The Doors: Sexy. Dead. Gods?

“Why idolize dead rock stars.” I felt a bit like an alien typing my search query into Google … as if I had been suddenly dropped onto Earth and tapped into something that I could tell was vital to the earthling’s social psyche, but was at a loss for words to articulate what it could be. Although I can wrap my extraterrestrial brain around the intricacies of a Google search, American pop culture is a snarling, untamed beast, much larger and more powerful than the sum total of people it feeds off. Its mind, if you could call it a mind, is a squirming mass, half-fried by a world indebted to microwave radiation, and propelled by the two-fold thrust of the muscle memory of a decaying nervous system, and roving, universal chaos. It’s maddening enough attempting to confront pop culture as a human living in the midst of it all.

But returning to my initial question: Why do we idolize dead rock stars?

My journey starts with the Doors. It was likely by chance that I landed on the psychedelic band known for ravaging the Sunset Strip. It could easily have been the Beatles or Led Zeppelin, or had I younger parents it could have been Metallica and Slayer, because 2006 was this baffling year when classic rock was “in,” and a trendy teen could claim some street cred by rifling through her parents’ album collection and then by delivering the good news to her sophomore classmates. The Doors just happened to be what I found first.

Maybe that’s not entirely true.

In 2006, I was 14, and until that time I found the music everyone else was listening to either far too poppy, or way too inaccessible for me in my MTV-blocked household. Though in my prolonged search for cool, stumbling across albums like Dark Side of the Moon, and Beggars Banquet there was no band that struck a chord in me as did the Doors. The group sounded like nothing else I had heard, and there was a distinctive darkness that seem to swarm around the band. And maybe more particularly, the Doors had Jim Morrison. Morrison was unlike the David Gilmours, the Paul McCartneys and Keith Richards of the world. Aside from being incredibly charismatic, devious, and a not-delicate yet poetic soul, Morrison had an exceptional quality that inarguably set him apart from the previous mentioned artists—he was dead.

Long dead. Dead over 20 years before I was even born. This, I think, is significant.

Perhaps, this is one of the reasons, if not the only reason, why we remember the Doors, and forget Status Quo, or why we don’t quite push the Kinks to the same upper echelons of rock “god”-ness. Consider, for a moment, the fact that “rock god” has even entered the trite, pop-culture lexicon. Or consider the mystical aura that surrounds the “27 Club”–or even more humorously—the vehement passion of the self-elected gatekeepers, trolling blogs and keen to keep the club “pure” (sorry, Amy Winehouse).

The Doors as a band were certainly good, but it’s not even like everything the band put out became a gilded instant-classic. “Hello, I Love You,” and “Twentieth Century Fox” always sneak their way onto compilation albums, but they seem so fabricated for 1967 AM-radio airwaves that they could have come from another singer’s mouth and no one would have noticed. There’s also more than a handful of tried-and-true stinkers. (“Yes, the River Knows” comes to mind. The “mysticated wine” bit makes my stomach churn every time I hear the line.) If we, and by we I mean the most savage of Doors fans, were to take Jim Morrison’s lyrics and imagine they were penned not by this myth-man, but instead by our freshman-year, college roommate majoring in philosophy, I’d take the bet that the words would be much more difficult to swallow.

But, going back, isn’t it funny that a teen growing up in the late 2000s would even have the chance to stumble on a band that had emerged 40 years prior? At 14, however, it’s easy to buy into the deification of Jim Morrison. You can gloss over the too-indulgent lyrics, (or even hail them as genius) because the teenage experience itself is often over-indulgent. Ironically, the existence of the artist’s mortality is what allows us the space for apotheosis. Because a dead rock star can no longer truly have a say in the matter, society is given the space to write a legacy for the star independently of his wishes or current actions. The more elusive the star—and make no mistake, Morrison, was nearly as cryptic in his daily interactions as he was writing lyrics—the easier it is for fans to craft their own narratives, and use the now-pliable image to bend the star toward whatever needs they are looking to fulfill. A residual of our humanness that has allowed us to maintain our histories through stories is that people like narrative arcs.

In high school especially, the age 27 seems far-off, but not void of a relatable youth. There are no comments to alienate the artist from today’s young circles, and there’s nothing quite like Roger Daltrey’s 60+-year-old abs to contend with. And this is why it’s totally cool to scribble “the streets are fields that never die” onto your teal pair of Converse high tops in sharpie as a teenager, because you’re like, that in-tune with his lyricism, man.

