Hmm what do I know of Ted Leo and the Pharmacists? Welp, prior to this week, I had heard the name from my college boyfriend, but listening to Hearts of Oak can confirm for me that this was my first real listen. Based on the person who initially exposed me to the name Ted Leo and the Pharmacists, I can surmise the group of people jamming to them in 2003-and-on at La Salle (I would bet that Sam Fran can corroborate that for me). And their sound totally tracks with that crowd.
Ever since I heard the name Ted Leo and the Pharmacists, for some reason I've associated them with a music-listening coolness that has always been just out of my reach. Maybe this is due in part to the advent of early-aughts indie rock that at the time I did not get into for years after Ted Leo released Hearts of Oak.
Musically, Hearts of Oak is exciting, but I can't help but feel like I would need to go back in time to really love this album. Either due to the ex-bf connection or based solely on their sound (can we ever really listen to music in a vacuum though?), Ted Leo and the Pharmacists represent a time and a place that I never felt was meant for me. Hearts of Oak sounds like a really cool album from 2003. The question is: can this sound stand on its own? Or are Ted Leo and the Pharmacists a band who I will never get caught up on simply because I wasn't there? In the same vein, if I had never listened to Pinkerton, would it just sound like a cool album from the '90s (would it even sound like a cool album from the '90s), or does all my love for Pinkerton come from everything that was happening in my life at the time I listened to the album (I won't give myself too much credit though, I will admit I didn't get into Pinkerton until probably 2000).
Here are my thoughts: I didn't know what to expect, but I guess Hearts of Oak is close to the idea of Ted Leo in my head. After the first or second listen, I was positive that this was a type of music that I'd outgrown (one point for the latter in the question above). But honestly, after listening to Ted Leo a few more times, I think this is music that is definitely enjoyable (one point for the former) in the present, but it still doesn't mean anything to me (another point for the latter), so there's talent and excitement, but I'm thinking there has to be a bit of a "you had to be there" feeling going on as well.
What else? The album itself is a little dense, but I usually feel that way about any album that's over 40 minutes. Honestly though, I'm pretty impressed that the album is 55 minutes, and it doesn't really slow down. My favorite song? Obviously "I'm a Ghost" (Boo!). Mostly, I'm proud of myself for listening to this band whose name has held a coveted spot of musical coolness in my mind for so long now. I don't think I'll listen again but I'm glad I can finally check Ted Leo off my list. Guys, am I cool now?
No comments:
Post a Comment