Will Of The People - Album Reviews

[Timbo59]

I couldn't disagree with Fantano's review more, but I've become used to that for many of the artists I love. I'm disappointed he spent most of the video talking about lyrics and messaging, where anyone who's listening to muse by now is aware that's not their strong point. I also thought bringing up Glenn Beck was a cheap shot (plenty of right wingers also think many pink floyd songs are anthems for their causes; that's not the fault of the artist), and his critique of taking off your mask in Verona completely missed the point of that song's message imo. The mask lyric wasn't just a cheap political anti-mask line, it was clearly about the conflict of wanting to follow the guidelines and not being sure what is and isn't safe to do during the early days of the pandemic, but rationality being in conflict and ultimately overcome by the desire for human connection with the person you love, and deciding that's more important than staying safe. Maybe I just relate to the song personally more than most because of a very specific situation I had, but reducing it to a 'yikes, he said take off the mask' criticism fell really flat for me.

Anyway, glad to see his opinion is in the minority among reviewers. 

Edited August 31, 2022 by Timbo59

[That Little Animal]

What’s a Fantano? And why does everybody care about what he has to say? 

Pitchfork’s review isn’t as terrible as some of their previous write ups, just their final grade is completely off. 

[Timbo59]

Ag I don't care about his opinion any more than I do any other reviewer's, though I do enjoy watching his vids (mostly his second channel though). But the point about Verona's lyrics is something I've seen on the subreddit too and it bothered me enough to rant.

Edited August 31, 2022 by Timbo59

[MartianSpaghettiRider]

2 hours ago, That Little Animal said:

What’s a Fantano? And why does everybody care about what he has to say? 

Pitchfork’s review isn’t as terrible as some of their previous write ups, just their final grade is completely off. 

…And that’s exactly the issue I have with their review: they bring up understandable criticism here and there without totally trashing the album, nearly giving you the feeling it could be at least a 5, but they give it nonetheless an incredibly abysmal score. It’s almost like they know how influential they still are and use that power to purposely blow down any artist the don’t appreciate when they are receiving mostly positive feedback from other critics. As soon as that lone review is aggregated to the Metacritic system, WOTP score will plunge to fricking 69 from 77, unless there are other positive reviews. It irks me to no end.

[Timbo59]

Just learned they gave BHaR a 4.2 😬

[EternallyPissed]

7 hours ago, Timbo59 said:

I couldn't disagree with Fantano's review more, but I've become used to that for many of the artists I love. I'm disappointed he spent most of the video talking about lyrics and messaging, where anyone who's listening to muse by now is aware that's not their strong point. I also thought bringing up Glenn Beck was a cheap shot (plenty of right wingers also think many pink floyd songs are anthems for their causes; that's not the fault of the artist), and his critique of taking off your mask in Verona completely missed the point of that song's message imo. The mask lyric wasn't just a cheap political anti-mask line, it was clearly about the conflict of wanting to follow the guidelines and not being sure what is and isn't safe to do during the early days of the pandemic, but rationality being in conflict and ultimately overcome by the desire for human connection with the person you love, and deciding that's more important than staying safe. Maybe I just relate to the song personally more than most because of a very specific situation I had, but reducing it to a 'yikes, he said take off the mask' criticism fell really flat for me.

Anyway, glad to see his opinion is in the minority among reviewers. 

Well put. Once in a while I'll come across a negative review of Muse, where I'll say, "Okay, I may not agree with that particular point, but I can understand where he/she is coming from." For the most part, though, the critical reviews come across as extremely lazy to me. Even though chief songwriter Matt Bellamy has never been big into Radiohead, some critics branded them as Radiohead rip-offs due to Bellamy showcasing a falsetto after Thom Yorke did (like they were the only two to ever do such a thing - especially considering they've both admitted to Jeff Buckley being their main inspiration). When that fell by the wayside (for some), the band suddenly became Queen-copycats - even though legendary Queen guitarist Brian May said he loved the band and had zero problem with them taking some inspiration from his band. When "Uprising" came around, the Glenn Beck's of the world stated it was speaking to them. It reached such a point that Bellamy even took the matter to the press and said he was pissed off that Beck and company were adopting the song as their own. The band was then being "disrespectful" with "Drones," "selling-out" with "Simulation Theory," and now are a combination of past stereotypes with "Will of the People" - including exhibiting an "anti-mask" stance on songs like "Compliance" and "Verona" when the band has explicitly stated that's NOT the case.

