Claiming The Carpenters

[Dave]

Hello, Rick. Some of what I'm about to write agrees with you, some of it explains why I "corrected" the original article in the manner in which I did, and none of it is meant to disagree with you. You'll see why...

What you missed was that the original article was aimed at an audience whose sole exposure to the Carpenters is during Christmastime. Most of the readers probably responded with a "Oh yeah, I remember them" type of reaction.

I can't remember where it was that I read about the family moving west so that Richard could attend a school that was better suited for his talents...it was something that I stumbled across while searching for something else, which was the same way I found out that Agnes worked at the aerospace plant in Downey that manufactured the Apollo spacecraft, and later, components for the space shuttle Columbia.

Like it or not, the Carpenters career inhabited the span of time between the end of the Sixties and the Disco Era. As such, they are thusly correctly identified with that timespan, which I believe Johnny Carson once labeled the "era of shortages", thanks to a gag of his about a shortage of toilet paper actually occurring because of him. Their co-inhabitants would be artists such as the Osmonds, the Jackson Five, and Bachman-Turner Overdrive. That era also would be the springboard for Elton John's career. You don't have to agree with me, but I do believe that it's a fair comparison, and not derogatory.

Another thing to remember is that although I am possibly a few orders of magnitude more knowledgeable about the Carpenters than Alexis, you are several orders of magnitude more knowledgeable than pretty much anyone save The Richard himself! As such, pretty much anything that you read you know instinctively where the faults lie. So when it comes to the technical aspects, you, my friend, would certainly qualify as a quotable reference.

Did you ever watch "Futurama"? One of my favorite eps is titled "The Series Has Landed", and I will use a few quotes from the episode to bolster my statement about having a faulty perspective about any historical period if one has not actually lived through it. Sit back and enjoy the "show"...first, a link to the IMDB page for the show: imdb.com/title/tt0756891/

[Fry and Leela are taking a ride on the Moon Park]
"Narrator: The story of lunar exploration started with one man - a man with a dream.
Animatronic Ralph Kramden: One of these days, Alice. Bang. Zoom. Straight to the moon.
Leela: Wow! I never realized the first astronauts were so fat.
Fry: That's not an astronaut, it's a TV comedian! And he was just using space travel as a metaphor for beating his wife."

"Narrator: No one really knows when, where, or how man landed on the moon...
Fry: I do!
Narrator: ...but our Fungineers imagine it went sometihg like this.
[Animatronic whalers emerge from a lunar lander]
Animatronic whalers: [singing] We're whalers on the moon.
Animatronic gophers: We carry a harXXXXX.
Animatronic whalers, Animatronic gophers: But there are no whales, so we tell tall tales and sing a whaling tune.
Fry: That's not how it happened.
Leela: Oh, really? I don't see you with a Fungineering degree."

"Fry: Look! It's the moon landing site! We found it!
Leela: Fry, get in here.
Fry: It's that flag from MTV, and Neil Armstrong's footprints.
[Puts his foot over Armstrong's footprint, leaving a Nike footprint in its place]
Fry: Hey, my foot is bigger.
Leela: Fry, look around! It's just a crummy plastic flag and a dead man's footprints in the dust. Now get in here before you freeze.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leela: I don't see what the big attraction is.
Fry: I never told anybody this, but a thousand years ago I used to look up at the moon and dream I was an astronaut. Bit I didn't have the grades, or the physical endurance. Plus I threw up a lot, and nobody wanted to spend more than a week with me.
Leela: A week would be a little much.
Fry: The moon was like this awesome, beautiful, mysterious thing, way up in the sky where you could never reach it, no matter how hard you tried. But you're right. Once you're here, it's just a big, dull rock. I just wanted you to see it through my eyes, the way I used to.
[the window reflects off Fry's helmet; Leela looks outside and sees a beautiful moonscape with the Earth in the sky]
Leela: Fry, look. You're right. It's beautiful. I don't know why I didn't see it before."

