the woods

oh, sleater-kinney... the woods starts out so promising with your heavy guitars and your minor chords. the lyrics are a bit iffy on track one, but the rocking more than compensates for that. by "wilderness" you are sounding like your bad old selves. classic s-k! you come into your own by "modern girl", which is (gasp!) almost a ballad. excellent work, girls! the progression from one beat is evident by this point. you manage to sound like yourselves without compromising your sound.

then, you go and ruin it all with "let's call it love". now girls, was an eleven minute song necessary? is an eleven minute song ever necessary? ask yourselves that, and really reflect on it, because the answer is no. few artists can get away with long songs, and unfortunately, you are one of those bands. the fact that this lends itself right into the closer turns it into what is basically a fifteen minute song. fifteen minutes! oh, girls, the key to a long song is to keep it varied and keep it interesting. guitars thrashing for a good five minutes does not constitute either component necessary to creating excellence.

you really threw it all away there. 2/3 of your album is really good, and could be considered excellent with more listens. but that last third? really, knowing that the last two songs constitute a full third of your album says something in and of itself. that last part will never be good. ever. and it is a shame, because the woods could have been your brilliant debut on a new label with a new sound, but instead, turns into a good effort with a poor poor ending.

examples of good long songs:

"notorious lightning" - destroyer, notorious lightning and other works (merge records, 2005) [9min, 51sec]
"1% of one" - stephen malkmus and the jicks, pig lib (matador records, 2003) [9min, 11sec]

examples of bad long songs:

"let's call it love" - sleater-kinney, the woods (sub pop records, 2005) [11min, 01sec]
anything by phish. (probably live.)