MYTH No. 1: Radiohead Can Do No Wrong

Illustration by <a href="http://mydogatela.deviantart.com/" target=_new" rel="nofollow">Harmony Carrigan</a>
Illustration by Harmony Carrigan

REALITY: Radiohead kinda blow.

They're the vanguard of music, a post-rock think tank, the absolute state of the art.

They've also been righteous, giving a confused music world a moral center. So we sit, wearing headphones and frozen grins, and continue denying that guilty, nagging feeling that actually, in some ways, when you think about it…Radiohead kinda blow.

Few, save for Liam or Noel Gallagher, dare speak this heresy aloud, instead couching it in longings for a "back-to-basics" album or a "return to form," despite the fact that Radiohead are at their critical and commercial peak. Civil (by Internet standards) discussions reside on Yahoo message boards with titles like "Why Did Radiohead Become Dull and Boring?" But while such almost apologetic criticism typically hides online or at water coolers, sometimes the elephant isn't in the room, but onstage.

At last year's All Points West festival, as their thin, stubbly faces filled massive video screens, Radiohead began their set with In Rainbows' "15 Step": an open-ended groove with a quirky electro beat, two-chord motif, and airy, abstract singing. Then they did the 2001 song "Morning Bell/Amnesiac": an open-ended groove with a quirky electro beat, two-chord motif, and airy, abstract singing. Then they kept going, one groovy tone poem into another, masterfully weaving beats, sound-washes, and misty vocals into an immersive experience of sound, light, pattern, rhythm, and utter, paralyzing boredom. By the encore, it was obvious what Radiohead had become: an exceptionally well-dressed jam band. That you can't even dance to.

The trajectory makes perfect sense. Thanks to "Creep," from their 1993 debut, Pablo Honey, the band contracted Gimmick Hit Syndrome and began the usual defensive career arc. To prove they were more than a grunge one-liner, they recorded the smart, powerful anthems of The Bends. To prove they weren't just excellent rock songwriters, they dug deep and created the stunning OK Computer, whose melancholy sweep of strange, gorgeous songs played like an elegy for modern man. With that, Radiohead supernovaed, garnering every superlative there was, including comparisons to epochal albums like Dark Side of the Moon. Then they had to make another one.

Kid A was a deft, sometimes beautiful experiment in electronica-based songwriting. Some fans found it a bit formless and switched to Coldplay, while others declared another masterpiece, encouraged by critical blurbs such as "Comparing this to other albums is like comparing an aquarium to blue construction paper." Even the nuttiest hyperbole reflected a growing belief that Kid A had revealed the future of rock, although it actually revealed the future of Radiohead. "I think, 'What would my life be like without the Beatles?' " Bono once said, worryingly, about Radiohead's post–Kid A output. "If the Beatles had just kept going on experimenting after Sgt. Pepper's?" And so they kept making pleasing beat reveries, enjoying continued success with fans, and receding ever further from the larger culture.

But in 2007, they dominated headlines by self-releasing In Rainbows online on a pay-what-you-want basis, positing a new economic model like some anarchist jewelry-maker at Burning Man. Of course, the nobility of the gesture was somewhat mediated by the fact that Radiohead are millionaires, and that three months later, In Rainbows was released, on CD, by a label (ATO) and sold in fine stores everywhere. The free download was more self-leaked promo than revolution. Even so, Yorke promised yet another paradigm shift, telling an interviewer this summer he had no interest in making proper albums, that Radiohead -- who held the medium so sacrosanct that they weren't on iTunes until 2008, lest a track be divorced from its proper context -- would abandon this hoary format and lead us into the free-floating digital world. Until guitarist Ed O'Brien let slip soon after that they are indeed working on an album.

So they're a band, making records. Why all the newspeak? Does Radiohead's every move have to be without precedent? Must they define a new music language? And really, does anyone believe that the creators of the finest, most original, and significant rock album of the last 15 years shouldn't be making rock albums? No one is suggesting Radiohead play the Super Bowl or release OK Computer 2: The Legend of Curly's Gold. And certainly, if they were the type of band that took advice, they wouldn't be Radiohead. But knowing the level of songcraft they're capable of, and that they possess an almost unheard-of level of autonomy and status, makes their latest behavior inscrutable at best.

