3.29.2010 | 6:00 am

Critical Backlash: For The Record, “Roman Candle” Is A 10.0

Elliott Smith - Roman CandleThings that are missing from and/or embarrassing with Pitchfork’s review today of Elliott Smith’s Roman Candle and From a Basement on the Hill:

1) A single paragraph in this review is spent discussing Roman Candle. This graf somehow earns it a 7.8. The fact that the album, Smith’s solo debut and his most fumblingly lo-fi/experimental effort, has been remastered is mentioned only in passing; that New Moon‘s Larry Crane did the remastering is not discussed at all, nor is its first-time-ever vinyl release. One would think these might be talking points in a review of a reissue. (Did I mention that Roman Candle is my favorite album of all time? Oh, yeah.)

2) The rest of the review is spent discussing From a Basement, suddenly worthy of an 8.4 despite the fact that nothing about it has changed whatsoever since Pitchfork gave it a 7.2 in 2004. This is essentially a second printing. The new release isn’t remastered and contains no bonus tracks; there’s nothing new to say about it except for the self-evident, single-sentence fact that, yes, it’s a harrowing record made a bit easier to listen to a few years removed from Smith’s tragic death.

3) Basement is a raw, angry record rusted through with distorted guitars. So, to an extent, is Roman Candle. This is the thematic and sonic link between the two, and what makes them interesting career bookends. In case you were wondering. Smith also used to play in a alternative rock band called Heatmiser whose sound and influence should probably be mentioned here, but that would be complicated.

4) Judging by a search of his work for the site, Jayson Greene, the writer behind the piece, is primarily a hip-hop scribe who has reviewed such records as Wale’s The Mixtape About Nothing, the Game’s L.A.X., Nosaj Thing and Baby Charles for Pitchfork. He also openly trashes Smith’s Figure 8 for being too polished before calling out Roman Candle for not being polished enough. Clearly, this is a critic with demonstrable familiarity and expertise within the singer-songwriter genre and the proper understanding of the Smith back catalog.

5) Look, folks, I hate getting all Ripfork here and it’s not news that Pitchfork’s never liked Smith much (Ryan Schreiber himself gave Figure 8 a 6.9 in 2000), but for crying out loud, this is a Monday morning lead review — you’d think someone would bother actually reviewing the reissue treatment of the album that’s getting one, or (God forbid!) take the opportunity to delve into what’s probably Smith’s least-heard album some 16 years later.

If you, dear reader, take that opportunity for yourself, your reward will be one of the most fascinatingly arranged, evocatively written albums ever made. Or you could listen to a Wale mixtape about Seinfeld. The choice is yours.

  • adam

    How's the remaster compare to the old master?

  • Tim

    I wonder if some pitchfork reviewers either take their job too seriously or not serious enough. I don't understand how a reviewer with full knowledge that what he writes will be on the internet for years and years to come and will be connected to his name and reputation could post such a lackadaisical review of Roman Candle (also my favorite album of all time ) I agree with most of your points Dave except for the review score on From A Basement. I don’t see why a critic must give the same score to an album that was released and reviewed over five years ago just because someone else gave it a certain score. Then again I’m not sure how pitchfork decides on review scores (an editorial decision?) It seems to me the reason why they review these reissues (other than the demand of their readers) is to make amends for some of their most contradictory and ignorant reviews. Maybe if they review Figure 8 again they can, you know, maybe not call Elliott a “grizzled old bastard” and complain that they have “invested” over $50 on his albums. Ryan Schreiber must have felt like a complete dick after Elliott died, as well he should. Now thanks to the internet the whole world can know of Ryan Schreiber’s and Jayson Greene’s dick-atry and complete unprofessionalism for as long as we have Google Cache!!!! Its fun to Ripfork every once in awhile….

  • Aidan

    I'm a bit disappointed with the review too, especially since Basement On The Hill is such a terrible record. The fact is though, your wrong, and clearly jaded. Pitchfork was always big fans of smith, too big of fans in fact, since much of his material is without any artistic merit. Though they were open fans of both Either/Or and XO, putting both on their Best of the 90s lists, both deservingly placed. But, they also gave New Moon an 8.7, an 8.7 for an album full of subpar leftover Elliot Smith songs. And Figure 8, for the record, was a terrible album. Undeserving of even the 6.9 rating. It was a bunch of over polished harrison-esque ditties. Shit, Easy Way Out and Somebody That I Used To Know sound like somebody trying to imitate Elliott Smith's Miss Misery or I Don't Think. The fact is, his first four albums were the only ones deserving of any acclaim, and you can't blame pitchfork for occasionally recognizing that he fell off.

  • aidan

    *were always

  • http://www.rawkblog.net/ David Greenwald

    “much of his material is without any artistic merit”

    Aidan, if you really believe this, I hope you go away and never read my blog again. No offense.

  • aidan

    Are you saying that he did anything with Figure 8, From A Basement On A Hill, or much of New Moon that anyone else didn't? They might have some artistic merit (I went a bit over board) but they're not anywhere near the standards he set for himself, let alone masters like Nick Drake who he so diligently aspired himself after. Roman Candle is an intimate, warm album about misfits and their addictions. His s/t is the same atmosphere except focused on Heroin addiction. They were his peaks. After that he added a more 'rock' atmosphere to Either/Or while sacrificing the intimacy that made his first albums great. XO was a return to form that focused slightly too much on the arrangements. Figure 8 was a bunch of imitations of the Beatles and the Beach Boys, and From A Basement On A Hill was horribly uneven. If you disagree then argue your case.

  • http://www.rawkblog.net/ David Greenwald

    There are dozens and dozens of posts about Smith in this blog's archives that discuss the merits of his entire catalog, if you feel the need to have your opinion challenged.

  • Antiqcool

    Lo-Fi warts and all recordings often retain an authenticity lacking in some over produced music but If re-mastering is done sympathetically I don't really see why not.

    He's really beginning to grow on me. Just been reading an account of his death…..tragically mysterious. R.I.P. Elliott. Some people have compared our music to Elliott Smith….can't see it myself but I'm not complaining, he's very good :-) judge for yourself http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=65613209…

  • Antiqcool

    Lo-Fi warts and all recordings often retain an authenticity lacking in some over produced music but If re-mastering is done sympathetically I don't really see why not.

    He's really beginning to grow on me. Just been reading an account of his death…..tragically mysterious. R.I.P. Elliott. Some people have compared our music to Elliott Smith….can't see it myself but I'm not complaining, he's very good :-) judge for yourself http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=65613209…

  • Jrd550

    From a basement is a pretty incredible LP – I can't imagine how much better it would have been if Elliot had finished it – it is near perfect as is.