For anyone who's not familiar with the show, Fry was accidentally frozen in the year 1999, and revived 1000 years later. The early episodes highlighted the difficulty he was having reconciling what was his life with what was to become his life.
In this episode, Fry got to go to the Moon, which was a childhood dream of his. But he found out that 1000 years later, they had gotten the history of it all wrong, and had even been unable to find the Apollo 11 landing site.

It's just a simple fact that the passage of time blurs everything, and for someone whose primary exposure to a subject consisted of late-night compilation offers on CD to write what she did, in the way that she did it, well, as you mentioned, it did create an emotional response. At least it did amongst the visitors to this forum.

But did it garner nearly as much response in New Haven? That's the $64K question.

I most certainly could have done more research, but I'm not writing for a local newspaper. The only time I did, it was about my family being invited to Sean O'Keefe's farewell gathering...if I'd have known that it was going to be printed in its entirety, unedited, and with my name as the byline, I would have included more details. I wrote it as a "teaser" for a real reporter to come and interview me, but there it was on the front page!

I think that we can certainly agree that Ray Coleman's book is a definitive reference on the career of the Carpenters, can we not? I freely admit that I haven't read it, but as you've seen, I don't go around writing "yellow" journalism about them. As a matter of fact, I haven't done that to anyone.

And I agree wholeheartedly with your final statement, "What I think is faulty journalism is when the writer gets the facts wrong."
Take the time to do it right the first time.

As far as personal biases in writing style go, I would agree that in some circumstances it would indeed add a certain "flavor" to an otherwise dull subject. As you've noted, what I tried to do was to make the article "friendlier" to those whose sole exposure to the Carpenters is during Christmastime. I'd like to write something to encourage the readers to perhaps stop by the local Big Box store, and perhaps have their memories jogged when they pick up "Gold", and remember that they can't play their old vinyl albums anymore, but still like the music.

Just for fun, it's your turn to rewrite the article as you've mentioned. You've piqued my curiosity.

[GoodOldDreams]

admin said:

I don't see it as distasteful or slander, when it's the truth. This is reality, this is how Carpenters are viewed by the general public. Oddly enough this does not bother me. As much as I love them, and everyone here knows I do love Carpenters, I do not get offended by negative remarks on them. Instead of saying "I enjoy" reading these articles maybe I should have stated that I find them amusing...

admin said:

...Hey Dreams... some really good thoughts on tihs... and before I comment on your viewpoints... again I'd like to clarify that this sort of article does not offend me and eventhough there are several inaccuracies (which I will touch on in my comments to you) there are also quite a few realities stated.

We'll start of with the realities...