There have been signs of a thaw. Yorke recruited fun-loving, oft-shirtless Chili Pepper Flea for a few solo shows in L.A. this fall (though Flea may just be doing fieldwork for his music degree at USC), and new songs like "Open the Floodgates," which Yorke debuted in October, augur anything but rockin' good times. The lyrics begin, "Don't bore us / Get to the chorus" and indict grabby, pleasure-seeking fans as another example of the self-medicating masses he satirized on OK Computer's "No Surprises" -- people who demand that art and life include only "the good bits…no heartache, no pain."

He made the exact same point with his actions during Radiohead's encore at All Points West. After a two-hour set, with the crowd screaming for more, Yorke retook the stage alone, sat at a grand piano, and played a quiet, minimalist nocturne. For five minutes. Before 20,000 people. The song, "Cymbal Rush," from his 2006 solo album The Eraser -- titled in an apparent gearhead reference to some sonic effect or software patch (probably between "Amp Fuzz" and "Element Isolator") -- amplified the sense that this man was so far up his own formalist ass we might as well have not even been there.

It's a valid outlook, but an odd one for someone making populist gestures in his business life and performing on such a giant stage. This became even more apparent after Yorke was rejoined by his band. As they began the loud, dramatic surge of "Just," from The Bends, it was like a toggle switch transformed the crowd from a group of happy, attentive young men and women to an ecstatic mob. "Pumped by an oldie" doesn't come close; this was now a different audience.

A year later, Radiohead opened their headlining set at the Reading Festival with the rarely played "Creep," the song that started it all. Sixteen years ago, this outsider anthem's refrain, "I wish I was special," stated an irony that has engulfed Radiohead their whole career. A band that can make iconic songs that stretch across a fractious culture, that can weave them into an even greater whole, and that have a unique, haunting musical voice we will remember for decades, is plenty special. As special as it gets. If only they'd settle for good.

Agree? Disagree? Tell us what you think below!

Posted By radioheaded

02.04.10 11:11 PM

sorry, didnt mean redundant, meant retarded

Posted By radioheaded

02.04.10 11:10 PM

spin....you......lose. very bad call. I thought they were being satirical or sarcastic.
to use thom as the cover picture is redundant....and also shows that you have no better material to put on the cover than a bad essay barely harming the best of our time (as far as music.)
im sure none of radiohead care.

Posted By Ronald Dean

01.28.10 1:56 PM

I understand when people don't like Radiohead, or if they don't get it, thats fine. But to come out and say that Radiohead blows is just ignorant. I expected more out of you, oh wait, no I didn't because on the the page just before this article it says, "Insane Clown Posse are Geniuses". Instead of putting Thom Yorke on the cover of your ****ty magazine so it will sell, throw Violent J on there and let the "Dumb ****alos" support your rag.

Posted By Anonymous

01.27.10 8:30 PM

After Radioheads performance for Haiti relief in LA I guess we can say your statement that they kinda blow has been blown to bits. I think you got this one wrong.

Posted By FM

01.25.10 1:36 PM

I just saw them last night at the Haiti benefit. Many of my friends don't like or get the appeal of Radiohead but worship bands like Linkin Park and Incubus. But then again, I was always the hipper more traveled one. ;-) Radiohead is my favorite band due to their thought provoking songs and the ability to creat scores to movies within each song. I am always amazed by how they trigger me emotionally and into a deep thought. I will say that the first time I saw them was at the Tibetan Freedom Concert in 1997. By some small miracle, I was pushed up front against the barricades in between Thom and Johnny for the entire show. I was spoiled after that. The best place to see Radiohead is not with 20 to 50 thousand people but pay the price to see them in a "theater" setting like I did last night. Then you can truly appreciate them. I know not everyone can do that...but until you can, you will never understand.

Posted By Leroy

01.25.10 12:56 PM

Wow, that was articulated ("I agree. They blow"). Funny comparisons like that have not been done with Pink Floyd as far as I know. That Pink Floyd kinda blows because the songs are too long, Roger Waters screems too much, or any other quaint comment.

Radiohead is the best thing that's happened to rock'n'roll since Pink Floyd and The Beatles. Yeah Thom Yorke can be a sufficient prick. I saw Radiohead during the OK Computer tour and for the encore, we were all screaming "Creep! Creep! Creep!". 20,000 people screaming "Creep!". That's powerful. But Yorked just yelled at us (20,000 people) that he wouldn't play that f***en song anymore.

So we shut up.

And they played whatever Yorke wanted to play.

Accept his genius. You don't understand it. It's OK. Just accept it.

"Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible" said Frank Zappa.

Posted By Anonymous

01.24.10 5:49 PM

Anyone recall Miley Cyrus saying she would bring Radiohead down?
This is just her paying this magazine off, I'm sure.
What a sad attempt.

