a capacity for the SCALE of the songs he just recorded. Compared to This Night, as well, which is the closest album sonically speaking, the scope of Destroyer’s Rubies is on another order of magnitude. I agree about the way that this record exemplifies Bejar’s work, but in some ways it also feels like the platonic ideal that he sensed, elsewhere, but did not have the chops, inspiration (or balls?) to record. I don’t think Destroyer’s Rubies sums up his career – I think it elevates it.
Ryan, I was originally going to post "Sick Priest", but quickly realized that it's not a Destroyer song at all: it's Mark E. Smith covering Neil Young's "Down By the River".
Sean, I kind of agree, but I think that some greatest hits albums do elevate more than summarize by distilling someone's musical output into its purest form. I'm particularly thinking Neil Young's "Decade", or maybe Leonard Cohen's first greatest hits comp. But not to get too caught up in my own critical wankery, I think that you are right. Song's like Rubies and European Oils perhaps surpass anything done previously by achieving a kind of subdued grandiosity.
that Leonard Cohen greatest hits is phenomenal.
I disagree, Sean, that the Hits assessment in any way minimizes Dan's accomplishment. Yes, a "Greatest Hits Proper" would just be a summation, but D's Rubies isn't a "Greatest Hits Proper" at all. I wouldn't say (nor would Ian, I think) that D's Rubies represents Dan "phoning it in," or "resting on his laurels," rather, my point was that D's Rubies seems to be a perfect aggregate of all the different Destroyer "sounds" we've heard over the years. While City of Daughters may not have hinted at the grandeur of some of these D's Rubies tracks, I think that Dan definitely began to explore this stratum with Your Blues. I don't consider the scope any lesser just because Your Blues was synthetic in nature, but I do think the range just blossoms more on these, and perhaps it is mostly due to the presence of the "real" instrumentation.
And as for the album being a "breakthrough," if that indeed does happen (and I do believe it will), I think that, above all else, it will happen because, as CW pointed out, it's About Damn Time.
Speaking of 'golden', I always heard that one line from "The Very Modern Dance" as White is the real gold, rather than Fire is the real goal. Which somehow worked at the time, as I had just gotten an ipod.
He demands attention and defies interpretation and I know the first time I heard him there was no doubt in my mind he was the future of music in Canada, if not the West, and I mean "For me". There's been much talk about whether or not he can be "for everyone"; I get irritated by the idea of seeing him on the cover of, say, Spin, because his famedefying act has been his most endearing accomplishment and fame is a destroyer of substance with few exceptions. People used to make the point he was too esoteric for the broader public but I'm not hearing that argument anymore.
it's Mark E. Smith covering Neil Young's "Down By the River".
Woah, so I'm not the only one that thinks it sounds like Neil Young? Hah!
People used to make the point he was too esoteric for the broader public but I'm not hearing that argument anymore.
Don't worry, most of my friends still don't like the music or his voice.
I loved the post, though, Ian (and the mention of my beloved Destroyer Wiki). I'm sure I'm biased as a huge Destroyer fan, but it all seems spot-on.
Don't worry, most of my friends still don't like the music or his voice.
Okay. I'll try not to. Awesome job, btw.
I certainly hope that Dan doesn't make the break through. I can't think he'd be into it either. Unless he's changed THAT much!
from the LION's mouth:
http://sixeyes.blogspot.com/2006/02/destroyers-dan-bejar-interview.html
I'm not sure that there's anything wrong with being successful or (gasp!) actually wanting more people to like your music. The whole point of releasing albums is so that people will listen to and, hopefully, enjoy them. The more people that enjoy good music, the better.
I guess it depends on what one means by "breakthrough"-good music(in this case destroyer)becoming more popular is a positive thing.Of course Destroyer might(maybe already are) big potatoes on the indie/college/underground "scene". I think thought, that anonymous was hinting at the friction a largescale, cover-of-Spin breakthrough might bring for Bejar, with his current/previous critiques of the industry. However this might be a moot point for at least three reasons:
1) I can't see it happening. (Maybe I should add "yet")
2) I can't see Destroyer playing the "game anymore
than he/they already do without throwing a monkeywrench into things.