The funny thing is the band has, in large part, at one time or another let it be known what their intent and messages have been with various albums and songs - "Will of the People" included. The problem is a lot of people may hear, but they don't listen. Vague poems or lyrics were at one time considered genius - especially from a marketing perspective, because it improved the potential outreach tenfold. No matter what the true inspiration was behind the poem or song, people of all stripes could read/listen to it and relate. Nowadays, though, it's a double-edged sword. While it may still be a brilliant marketing strategy from the relatability standpoint, if a single person - especially a critic - misinterprets it to the point where their perceived message is antithetical to the initial one, said misinterpretation can spread like wildfire, and then what do we have? A poem or song which basically lives a double-life - one where it's interpreted correctly or at least partially correctly and another which is so off-base, Abbott and Costello are no longer asking, "Who's on first?;" they're asking, "You see that moving dot way up in the sky? I think he was just on first." At the end of the day, given the constant motion and communication that is the internet, what can a band realistically do to stop these cycles? A lot of the criticism I've read concerning this album has been with regard to messaging: "What if someone misinterprets 'Compliance' or 'Verona' as anti-mask? What if people think 'Liberation' is advocating the Capitol attacks?" I'll partially defend critics, as they have many albums to review, and it'd be unfeasible to expect them to listen to "Will of the People" 15 times before reviewing it, but come on, a little research doesn't take real long. Bellamy has said "Compliance" wasn't anti-mask, and that he's fully vaxxxed and mask-friendly. The band's also stated that "Verona" is a hybrid of "Romeo & Juliet" and "Coronavirus." Matt said the main influence for "Liberation" was the Black Lives Matter movement and protests. It's out there for everyone to read and isn't very hard to find. Instead of these critics actually doing their job; they make it seem as though they want everyone else to do the research for them; feed them the facts; and then they'll give a half-ass listen to an album, before providing it an obviously biased review. At the end of the day, it doesn't mean squat, but at the same time it truly amazes me how far we've fallen with regard to impartial journalism and journalistic integrity.

[Timbo59]

4 hours ago, That Little Animal said:

What’s a Fantano? And why does everybody care about what he has to say? 

Pitchfork’s review isn’t as terrible as some of their previous write ups, just their final grade is completely off. 

I'd also add that Fantano seems to have more influence/relevance to online music discourse and culture, so I do find it interesting to follow his reviews of artists I enjoy.

[Silentgod86]

I don't think music critics should be blamed if the lyrics are ambiguous. If Matt has to repeatedly clarify his personal stances in response to criticism of lyrics he's written, perhaps that's on him for using right wing lexicon. If someone like Zane Lowe, someone who's followed their career from the beginning and his interviews are part of every album's release cycle, thinks the lyrics are pretty bloody ambiguous and can be easily co-opted by right wing groups, it's hard to argue that it's down to a lack of research or pre-existing hostility towards the band. Matt writes sloppy lyrics, this is nothing new but seeing mental gymnastics like "well you'd understand if you read this article and watched these five interviews"  really just emphasises how ambiguous they really are. Great art speaks for itself.

[EternallyPissed]

28 minutes ago, Silentgod86 said:

I don't think music critics should be blamed if the lyrics are ambiguous. If Matt has to repeatedly clarify his personal stances in response to criticism of lyrics he's written, perhaps that's on him for using right wing lexicon. If someone like Zane Lowe, someone who's followed their career from the beginning and his interviews are part of every album's release cycle, thinks the lyrics are pretty bloody ambiguous and can be easily co-opted by right wing groups, it's hard to argue that it's down to a lack of research or pre-existing hostility towards the band. Matt writes sloppy lyrics, this is nothing new but seeing mental gymnastics like "well you'd understand if you read this article and watched these five interviews"  really just emphasises how ambiguous they really are. Great art speaks for itself.

Come on... Whether or not art intends to be ambiguous, at the end of the day, guess what? It's ambiguous. No matter what the songwriter intended with his or her lyrics, millions of people will hear the song, and as is human nature, they'll interpret it as they so choose. Whether that song, for whatever reason, brings back a memory from childhood; reminds them of a loved one who has passed; etc., they're going to interpret it through their own lens. This isn't isolated to Matt Bellamy's lyrics, as you seem to enjoy contending. Some of the most well-renowned lyricists in history have long had the meanings of their songs misinterpreted due to inevitable ambiguity.

"Imagine" by John Lennon: Described as "22 lines of graceful, plain-spoke faith in the power of a world, united in purpose, to repair and change itself," Lennon called the song "virtually the Communist manifesto."

"American Girl" by Tom Petty: Rumored to be about a girl at the University of Florida who killed herself, Petty said, "It's become a huge urban myth down in Florida. That's just not at all true." Guitarist Mike Campbell added, "Some people take it literally and out of context. To me it's just a really beautiful love song."

"Blackbird" by the Beatles: Many believed it to be about a blackbird, whose wings were broken. To this, Paul McCartney responded, "I got the idea of using a blackbird as a symbol for a Black person. It wasn't necessarily a black 'bird,' but it works that way, as much as then you called girls 'birds' ... it wasn't exactly an ornithology ditty; it was purely symbolic."