Posted By Anonymous

01.22.10 12:07 AM

I agree. They blow

Posted By Anonymous

01.18.10 1:25 AM

amen.

Posted By Tyler McDowell

01.15.10 4:59 PM

so... if you're not constantly doing genius things, then you must "kinda blow"

ps: would anyone say this article is genius?

Posted By Keith

01.14.10 8:39 PM

i hear Spin used to be a great magazine.

Reality: Spin totally blows.

but then, 99% of what's out there is crap. the odds are against you.

Posted By TinaBean

01.13.10 9:00 PM

I have to agree with the article

Radiohead does kind of blow

Posted By felipe

01.11.10 5:43 PM

Last year I saw Kiss, Faith No More, Depeche Mode, Cat Power, The Hold Steady, AC/DC and many more. But the worst concert I went was to see Radiohead. I spend the most boring hours of last years watching how they sounded awfull. They didnt play lowd, they made lots of mistakes, they had problems with the monitors, and the song selection suck. I really love The Bends. So hearing them now makes me wonder where the hell are their two guitar players?

Posted By Anonymous

01.09.10 3:42 PM

Are you nuts? Did you see their performance at last year's Grammy's? Nobody else is doing things like that.

Yeah, you're nuts.

Posted By Anonymous

01.09.10 1:13 AM

I totally agree. So many people claim they like radiohead to let other people know they're "smart because they can appreciate what others can't". I am not a huge fan of radiohead, I am a fan. But if i find something of theirs boring, i just don't like it, unlike most people who say they like it although they actually find it as dull as the next person.

Posted By Anonymous

01.08.10 9:37 PM

You suckk

Posted By Anonymous

01.08.10 6:49 PM

I hope you can be successful in your attempt to destroy any originality and musical integrity that is available today. Maybe you should just stick to listening to 80's metal, and leave the reviewing to someone else who actually has a brain.

Congratulations, you have managed to convince me to never read this magazine. ever.

Posted By tj

01.07.10 9:15 PM

creep. generic. does anyone else see a problem with the proximity of those two words?

Posted By tj

01.07.10 8:16 PM

how can you write for a rock magazine and not know anything about music? i understand radiohead is the tip of the mod rock iceberg, striking chords with fratboys, hipsters, candy store tweens, and world of warcraft nerds...but how could you ever deny a band that could unite the interests of such diverse groups? indeed, their stigma has become a perversion of experimental, making what was weird, now disgustingly bland. but without kid a, you wouldnt be writing these rave reviews of bands like phoenix, battles, atlas sound. ok computer is arguably the best rock album ever written, and when i say arguably, were putting it up against Are you Experience, Rubber Soul, and Led Zepplin 3. if you wrote that article to get a rise out of radiohead fans, nice work. but if you wrote it to get a rise out of music lovers, you just looked stupid.

Posted By An

01.06.10 8:46 PM

this magazine sucks

Posted By myspace.com/krystalsalinas

01.06.10 8:38 PM

wow, this is why i never agree with pop culture. i've never checked out spin magazine. so now, here i sit for the 1st time, and read this? are you kidding? you probably sit around and enjoy coldplay and creed. you think that saliva and is innovative like bob dylan, and portishead had the worst album with 3rd huh? step outside the box spin..no wait, you can't, corporate america loves to play awful music on every clear channel owned radio station in the country. so cuddle with your masses and curl up with some pizza hut and watch your reality tv shows on your huge plasma tv, bought at best buy on your platinum credit card, and give hand jobs to your qualifying demographic for your next paycheck.

Posted By Anonymous

01.06.10 2:00 AM

Everyone has a right to their opinion, but you sir have almost made me cry.
Radiohead is and will always be one of the best bands of all time bar none. They helped me through some very rough times in my life and I think that the fact you wrote this bull **** article simply to sell more magazines is pathetic. I am sorry if I get heated, I'm sure that you are a good person. But truly evaluate yourself and why you wrote this article. Please sit down with a Raidohead record and listen from beginning to end. If you aren't moved to tears or dancing or laughing until you cry or in a meditative state because of the beauty of true art...... then I don't know if you are human.

Sure, many have "overrated" the band. But that's what happens with great art, people get attached to the praise and forget the work itself and what they loved in the first place.

I just wanted to let you know that you personally offended me with hate rant and I feel that you are not giving them a fair chance.
Sorry again if I got upset.