On larger scale however, rock even is, as we now know it, dead. And that’s fine. Rock as we knew it has been dead countless times, and critics have been heralding its death since 1968. But aesthetic life is like a comic book author, eager to kill off beloved characters to drum up sales, only to resurrect them through some sort of cheap deus ex machina plot twist. So rock is cyclic, and as far as my lifetime is concerned, rock is eternal. Like our “rock gods,” immortality is achieved only through death.

Though I’m in no way trying to undercut the band, (the Doors still hold a particularly special place in my heart–even if I’m not engaging with their songs as actively as I used to, and if the shrine to Morrison that was in my room has been–mostly–dismantled), Morrison’s greatest legacy may have been death. His death, along with that of Hendrix, Joplin and few others heralded the beginning of a new musical era, and perhaps cemented the Doors as a near-household name.

 

Ghost: Meliora

Prompt: Review an album that you changed your perspective on over time.

Initially, I wasn’t sold on the band Ghost. It wasn’t the band’s masks, or ghastly outfits. It certainly wasn’t their albums dedicated to the conception and birth of the Antichrist, or their presumed ties to the Prince of Darkness. It was that, despite all those things, the band had a sound that was anthemic, melodic, well-constructed with smooth, polished vocals lacking any ferocity. Was this music supposed to be doom metal? Ghost, who commanded such a sinister aesthetic, seemed to be bordering on being simply a garish glam band.

Still, I was struck with feeling something was different about the band. They were far from the first to wear full, face-distorting makeup on stage, or even shield their identities with masks, but there seemed to be a larger narrative here. So, despite my initial hesitations, I persevered through Meliora, their third studio release, and what I found was a talented band that revealed as many facets as the listener is willing to engage with.

What is so compelling about Ghost is the duality existing in everything that they produce–the way in which the listener can easily tackle the band at a superficial level or wade through their material with an eye for the symbolism and wordplay at work. MelioraMeliora exemplifies this. The Latin title, often translating to “the pursuit of something better,” is one example of double meaning. The album, belonging to the Antichrist timeline of their two previous releases (the band’s first album Opus Eponymous reveals the conception of the Antichrist, and their second album, Infestissumam, translating to roughly the “most hostile,” depicts the post-birth presence of the devil-made-flesh) portrays a critical look at modern sensibilities, asking whether technological and societal advancements truly make the world better. The message is typically a tired one, and were it framed by U2, it’d likely be grating. Ghost paints our cities as modern Babylons where we are mindlessly precipitating our doom, and it successfully does so without the heavy handedness of bands like Avenged Sevenfold. Meliora presents something “better” on a solely sonic front as well. The album happens to be the band’s first collaboration with pop producer Klas Åhlund. After the group was widely criticized for the mixing quality on Infestissumam, it’s clear the band was pursuing something better and found it.

Though it’s easy to dismiss Ghost as simply harnessing shock and horror in an attempt to rabble-rouse, the band uses its image to deftly point out absurdities of our contemporary world. In a country where 13% of the population believes that the current president is in fact, the Antichrist, their critique seems timely. The theme of Meliora is arguably revealed in the album’s last track “Deus in Absentia ” (God is Absent), recalling Watchmen’s Rorschach surveying New York City and imagining its inhabitants shouting “Save Us!” to whom he whispers, “No.” With the events of 2016 (thus far) slouching toward an ominous future, Meliora’s message feels particularly apt, and sheds light on why humanity looks to demagogues and false gods in times of strife.

But let’s not forget that, above all, the music on Meliora is good. Despite the slick and polished surface that had given me pause, the album is not without grit, and is tongue-in-cheek enough to have me buying into the whole demon-aesthetic thing. Opening with the spacey-horror tone that the theremin has become known for, “Spirit,” the album’s first track, sets Meliora up for the sound of a not-so-distant-future. The song is anthemic, but with the addition of a ghostly choir singing in the background, it recalls a church hymn gone awry. The track is followed by the foot-stomping bass riff of “Pinnacle to the Pit”–possibly the strongest one of the record. Though there is never any outward vocal ferocity, there is something absolutely sinister about the soft growling that the vocals fall into during the choruses on the song, and they compound the driving nature of the bass riff. The decidedly evil tone weaves in and out of the remainder of the tracks, culminating in “Dues in Absentia.” The song has all the trimmings of an arena rock ballad, but set against the ticking of a doomsday clock it is the sound of existential horror manifest musically. Even if the tracks were divorced from their symbolism, they would still yield aural delights that resound with tremendous musical gravitas. Though Ghost may seem kitsch to the skeptical listener, there is much more to unpack than their ghoulish figures may have you initially believe.

