Unlike my experience with The Beatles last October I already knew going into this Bruceathon that I liked Bruce Springsteen's music. It was interesting, to me at least, so just as I did after a month of listening to almost nothing but The Beatles, here is an interview with myself about my month of nothing but Springsteen.
Well, we hope that was enjoyable for you. A whole month of Springsteen? What's next, a whole month of Manilow?
I have to review every album I own, even if it's seventeen albums from the same artist. The good thing about Springsteen is that so many of his albums sound differently, and he plays with so many people, it's like reviewing more than one artist. He even sings differently on certain albums. Out of seventeen there has got to be one you like! Alright, maybe not, but still, it's over, and there isn't one other artist I like with as big a body of work. In about ten years, when I finally get to U2, you'll see even they barely have over half this many albums.
Okay, you barely even mentioned Justin Bieber in these reviews. What gives?
Yeah, I'm real broken up about that one, too.
Well, you just reviewed SEVENTEEN albums! What Springsteen album is your favorite?
Nebraska. Not trying to be cool or cliche or anything, but I still like that one the best by far. It's magical.
DId any particular albums rise or fall in your estimation?
I used to jam out to Born to Run on vinyl, so I was kind of surprised it didn't connect as well when I listened to it in sequence with the other albums. I would have never thought I'd have given it a LOWER score than the first two Springsteen albums, but it happened. It's just too Broadway for me, I guess. I'll take the grittier Springsteen any day. Speaking of which, I thought I'd give Darkness on the Edge of Town a high score, but I was almost surprised at how perfect it is. That was another one I had only listened to on vinyl before, but in sequence, it worked even better. Devils & Dust also shot up in my estimation, perhaps because I had never before immersed myself in it. That one definitely rewards repeat listens and concentration. Same goes for Magic.
Jeez, stop talking about Springsteen. You already made us read about him for a month! What's next?
One more letter "B" review of a fairly obscure release I doubt many people will care about. Then I finally get to the letter "C," which will be a diverse cavalcade of music. The Cardigans, The Chariot, Creedence...Coldplay. Coldplay is like a band full of Justin Bieber's, right? Anyway, it should be very interesting. I thought I was going to get to Nick Cave, then I realized that according to the way I am doing this, I have to get to the letter "N" to do that. Wonder when that will be? Also, when are they going to open a Five Guys in New Roads?
Stop trying to weasel your way out of the difficult questions, Nicsperiment guy. Who is better? The Beatles or Bruce Springsteen?
Springsteen. The Beatles pioneered modern music in a way, but then they just broke up. Almost immediately after, Springsteen started refining what they did. He's got several perfect albums to his name, while the Beatles may have one (I kind of gave Abbey Road a mulligan with "Octopus's Garden" and "Maxwell's Silver Hammer"). But one thing puts Bruce Springsteen head and shoulders above The Beatles, and above just about everybody else: his lyrics. The Beatles may have "and in the end the love you take is equal to the love you make." Bruce has every O'Henry worthy song on his solo "folk" albums. I'll take those any day. All the rest of his work could be lagniappe and he still wins. Also, more people read these than the Beatles reviews, believe it or not.
Yeah, yeah. Look, there's Justin Bieber!
Haha. I can't believe you Beliebed me.
I guess I'm just gullible.
Well, check this out. Bob Dylan once saw Barry Manilow, "...at a party, hugged him and said, "Don't stop what you're doing, man. We're all inspired by you." Unlike my Be-lies, this is actually true. Someone will probably tell this to Bieber soon. So, have a good weekend, peops. Wait, that doesn't work. But people shortened is peops. Why is it supposed to be peeps, then? Peeps is a candy shaped like chicken babies. WHY IS LIFE SO CONFUSING?!?!?!?!?!