Posted By Anonymous

01.05.10 9:17 PM

well, rage mcragerstein,

you are so silly. poor chuck norris. apparently you were trying to insult someone? i hope your radiohead cds are not literally on the car floorboard, collecting dust and scratches, because no radiohead cd should be there. they should be safe and sound in their cases. and maybe they should be made from recycled cardboard (the cases). everything in its right place, dontcha know.

don't worry be happy.

Posted By AyHy

01.05.10 7:49 PM

Yeah, I absolutely agree with this. Radiohead started as a fairly generic rock band that wrote fairly generic rock songs like "Creep." Then, they developed a hatred for all things generic. So far, so good - as Frank Zappa once famously said, "Without deviation, progress is impossible."

So they wrote crazy, awesome, inventive stuff. But then they apparently determined even that too "generic." They decided that concepts like notes and chords and time signatures and lyrics were tired, played-out concepts and that sometimes you should just make random noises while mumbling about barn doors and doors on the rudders of big ships.

It'd be nice if they'd return to songwriting.

Posted By RAGE McRAGERSTEIN

01.05.10 7:01 PM

OMG CHRIS NORRIS, U GOTTA BE CHUCK NORRIS IF ARE THAT STUPID

I AM SO PISSED ABOUT YOUR OPINION ON MUSIC, YOU ARE CLEARLY WRONG. YEAH, GET YOURSELF OUT OF THE GENE POOL, RADIOHEAD IS WHERE IT'S AT! ...ON MY CAR FLOORBOARD, COLLECTING DUST AND SCRATCHES. BUT YEAH, **** YOU! THEY'RE THE BEST.

Posted By Nicholas Buckton

01.05.10 2:02 PM

This article is complete rubbish.

Chris Norris, you have shown blatant disregard for Radiohead as a band, and their numerous accomplishments.

You are a miserable twit if you think Lady Gaga is even remotely talented, and completely fooled if you think that she ACTUALLY writes her own songs.

I will not buy another issue of Spin unless they fire you, or refuse to publish such garbage as this.

I hope Thom Yorke kicks the s*** out of you.

Posted By marianne

01.05.10 5:54 AM

Dear Chris Norris,

Thank you for your thought-provoking article. You asked us to keep our feedback “constructive,” which works out just perfect for me because one of my many new year’s “resolutions” is to be more “productive.” I have a lot of thoughts so I might as well try to communicate them to you!

I guess when it comes right down to it, after reading your article I think I know that you’re truly a huge Radiohead fan. What becomes confusing to me is the idea of truth and falseness. I believe that what you stated to be a “myth,” which is that “Radiohead are the most important, visionary band in the world,” is TRUE.

On the contrary, you wrote that “Radiohead wish they were special.”

When I first came across these words, I felt enraged because I was thinking to myself, BUT RADIOHEAD IS SPECIAL!

And now I’ve come to realize that both statements are true.

I guess you can have a “myth” and a “reality” in the same article, even if the ideas conflict, and have them both be true. So I suppose what that makes you is a very talented writer.

Thank you again for your interesting and thought-provoking article, which I enjoyed reading thoroughly, on an airplane from Ohio to CA. I especially enjoyed the outrageously inspiring photo of Thom Yorke’s face on the cover. His ojos look especially azules. It was almost too much.

Sincerely,
Marianne

PS. Your name sounds vaguely familiar. Were you ever a music news reporter on MTV?

Posted By Anonymous

01.05.10 3:40 AM

This was my first time visiting spin magazine online, and my reasoning for it was see how their layout looked. I don't really have much respect for them, mainly due to my peripheral vision catching a glance of things such as "BEST ALBUM OF THE YEAR: ONLY BY THE NIGHT"....please. However, I got sucked into reading about radiohead. I must say this was a really fowl article written in poor taste. I am now thoroughly convinced that this is a second rate publication and I hope many others realize this soon. Pitchfork baby.

Posted By 2xUeL

01.05.10 1:57 AM

Good to know that the author likes Radiohead's early work better than their later, now I can sleep better. Is that it though, really? This was a cover story? I agree with an earlier comment that SPIN duped pretty low here. It's a great marketing ploy, but it's an insult to their readers.

Posted By Teaflax

01.04.10 8:11 PM

Calling on dull cliché-meisters Oasis to debunk one of the bravest and most innovative big acts of the 00s = one-way ticket to Failsville.

Got something to say?

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • No HTML tags allowed
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Use <!--pagebreak--> to create page breaks.

More information about formatting options

Are You Human?
If so, enter the four-letter code below.
Image CAPTCHA

Connect With Spin