A Year of Blind Spots: Vs.

Joe is working through a list of albums that he considers "blind spots," i.e. albums that he's never heard but feels like he should.

Vs.

Mission of Burma

1982

Have I ever used the Elvis Theory to describe a punk rock band? I don't remember. I could page through hundreds of Blind Spot entries and thousands of blog posts, I guess, but it's easier to just assume that you didn't read that one even if it exists. But you know about the Elvis Theory, right? It's the idea that the originator might not sound as good as all those who improved upon them, simply because you're so used to hearing the already improved stuff that the original stuff feels thus inferior. E.g. no one is denying that Elvis' music was world-changing, but the songs sound like gargled balls.

This album is fine. It's fine to listen to. And it's important, so that's why I'm here, I guess. I've heard of this band plenty of times, but never really gave it a thought until I slapped it on this list of Blind Spots. I had no idea what to expect. If I had known that Mission of Burma was one of the bands featured in Our Band Could Be Your Life, then it would've been easy to figure out—though I've never read the book, after this week we are down to two featured bands that I'm not familiar with, and knowing the other ten pretty well, I can say, yes, Mission of Burma sure does fit in with this crew, sonically speaking.

That would've been good to know, going into this, but I only found out about their inclusion in the book after listening a few times. I think I was expecting something more akin to world music? Probably because of the name. Which is fucking stupid of me. In fact, I bet you that I first heard of this band twenty years ago, when I was reading Burmese Days for sophomore history class. My knowledge of Burma (now known as Myanmar) is limited to these two things, so I guess my dumb teenage brain got 'em mixed up and hung onto that misconception for two decades, until I could finally get off my ass and listen to the album and find out that, no, this is punk rock music.

Post-punk, specifically, which is both something that I enjoy and something that I am growing just a bit tired of. It's all cyclical, so I'm sure that in a couple years I'll come back to Vs. and find out that it's hitting the spot. For now.... eh. Nothing I haven't heard before, you know what I mean? That's why I'm pulling the Elvis Theories out of mothballs right now. I think I'd rather listen to (e.g.) Squid or Viagra Boys, two present-day bands that were so clearly influenced by Mission of Burma that I'm honestly surprised that they haven't been sued. And yet those two modern bands have had their whole lives with Mission of Burma's music, and ample time to take it and make it even more interesting, and now I'm looping back around to the influencer and I'm finding it hard to connect. So it goes.

Still cool music. Way better than Elvis, that's for sure. And I think I find some pathos in the idea that this band had to leave at the wrong time, mostly because their guitarist and co-vocalist Roger Miller developed tinnitus so bad that he was reduced to wearing rifle-range earphones onstage. Though I guess that gave the band's legacy time to grow—it was after their breakup that they were featured in that book—and maybe that lent some heft to there reputation. "A band goes out on top" and whatnot. They did reunite eventually, of course (and there's no mention of the tinnitus on the Wikipedia page, which makes me realize that I have no idea how treatable that condition actually is, I thought maybe it wasn't?). That doesn't negate any myth-building when they were gone.

The tinnitus should clue you in on one thing that this band had going for it during their prime—they were fucking LOUD. Literally dangerously loud. Plus, there was the novel development of "tape manipulation" by member Martin Swope. Just literally a guy on stage creating feedback and sound effects like a mad scientist, adding to the cacophony. I don't doubt that "LOUD" was a cool thing to be in the '80s. Forty years later, it's not as important. Bands have been LOUD for a long time. Bands have made LOUD even more interesting in the time since. So it goes.

Still a good album, I'm just saying that it didn't excite me like I thought it might. But there's a huge gap between "really great but unexciting legacy punk band" and "piece of shit." The former is accurate, and the latter has no place in any discussions here on the blog, I think. Good stuff here. But like the British imperialists in Burma, I say: let's keep exploring.