Kitsch... The word kitsch means to be excessively garish or sentimental art; usually considered in bad taste. In the true sense of the word "kitsch" it does not even come close to applying to the Carpenters... though, that's not to say that they haven't recorded their share of songs which are very easy for critics (and music listeners) to critique. For example "Druscilla Penny"... several people on this forum like this song... but to follow such a classic as "Superstar" with "Druscilla Penny" is almost a crime... and then Richard's lisp is evident in the song making it even more of a target for criticism. "Piano Picker" is another which several people from this forum like. The album "A Song For You" is an almost perfect album but, then comes along "Piano Picker", again there's the lisp... and I know most of you here won't like what I'm about to say... but the song contains a high "cream-puff" factor... the exact opposite of that "chill" factor... sorry but I had to say it. Then there's some of the hits like "Sing". When critiquing music any good music critic is going to take the music for it's face value and critique it on it's merits of musicianship, vocal finesse and originality. A good critic will also look at how the song relates to the current day as well as eras past and how the music may grow in generations to comes. We take "Sing", keeping all this in mind, and you have a wonderfully produced song with outstanding vocals. But, then there's the "la, la, la, la, la's" which after awhile tend to become quite, uh well, "Sesame Street", if I may say. And then when you look at "Sing" next some of the other music in 1973 which was getting the rave reviews such as Pink Floyd's chillingly and intricately beautiful "Us And Them" or Stevie Wonder's "Higher Ground" and well the song becomes a bit of a joke. I mean think about it... take a listen to "Us And Them" or "Higher Ground" and then listen to "Sing"... get my point. I love the song "Sing" and I think it has a great message... but I can also see why critics poke fun at Carpenters... same with the song "Yesterday Once More... again a great song with outstanding vocals and lyrics... but easy to poke fun at. Too bad Carpenters didn't do an album with all songs like "This Masquerade", "I Can't Make Music", "Road Ode", "A Song For You", "Goodbye To Love", "Superstar", "Rainy Days And Mondays"... there would have been no room for critics to critique as harshly as they did... but as it stands there was quite a bit of room left for critics to critique. I guess with "Horizon" Carpenters did put out that "perfect" album... and critics raved about that one calling it Carpenters' most sophisticated album - but that was only one album. Anyway my point is I can understand 100% why Carpenters are treated as they are by the critics... and let's not get into their clothing (primarily Richard's) and the lovey-dovey photos. I understand that a lot of the image stuff wasn't their fault. That jump-suit that Richard wore in the 1976 photo just could not have been his idea. I wouldn't be surprised if he hated putting that thing on. Regardless, he did wear it and the photo was taken and that's what the public and the critics are seeing and they're saying... "cream-puff"... sorry but there's no other way to say it.

Onto your comment Dreams, about Fitts apparently seems to think that physical appearance is just as important as the music... well we all know that it's the art (the music... the product) that is most important. But when you have a product on the market (and yes, Carpenters were (are) on the market) it's the "whole" package that the consumer is looking at. Why do you think marketing is such an important part of the music business... it was important in 1970 and still important today. Obviously the people who were marketing Carpenters made some big mistakes. Fortunately for Carpenters, the music and Karen's voice were strong enough to overshadow the poor "image" decisions...

Hey Rick,

You made some good points here. However, there are some mitigating considerations to some of the issues you have raised.

While the Carpenters have had their share of admirers and detractors alike over the years, using words like "truth" and "reality" in these discussions seems to inadvertently equate the inherently subjective and fluid nature of public opinions and perceptions with relatively more solid, objective, scientifically-based or philosophically-defined absolutes that are more or less universally accepted and do not tend to change over the course of time.

In creating their extensive repertoire of songs, the Carpenters took many creative risks experimenting with different genres of music, lyrical contents, and styles of personal expression and interpretation to varying degrees of success. It is understandable how certain songs (like the ones you have exemplified as potentially "kitsch") may have played into the negative perceptions some critics had about the Carpenters, especially if they seemed to feed into the sweet "wholesome" image that the Carpenters themselves tried in vain to avoid. Even though these songs are not necessarily among my personal favorites, I can see their merits and why these songs might have been included in their repertoire in the first place.

With its origins from "Sesame Street" and its exuberant choruses of "la la la la la's," the song "Sing" was largely targeted to appeal to children and the young-at-heart, while it may evoke sickeningly saccharine images of childhood innocence in some adults. By the same token, should Sammy Davis Jr.'s 1972 Top-5 hit "Candy Man" and Clint Holmes' 1973 Top-12 hit "Playground in My Mind" from the same era be trivialized and dismissed as childish "kitsch," along with Frank Sinatra's even earlier hit "High Hopes," which are among their most recognized songs? Mama Cass Elliot's "Make Your Own Kind of Music" basically delivers the same timeless message as "Sing" --- be courageous and true to who you are (in terms of music and, by metaphorical extension, be true to your self-identity) no matter others may think, which was a continual challenge that the Carpenters had to face professionally as well as personally. The song "Yesterday Once More" reflects on the phenomenal resurgence of popular music that the baby-boomer generation grew up with, and uses the choruses of "sha-la-la-la's," "wo-o-wo-o's" and "shing-a-ling-a-ling's" to give the song a flavor reminiscent of the time period and the distinctive hook that it needed.