 

 

Moon Tooth: Live Review at St. Vitus

Prompt: Attend a live show, and submit a review with a short turnaround

I’m going to–right now–claim Moon Tooth for my own. I’ve grown up on Long Island in the Brand New/Taking Back Sunday wake, and have spent years shuffling past people who claim how dead the local scene is–contending with those who contribute nothing but acrimony and expect a phoenix from the ash. Despite our sins, the gods are kind and have gifted us Moon Tooth, which, if we were to be terse, is a “prog” metal band. I’m keeping big quotations on the word “prog” here, because the band nimbly weaves through an arsenal of influences, fusing elements of sludge, math rock, blues, and thrash. It’s a bridled chaos that is only amplified during their floor-crushing live performances. Their show at Brooklyn metal den St. Vitus, where they opened for Intronaut and Entheos this past Sunday night, was no exception.

So, how does one describe Moon Tooth? The band is a firestorm, hailing holy hell onto a wickedly delighted audience. Opening with the teeth-gnashing “Queen Wolf,” singer John Carbone, who sings with a celestial deftness, is not at all what I expected to see on stage. His body juxtaposes his voice with a clomping wildness, set haphazardly to the beat that the other two standing band members soon adopt. The MoonToothPosterrest of the set continues with a similar feral barbarity punctuated by a surprisingly spry guitarist Nick Lee jumping from stage to half stack and back, and Carbone leaping into the loving embrace of a germinating pit–neither make a misstep.

As a metal band, Moon Tooth is distinctive in that they possess all the crunch and sludge of bands like Mastodon while at the same time occupying the vocal finesse of artists like MutemathBut perhaps what’s most attractive about seeing the band live is observing the line they walk. Moon Tooth is serious: they’re throwing down seriously heavy riffs with eloquent lyricism. But despite their unquestionable sincerity, they’re incredibly fun to watch, and the band embraces a certain self awareness–a disregard of playing close to chest in an effort to gain a godlike aloofness. Moon Tooth is wholly mortal, a fact evidenced when Carbone throws his bloody beating heart into the ring in earnest with every manic dance-spasm, and Lee makes no moves to veil his delight in the visceral gut-punches coming out of his snarling guitar. Though I’d currently peg them as a group in the developing stages of navigating stage showmanship, the audience buy-in is sure to come. In the meantime, I’m just as pleased to watch the clumsy, pounding spontaneity that punctuates their non-stop set.

St. Vincent of Strange Mercy, Pray for Us Women

Prompt: Connect a musical moment with a larger cultural narrative

The stage was engulfed in a thick white fog, and aside from the anxious whispers of an expectant audience, the entire room was filled with a pulsating drone–slightly mechanical in sound–impossible not to fixate on. It’s March of 2015 and I’ve driven three and a half hours to stand in the newly re-named Upstate Concert Hall, about three people deep from the platform’s ledge (a spot I pushed and ducked my way into during the previous 30 minute art-pop set). Suddenly, the droning stops, and the silhouette of Annie Clark emerges from the mist. Her face is wreathed with untamed brown locks that reflect the wildness in her eyes. Clad in a black sheath dress emblazoned with a single sequined eye, Clark is flanked by the talented Toko Yasuda who acts as second guitarist, keyboardist, or back-up singer, depending on the musical demands. Toko also wears a dark shirt with sequining–however in her case the eye is swapped out for a set of red lips. The symbolism is fitting: the eye represents the imagination of the mystical visionary and the mouth stands for the organ through which those conceptions are transformed into sound.