3) In the eventuality this does happen it just gives DB more fodder to write about. It's a classic win-win situation.
re: greatest hits. funny, after listening to Rubies the first time, it reminde me of Spoon's Gimme Fiction because i thought that album felt like a greatest hits of all their past discs.
and thanks for the wiki plug! btw, i thought of creating it while reading popsheep, then saw that drinking game and then that ilm thread and said fuck it i'm doing it.
s. is saying what I meant but I see why you take issue Ian as many make great work after becoming visible icons robbed of all anonymity and unable to walk outside. People who think Dan too esoteric for that level of success listen to Ballad of a Thin man and ask yourself who the target audience is there and millions upon millions of people worship its creator, or imagine if Spike Jonze had his hands on It's Gonna Take An Airplane. Still though, wasn't meaning to imply it wasn't great living in a world where people appreciate (and buy) Rubies (even before it's out!) especially if the alternative's Dan working at the Gap wallowing in obscurity.
...,,;'
(Anonymous, here: 3 periods, 2 commas, a semicolon, and an apostrophe; I give them to you freely. Please use these the next time you write a post, I beg of you!)
"Sick Priest Learns..." actually sounds a lot like David Crosby's "Cowboy Movie".
A good thing.
"Sick Priest Learns..." actually sounds a lot like David Crosby's "Cowboy Movie".
A good thing.
How odd it is being flamed - at Popsheep no less! - by someone I'd surely along with just fine in person. My grammar was atrocious though, so I'll take the punctuation you offer me, Ryan... but only because you've begged me to...
This post has been removed by the author.
Dan working at the GAP?
mebbe if the trust fund ran out...
Sheesh, it wasn't like I punched you in the gut or anything!
I'm sure I would have offered you up that same punctuation, had we been having a discussion in person.
I mean, if one could actually offer up punctuation in the physical world.
Or maybe I would've just punched you in the gut, instead.
Hee hee hee!
http://thefader.com/blog/articles/2006/02/03/newstanding
Discuss.
Anyway, Rubies seems to me like the straight-up-the-middle, now-I've-matured, singer-songwriter album everyone expected. There's precious little double tracking on the vocals, which is where the focus lies. There's some sax, but it's about the voice, baby, the thematic cohesion in the lyrics. It's not as radio-friendly as Destroyer can be; song titles may be sung, but the choruses are all da-da-dahs, which is catchy, but... only to Destroyer fans. If it were a best-of, it would be without a filler track, and personally I hear one or two, (roughly the same number I hear on all his albums.) However, if you wanted to turn someone on to Destroyer, and were limited to only one album, one album to convey the whole darn project, Rubies would suffice... in that sense I completely agree.
I think Fassbinder said it, but it's probably just a cliche, that great artists only have one story to tell, and it's their own, and they tell it over and over and over again. They get better at finding ways to say it as they mature; they become more sincere, less snide, their punctuation improves, etc..
There was a second where I thought the comments were going to turn into the I Love Music (http://ilx.wh3rd.net/) "Destroyer's Rubies" thread. I just looked at that behemoth for the first time last night and I still reeling with shock/awe.
In general, though, I gots to say thanks for all the comments - its nice to have this kind of response to something you've written.
This post has been removed by the author.
blech. i think it sucks.
Spitz, do you mean the album, or something else?
This was my first exposure to any of the material on "Rubies." I think it's fantastic. Unfortunatley, Bejar's ascension to Fader cover star most likely represents the apex of a parabolic arc that began last year when my roommate told me that "It's Gonna Take an Airplane" was in regular rotation at the Starbucks where he was working. The ensuing media push will lead to over-saturation and an inevitable backlash from a music-buying public that will never be ready for Destroyer (putting Bejar on the cover of Fader is like putting Stephen Hawking on the cover of Highlights). Our boy will go into seclusion and eventually resurface making granddad-pop with the other elder statesmen on Yep Roc, or something. He had a good run, but how can he possibly sustain the kind of catty vitriol for which his biggest fans revere him when he's staring out at us from the cover of this generation's Sassy? "Your love of shit knows no bounds," indeed.
Post a Comment
<< Home