While Richard helped to enrich the harmonies of the trademark Carpenters sound as a back-up singer, his lead vocals, like many other singers, would pale by comparison to those of Karen's in many people's judgment. In the same spirit as the Beatles' "Eleanor Rigby," the Carpenters made social commentaries on the unexamined lifestyles of a number of people from social outcasts ("Druscilla Penny" and "Eve") to those who are in the mainstream and the conventional establishment ("Mr. Guder" and "Your Wonderful Parade"). "Druscilla Penny" might be interpreted as a song with a different perspective on the groupie pining away in the companion song that precedes it --- "Superstar." (Similarly, "Saturday" might be seen as an accompanying piece and the antithesis to its predecessor "Rainy Days and Mondays," singing about the joys of the weekend rather than the dreaded beginnings of the hum-drum weekdays.) Much like the ditties "Goofus," "Intermission" and "Man Smart, Woman Smarter," the seemingly autobiographical "Piano Picker" interjects refreshing moments of humor and levity into their repertoire, which was already caricatured by many as being seriously overwrought with sentimental songs of love and melancholy. However distracting Richard's lisping may be, most critics are likely to form their first impressions and overall opinions of the Carpenters based on the more familiar singles where Karen is prominently featured rather than the few album cuts in which Richard performed lead vocals.

Like you, Rick, I would enjoy a thematic or concept album with intense, powerful and chilling songs like "This Masquerade," "I Can't Make Music," "Road Ode," "Superstar" and "Rainy Days And Mondays," but, as I had alluded to earlier, some critics would surely be quick to dismiss this album as nothing more than what they would characterize as just a collection of melancholic, depressing, sappy and weepy songs.

It seems that many music critics are often quick to assume an air of expertise and make sweeping generalizations when there is no evidence that they have actually obtained and listened to other cuts on the studio albums beyond the handful of singles occasionally broadcasted. Alexis Fitts' specific mention of "Close to You" and "Sing" and the short sound bites she heard from those childhood compilation CD ads only confirms that she has not done much more in-depth research and investigation into the Carpenters' vast output of work before jumping to her conclusions and condemning Bill Hosley's enthusiasm for the Carpenters' legacy before he even had a chance to fully present his case at the event.

Of all the negative reviews I have read about the Carpenters, there have been very few in which they explained specifically why they found their music objectionable, besides poking fun at their un-hip physical appearance, hair, clothing, middle class suburban values, political leanings (or apparent lack thereof), health problems, complicated relationships, etc. Since you find negative reviews amusing, Rick, you may enjoy the notable exception of Tom Reynolds' book "I Hate Myself and Want to Die: The 52 Most Depressing Songs You've Ever Heard," in which he analyzes and skewers "Goodbye to Love" in great detail from various angles.

As for your comments about physical appearances, I concur with much of that as the sad state of standards for judging musicianship. Although I am not a "Claymate," I am reminded of Simon Cowell's recurrent comments to Clay Aiken in American Idol 2 that while he had an amazing voice, he did not look like a pop star. After image makeovers from a bespectacled "nerd" to a more hip-looking, spiky-haired dude, Clay proceeded to win second place to Ruben Studdard, but became the most successful male singer ever in terms of sales in that show's history.

Pushing this trend of judging singers based on their looks more than the music itself even further, the current American Idol season have some people declaring David Archuleta the clear winner among the top 12 contestants already. Although David Archuleta has the youth, ambition (cultivated for a long time with his stage dad) and "good-looking"/"cute" factor that the judges and fans raved about right from the start, his voice is by no means necessarily the best, and, to some, has too much of a "nasal" quality or generic "boy-band" sound that cannot be overlooked. However, he was advanced to the next round even though all the judges concurred this week that his singing of the Beatles' song "We Can Work It Out" was lackluster, and David himself acknowledged he has no sense of affinity for 1960's music.