Clark pounces on the abrupt silence left by the absent droning and, without warning, throws the band into the set. “Bring Me Your Loves” starts with St. Vincent simultaneously speak-singing the command of the track’s title and stretching out her arm, palm opened wide, with the uninhibited confidence of a three-year old demanding–rather than asking–for more, before returning her hands to the guitar and shredding the riffs of a woman who has not known earth as long as she has known the cosmos. Like all of her music, “Bring Me Your Loves” flirts with an otherworldly knowingness, and the song is a near perfect example of explosive chaos and calculated restraint–a raw display of musical talent made even more striking because of the masterful way in which St. Vincent commanded the stage in this live performance.

St_Vincent_artwork St. Vincent, a name that both acts as the alter-ego of Annie Clark and the name of the group that she performs in, has finally crossed into mainstream–even if it has grudgingly done so. The eponymously titled album released in 2014 saw a Grammy win in 2015 for “Best Alternative Album,” and peaked just shy of a top ten spot on the Billboard charts. Clark is not only significant because of her incredibly virtuosic melody writing, guitar playing and musical arranging. She has consistently occupied a public social space that is decidedly feminine without being overtly sexualized. She is, of course, a woman, but she has freed herself–at least partly–from needlessly gendered behaviors in a way that feels notably sincere. Her recent launch of an Ernie Ball “Music Man” signature guitar–a guitar designed for women’s bodies that resists pandering by using either the color pink, animal-skin prints or heart symbols–is an excellent example. Instead, she lives outside the sphere of sexual stereotypes every time she takes to a stage dive and at those manic moments when she wildly pulls the strings off her guitar in the middle of a solo. Likely because of this, there is a subtle but powerful shift starting to emerge as opinion moves from “Annie Clark is an excellent female guitarist” to “Annie Clark is an excellent guitarist.”

Perhaps it is for these reasons the live performance of “Bring Me Your Loves” was so striking. Clark is a musician who stimulates the innocent request, “Please sir, I want some more,” that females have learned to suppress as they grow older. As the world continues to deny women basic liberties, the command to bend under the totality of the normative model is transformed over time to a dance of “maybe”s, “could I”s, and “if that’s OK with everyone”s. Clark dares to force her audience to engage with the music beyond a sonic level. With an extended palm, St. Vincent is aiding in the effort not only to carve a place out for female musicians in 2016, but also to give serious credibility yet again to the threadbare argument that women have the right to be taken seriously.

 

Bergo ’45–Dresden

Is Rock dead?

Just posing the question makes me twitch and I’m starting to break out in sweats thinking about it. At the same time though, artists who seem to genuflect to the “Gods of Rock” end up falling into tired tropes, and it’s natural to consider how many times an idea can be recapitulated and still be revolutionary. Bergo ’45, like many rock groups, is a band that owes a debt to the mainstream music of the late 60’s and 70’s however, its 14-track span feels aimless in scope and fails to either honor the bands or advance the genre.

Their first LP, the ambitiously titled Dresden, falls flat of its lofty name and though there are certain moments in their sound worth exploring, the work is largely a hallmark of a band yet to settle into a coherent approach. The firebombed Dresden image that haunts the album’s cover seems to prime the listener for something vaguely political—perhaps offering an exploration into the atrocities of war, or a meditation on dehumanization—but if there’s a loaded message to be taken from the album, it must be buried somewhere in the unintelligible vocals. CaptureThe album suffers from severe production issues, often dragging the vocal line to the bottom of the mix, where it is gleefully swallowed up by needless, hefty instrumentals. “Mud in Your Eye,” the album’s opening track, is a good example of this defect with vocals that mimic someone in the final throes of treading water—bobbing up and down, dangerously close to being drowned entirely. The lo-fi quality of the recording could work if the band wallowed in the DIY aesthetic and possessed the defiant snub of high fidelity in the vein of bands like The Vaselines. But the music seems to be too calculated to exist in that space.

Aside from the recording quality, the band suffers from self-congratulatory instrumental sections and frivolous fills that move the music nowhere and that could be cut entirely without consequence. “Wasted Words,” a track clocking in at 10 minutes, could be more aptly titled “Wasted Time” as the two minutes of halfway-decent songwriting is regurgitated ad nauseam. It’s as if the band members need the listener to know how proficient they are on their instruments. Though mindless soloing may be impressive at parties, it is positively grating in the context of an album. The drummer is the most grievous offender, offering completely superfluous fills (in “Mud in Your Eye,” “Sweet Mary”), and, in the case of “It’s Just About Time,” creating winded solos that flirt dangerously with falling behind the beat.