"Born in the U.S.A." by Bruce Springsteen: According to Songfacts, "Most people thought it was a patriotic song about American pride, when it actually cast a shameful eye of how America treated its Vietnam veterans ... with rollicking rhythm, enthusiastic chorus, and patriotic album cover, it is easy to think this has more to do with American pride than Vietnam shame."

These are far from the lone examples of song messages by some of the most well-renowned lyricists in the history of rock being misinterpreted. Does that thereby make the lyrics "sloppy" and problematic? Do you still contend that "great art speaks for itself," or due to human nature being what it is, is it not all but inevitable, whether lyrics were intended to be ambiguous or not, they will be received in such a manner, and there's little to nothing the songwriter can do about it?

[New Born Lee]

It is not a critic's job to do all the research and interpret everything from the musician's point of view. THAT would be a lack of journalistic integrity.

It's their job to provide their authentic personal perspective and offer their curation of music to their readers. To many critics, lyrics like "take off your mask" after the COVID pandemic has happened are sloppy because it's obviously going to be misinterpreted regardless of what the lyricist's intent was. That isn't some highly personal, memory-from-childhood interpretation. It requires knowledge and awareness of THE PANDEMIC, something literally everyone knows about. The fact that Matt even TRIED to provide another interpretion is frankly ludicrous - like, you'd have to be DEAD TO THE WORLD to not notice the connotations of "take off your mask" in the current context. ESPECIALLY considering the revolutionary themes in their music. There's EVERYTHING Matt could have done about it. That's why it's SO SLOPPY.

It REALLY doesn't matter if Brian May didn't mind Muse ripping off Queen. Sounding so very like Queen like Muse have in their songs is tacky to many critics because it sounds like they're piggybacking off the appeal of a style without offering anything new. Critics are more likely to use phrases like "ripping off" not only because they are more impactful/inflammatory - and ultimately journalism feeds off that - but because they do not need to explain why sounding very like another artist is tacky. It's shorthand.

 

[EternallyPissed]

14 minutes ago, New Born Lee said:

It is not a critic's job to do all the research and interpret everything from the musician's point of view. THAT would be a lack of journalistic integrity.

It's their job to provide their authentic personal perspective and offer their curation of music to their readers. To many critics, lyrics like "take off your mask" after the COVID pandemic has happened are sloppy because it's obviously going to be misinterpreted regardless of what the lyricist's intent was. That isn't some highly personal, memory-from-childhood interpretation. It requires knowledge and awareness of THE PANDEMIC, something literally everyone knows about. The fact that Matt even TRIED to provide another interpretion is frankly ludicrous - like, you'd have to be DEAD TO THE WORLD to not notice the connotations of "take off your mask" in the current context. ESPECIALLY considering the revolutionary themes in their music. There's EVERYTHING Matt could have done about it. That's why it's SO SLOPPY.

It REALLY doesn't matter if Brian May didn't mind Muse ripping off Queen. Sounding so very like Queen like Muse have in their songs is tacky to many critics because it sounds like they're piggybacking off the appeal of a style without offering anything new. Critics are more likely to use phrases like "ripping off" not only because they are more impactful/inflammatory - and ultimately journalism feeds off that - but because they do not need to explain why sounding very like another artist is tacky. It's shorthand.

 

Gosh, you people are impossible. Thank you for the morning laughs, though; it's greatly appreciated.

[Silentgod86]

That was a nice Google search with copy and paste.

Suppose you can't delete this thread, so I'll repeat what I posted yesterday. Apparently Liberation is about BLM however the lyrics talk about owning the air and wanting to commit violence. Considering BLM spawned from a black man being suffocated to death, the systematic suppression of Black people in America and innocent black people being brutally murdered by police on a regular basis, it's utterly tone deaf. Liberation's lyrics conjure up in non-ambiguous terms, imagery of protestors violently bringing down power structures which in 2022 is going to remind people of the January 6th attacks more than BLM, because black people are the victims of political violence more than they are the perpetrators. 

Am I saying Matt Bellamy should be cancelled? No. Do I think he meant harm by the lyric? No. Do I think as a rich English white person, he may not understand the nuances of the situation faced by black people in this US and possibly is not in the best position to write a lyric that captures a moment of which he is not part of? Totally. Does it make me less of a Muse fan to treat Matt's lyrics as a work of artistic expression worthy of serious and honest analysis and criticism? No.

Edited September 2, 2022 by Silentgod86

[Claudia O]

Rock Antenne 

https://www.rockantenne.at/musik/album-der-woche/muse-will-of-the-people

jpc 4/5 

https://www.jpc.de/jpcng/poprock/detail/-/art/muse-will-of-the-people/hnum/10890969

Musewiki 😉🥳

https://www.musewiki.org/Will_of_the_People_(album)

Heavypop 6/10 …

https://www.heavypop.at/muse-will-of-the-people/
 

Edited September 6, 2022 by Claudia O

[Claudia O]

https://vampster.com/cd-reviews/muse-will-of-the-people/