Is American popular music now really being judged with the eyes more than the ears?

[GoodOldDreams]

As further evidence of Alexis Fitts' lack of journalistic integrity and investigative skills, one only needs to notice that in the second paragraph of her article, she rhetorically asks if the Carpenters are relevant, when she only needs to read her own first and third paragraphs, where she lists but a few examples of how the Carpenters are still integral to current media and popular culture, including movies and singers from a wide variety of genres who cite the Carpenters as an inspiration and/or influence over three decades later. If she can't figure out on her own the reasons why the Carpenters are still relevant today, then the author should dig a little bit deeper with these potential sources from the very beginning and perhaps she will reach a very different conclusion in her assessment of the Carpenters and their entire legacy.

Rather than inviting the readership to come the promoted event with an open mind, the author already had her prejudices clearly laid out, and in effect announces "it's really not worth your time coming to this event." Who needs publicity like this?

Thanks to wisejester7 for bringing this article to our attention, as it illustrates many of the faulty tactics that people who love to hate the Carpenters use. It has inspired many impassioned and lively discussions in this thread as well.

[Rick Henry]

I will obviously come back and comment on some of the recent comments made...

First let me state, that I am not claiming to be a writer or journalist. Nor am I attempting to write or rewrite anybody's article I am also not defending Alexis Fitts (nor am I putting her down). The point I'm making is there are reasons why one would diss or put down the Carpenters (whether it be a critic , journalist or music listener).

I will briefly comment on what Dreams said about "judging music by the appearance of the musicians as being a sad state of judgment."

In my comment I stated that some of the clothing styles (primarily worn by Richard) and some of the lovey-dovey type photos are part of the entire package... like it or not Carpenters were part of the media, they were a commodity of their day... as well as artists of their day. A&M packaged and sold them. People who were tuned into the media (as well as critics, music buyers, etc) take in the whole package... the music, the image and everything. So, really one may love the Carpenters music and think that Karen Carpenter is the finest singer to ever live... but also say they are annoyed by the cutsie-pie pictures often featured in magazines and other media. This is they way it really is. I have heard this one many times. You guys should read some of the thousands of emails I receive each month. People say it all. Whether you may or may not agree Karen and Richard's image is part of the "whole package"... of course their image is not their music. The Carpenters' music for the most part is viewed in a very positive manner by most critics these days (many call Carpenters' music "classic")... though along with the good comments on the music... there will always be the comments on their image... it seems to go hand in hand, it's part of the Carpenters' history. I do not see this as their music being judged by their image... the music is being judged exactly for what it is... outstanding pop music... but even that's subjective... as Carpenters do have that cutsie-pie side to their music which is not necessarily dismissed as kitsch... but at the same point is not taken as serious by music critics... and is often panned. Richard himself has stated on a few occasions that he now wishes he would have spent less time in recording certain songs and more time working on masterpieces. Richard is well aware that some of their songs are going to receive criticism... but he also knows (as we know) that Carpenters have more than their share of music that is worthy of the highest praise... and this we know is obviously true as Carpenters to this very day are still selling 3 -4 million discs per year... this is no "kitschy" fluke... this is some serious music that truly reaches into the soul of the one's who are listening, have been listening and want to listen.

[GoodOldDreams]

admin said:

I will obviously come back and comment on some of the recent comments made...

First let me state, that I am not claiming to be a writer or journalist. Nor am I attempting to write or rewrite anybody's article I am also not defending Alexis Fitts (nor am I putting her down). The point I'm making is there are reasons why one would diss or put down the Carpenters (whether it be a critic , journalist or music listener).

I will briefly comment on what Dreams said about "judging music by the appearance of the musicians as being a sad state of judgment."