The band’s strongest songs, not surprisingly, are its simplest. “Poignant” and “Fifty-Eight,” slower tracks propelled by solid acoustic strumming, seem to hit their intended mark. Without the weight of the other instruments the vocalist drops his falsetto, and instead adopts a lower register, which sounds far less forced than many of the full-band tracks. “And So It Goes” and “Run It,” though imperfect in arrangement, point toward what could be the sound of a band matured. The tracks—which have an almost Smiths, new-wave vibe—instead of fighting against the singer’s vocal range, not only work with his voice but also feature the few moments when the band exhibits a cohesive sound without any hint of competitiveness. In “Run It” especially, the vocalist is almost unbridled in his rawness, and it is one of the few flashes of sincerity that we hear on the album.
Dresden is the sound of a band that might have potential but fails to fully brandish it here. At its best, the album is inconsistent. There are four or five interesting moments, but they lack development (or worse, suffer from a tedious overdevelopment that beats songs within an inch of their lives), and though I have a hunch that Bergo ’45 produces something dynamic and unique in a live setting, it doesn’t translate on the recording, which is often wearily flat sounding. Dresden fails beyond the sum of its dysfunctional parts—it neglects to create anything meaningful, and seconds of musical daring are quickly substituted for fatigued safe-sounding riffs. Rock may not yet be dead, but rest assured that Bergo ’45 is not doing it any favors.

Nirvana: Bleach

Prompt: Find a negative, wrong-headed review of an album you love and make it right.

First off, I hate to be that guy. You know, the one that’s always at someone else’s party who feels some sort of need to smugly butt themselves into a conversation you’re having in an attempt to overstep your clearly well-formed opinion. It can be about anything–you’re having a conversation about Clerks, and they have to assert that Dogma is actually an “underrated Smith in his best form,” for example–but it’s probably far worse when it’s about music. But here I am, shamelessly being that guy to the chagrin of party goers the world over. My snobby, unpopular opinion? Bleach is my favorite album from Nirvana, and I’d argue that it’s the best work in their ephemeral, 5-year-long recording career.

allcdcovers_nirvana_bleach_1991_retail_cd-front

The funny thing about Bleach, an album recorded for $600 in 1989, is that it only became subject to the scrutiny of the mainstream critical ear after Nevermind exploded onto the scene. Because of this, Bleach has often been reviewed through the prism of the band’s breakout album, instead of as a self-standing creation with its own context. The album is described by critics across the board as being inconsistent, less focused, and sounding like an immature band still working on its direction. And thus, its place in the Nirvana discography is often dismissed, and relegated to the category of “a record for the die-hards.”

The reality is that Bleach is 11 blaring tracks that fail to hold back, and never make a single attempt to be cool. It is unapologetic in scope, its riffs are dirty and gritty, and if calling the album sloppy or unfocused are fair critiques, it is only because it radiates the unfocused sloppiness of blunt anger. The album is raw, relentless and driving, bathing the listener in all of the feedback and fuzz sewn into it. There is not a record out there that so perfectly encapsulates the ferocity of post-pubescent angst.

Though the album clocks in at just over a 30-minute run time, Kurt Cobain effortlessly navigates a multitude of topics, perhaps relying more on the absolutely wrenching vocal performance he exerts throughout the tracks than on overt lyricism. “Negative Creep,” a tune written with a fervid self-loathing, is a good example. The song features only four distinct lines of text that border on absurdist, but when performed with an ululating Cobain on vocals the exact mood of the piece–a nihilistic ode to the anti-social–is clear. While the album certainly slouches toward what the post-1992 world of grunge would become, it also exists in a space heavily influenced by the DIY hardcore and metal groups of the time. “Floyd the Barber,” a track led by a very simple riff of two power chords followed by three driving, echoing bass drum hits could be right at home alongside the simple, droning title track from Black Flag’s My War.

Though Cobain claimed to have written much of the lyrical material of Bleach the night before the songs were recorded and even made the point of saying that none of the lyrics on the record were particularly dear to him, it is nonetheless a highly personal series of songs. Perhaps this is due to the short time the songs saw between writing and recording–Cobain wrote down his feelings immediately as they came to him, and had no time to veil them. The result is a raw look at topics from Cobain’s contempt for the macho (“Mr. Moustache”) to his complex love relationship (“About a Girl”). One particularly personal track, “Paper Cuts,” whose primal drum opening–courtesy of a pre-Dave Grohl, Chad Channing–builds like a suspense film, stratifies itself into layers of discomfort and dissonance, and offers a visceral look into Cobain’s complex family dynamic, the likes of which we are hardly privy to again.