In my comment I stated that some of the clothing styles (primarily worn by Richard) and some of the lovey-dovey type photos are part of the entire package... like it or not Carpenters were part of the media, they were a commodity of their day... as well as artists of their day. A&M packaged and sold them. People who were tuned into the media (as well as critics, music buyers, etc) take in the whole package... the music, the image and everything. So, really one may love the Carpenters music and think that Karen Carpenter is the finest singer to ever live... but also say they are annoyed by the cutsie-pie pictures often featured in magazines and other media. This is they way it really is. I have heard this one many times. You guys should read some of the thousands of emails I receive each month. People say it all. Whether you may or may not agree Karen and Richard's image is part of the "whole package"... of course their image is not their music. The Carpenters' music for the most part is viewed in a very positive manner by most critics these days (many call Carpenters' music "classic")... though along with the good comments on the music... there will always be the comments on their image... it seems to go hand in hand, it's part of the Carpenters' history. I do not see this as their music being judged by their image... the music is being judged exactly for what it is... outstanding pop music... but even that's subjective... as Carpenters do have that cutsie-pie side to their music which is not necessarily dismissed as kitsch... but at the same point is not taken as serious by music critics... and is often panned. Richard himself has stated on a few occasions that he now wishes he would have spent less time in recording certain songs and more time working on masterpieces. Richard is well aware that some of their songs are going to receive criticism... but he also knows (as we know) that Carpenters have more than their share of music that is worthy of the highest praise... and this we know is obviously true as Carpenters to this very day are still selling 3 -4 million discs per year... this is no "kitschy" fluke... this is some serious music that truly reaches into the soul of the one's who are listening, have been listening and want to listen.

Let's put this matter into proper perspective and not ignore the elephant in the room. Judging the Carpenters by Richard's occasional jumpsuit is only a small part of their image problems. Judging the Carpenters by Karen's sometimes awkward fashion sense in the earlier years and her emaciated, anorectic appearance in the later years are far more commonly used as the bases of criticism in the public eye. Unfortunately, the cruel and ruthless use of Karen's appearance and death as joke fodder has continued to this day.

[Rick Henry]

goodolddreams said:

admin said:

I will obviously come back and comment on some of the recent comments made...

First let me state, that I am not claiming to be a writer or journalist. Nor am I attempting to write or rewrite anybody's article I am also not defending Alexis Fitts (nor am I putting her down). The point I'm making is there are reasons why one would diss or put down the Carpenters (whether it be a critic , journalist or music listener).

I will briefly comment on what Dreams said about "judging music by the appearance of the musicians as being a sad state of judgment."

In my comment I stated that some of the clothing styles (primarily worn by Richard) and some of the lovey-dovey type photos are part of the entire package... like it or not Carpenters were part of the media, they were a commodity of their day... as well as artists of their day. A&M packaged and sold them. People who were tuned into the media (as well as critics, music buyers, etc) take in the whole package... the music, the image and everything. So, really one may love the Carpenters music and think that Karen Carpenter is the finest singer to ever live... but also say they are annoyed by the cutsie-pie pictures often featured in magazines and other media. This is they way it really is. I have heard this one many times. You guys should read some of the thousands of emails I receive each month. People say it all. Whether you may or may not agree Karen and Richard's image is part of the "whole package"... of course their image is not their music. The Carpenters' music for the most part is viewed in a very positive manner by most critics these days (many call Carpenters' music "classic")... though along with the good comments on the music... there will always be the comments on their image... it seems to go hand in hand, it's part of the Carpenters' history. I do not see this as their music being judged by their image... the music is being judged exactly for what it is... outstanding pop music... but even that's subjective... as Carpenters do have that cutsie-pie side to their music which is not necessarily dismissed as kitsch... but at the same point is not taken as serious by music critics... and is often panned. Richard himself has stated on a few occasions that he now wishes he would have spent less time in recording certain songs and more time working on masterpieces. Richard is well aware that some of their songs are going to receive criticism... but he also knows (as we know) that Carpenters have more than their share of music that is worthy of the highest praise... and this we know is obviously true as Carpenters to this very day are still selling 3 -4 million discs per year... this is no "kitschy" fluke... this is some serious music that truly reaches into the soul of the one's who are listening, have been listening and want to listen.