The album in all its gut-busting  glory reaches a fever pitch on “Love Buzz,” a cover of the 1969 song by the Dutch band Shocking Blue, that doubles as a not-so-subtle love note to Melvins frontman, Buzz Osborne. With this track, the album reveals itself as the perfect blend of unbridled musical chaos and moments of quiet control.

“Smells Like Teen Spirit” was a song for a generation. Nevermind was an album for all time. This album is hardly that. There’s some serious authorial self-loathing and anger issues the listener must contend with. However, it’s likely a more unfiltered look into the naked psyche of a man whose mind was as dazzlingly inventive as it was disturbingly fractured. Bleach is likely not timeless, and it is certainly not universal. Yet in all its ragged edges, it reveals an emotional depth to those who can relate to its aesthetic jaggedness perhaps more than Nevermind–with all its anthemic brilliance–ever could. It’s an album for the aimless twenty-somethings, the negative creeps, and maybe, all those smug “that guy” types you hope to avoid running into at your next party.

Dancing about Architecture; or, Death to the Dull

305933_10152730323795099_1509944652_n

I love the living, breathing paradox that is all things punk. I play bass (read: I play guitar so terribly I was Survivor-style voted off the instrument) in a punk band. I’d even go as far to say that I play in a bad punk band. So, arguably–the trope goes–I play bass in an “authentic” punk band in that my technique is garbage, our sound is downstroke-driven primal, and I chew through picks the way that my dog chews through every screen door we’ve ever had. This idea of authenticity is, of course, ridiculous. Everything starts to get muddled when we start considering that bad punk is more authentic than good punk, authentic is “better,” and good punk is ostensibly “bad.” Throw in the fact that we’re playing in a musical style whose swan song really should have come about with the first power chords of “Smells Like Teen Spirit,” and (even more concerning) that the genre is so obsessively concerned with “poseurs” and submits to an ouroboros of the bona fides–eating itself away into oblivion–and you’re dealing with a beautiful hodgepodge of contradictions as expansive as it is limiting. Despite all of its paradoxes, its burnouts, and its tenderhearted but naive ambition, it still seems to exist in some state just fiercely trucking on, blind to all its faults. Point is, although there’s a huge part of me that likes indulging in blaring nasty distorted noise at a level way past human decency, there’s a part that is drawn to punk because it both delivers a hard credo and gives you license to do whatever want under its crusty, threadbare umbrella. It allows me to carve out my own space between shades of gray.

If you’ve ever done a quick search on the Internet for “writing about music,” you’d have a difficult time avoiding this nugget of supposed wisdom:

“Writing about music is like dancing about architecture.”

The quote is nebulous in origin, but as pervasive as a perennial garden weed. Despite its persistence, it is a quote I can imagine only exists because of the incredibly dull sort of people who like to maintain that the current crop of musicians are far worse than the ones of their own generation.

But why is it so aggravatingly narrow-minded? First, to argue that we can’t dance about architecture assumes that either ballet or buildings can’t be greater than the sum of their own parts, and that something so intangible and fluid could never hope to create a dialogue with something as substantial as a concrete structure. You could maybe try to argue that architects and dancers had no business talking to each other if each one was able to grow up in a bubble– totally isolated from one another–free from any shared experience aside from the mystical “divine” spark of inspiration. But the reality is we live in a world where paintings are not just paintings, songs can “save lives,” and works don’t just have the ability to exist outside themselves; but they may need to in order to make any sense. Like punk, you’re blocking meaningful thought if you’re asserting that your art has to be “totally authentic,” and completely isolated from other media and experiences.  Anyway, the case can be made that you can write about music, and furthermore, that exploring an art form through a different medium is not a futile pursuit.

And I guess that brings it back to me. I’m here to try to do just that—not simply to hone my writing skills, but also to create some dialogue with some works, works for which I have an overwhelming, nerd-like love, and hopefully works about which I have something meaningful to say. I’m guessing that by the end of this, you’ll have something meaningful to say about them as well.