Let's put this matter into proper perspective and not ignore the elephant in the room. Judging the Carpenters by Richard's occasional jumpsuit is only a small part of their image problems. Judging the Carpenters by Karen's sometimes awkward fashion sense in the earlier years and her emaciated, anorectic appearance in the later years are far more commonly used as the bases of criticism in the public eye. Unfortunately, the cruel and ruthless use of Karen's appearance and death as joke fodder has continued to this day.

Dreams... you have a point... but this is not to discount the fact that Carpenters have definitely received more than their fair share of criticism due to cutsie-pie photos and yes, Richard's occasional jump-suit. Sadly it's all a part of it. The only thing that wasn't marketed as a commodity though is Karen's illness and death. But, the image was all marketing and if you ask me the image people for Carpenters did at best a fair job.

Anyway this is not the point to what I am saying... all I am simply saying is I can easily see why many critics poke at Carpenters' image. There are some, yes, who do poke at Karen's illness... but those are few and far between. Most respectable journalists and/or critics (whether they are a good writer or not are just simply not going to make fun of something like that). Generally when I see jokes made about Karen it's on raunchy blogs or others of the like.

Dave, By the way... I love "Futurama"... don't watch it as much as I used... but still manage to see it every so often.





Here are a few pics which really are not image building photos... well photographed yes... but not really a look that is going get people saying..."cool"...







Now this is a photo of Richard in which he looks great and is quite fashionably dressed... This is the California casual look... a very good look for Richard.

[GoodOldDreams]

I would like to think that music critics are generally more respectful and professional, but Alexis Fitts certainly isn't one of them. As I noted in my first post in this thread:

"More of a reflection of the author rather than her subject, Pitts finds morbid delight in concocting phrases like "after Karen's tragic, tabloid-friendly death" and "...Karen's seminal struggle with anorexia nervosa—all amidst circulating trays of canapés and desserts." Fitts makes a sport out of how many ways she can insult and poke fun of her subjects..."

In my search for other "cutesy" photos to supplement those that Rick posted, I encountered the following critical review which uses an attack strategy remarkably similar to that of Alexis Fitts: go for the physical appearances first and foremost, proceed to downgrade the music as having little or no redeeming qualities, and throw in some morbid humor for good measure to spice up the mix. So much for respectfulness and professionalism. Oh well, I guess I should be thankful that the author at least bothered to listen to some of the album cuts and commented on them specifically before he mysteriously and abruptly ended his review of the album.

********

The Cut-Out Bin #5
The Carpenters, The Carpenters (1971)
[9 February 2006]
Forget horror-core and death metal, the most terrifying and emotionally exhausting album ever made may be this soft-pop classic.

by Rob Horning

Somewhere beyond angst, beyond hopelessness and utter desolation, lies the Carpenters. Even if Karen's anorectic decline hadn't been mythologized in song (Sonic Youth's "Tunic") and film (Todd Haynes's Superstar), the creepy sexless photographs of the brother-sister duo, with their strained toothpaste-white smiles and their lacquered bangs and their polyester wardrobe, are enough to project the ineffable sadness of pretending to casualness when you are in fact suffocating. And of course the pair's music is merciless in the way it pummels you with Sunday afternoon ennui and dentist-office despair. Nothing else in the history of pop music sounds quite like their otherworldly blend of sunny harmonies and glimpses into the abyss; in retrospect it seems amazing that they ever could have been on the charts anywhere on planet Earth, let alone field a half dozen or so Top 10 hits.

Initially marketed as flower children (have a look at the original cover of their first album, Offering), the Carpenters began their career covering Buffalo Springfield and hippie anthems like "Get Together". But they didn't catch on commercially until they released their version of Burt Bacharach's "Close to You," which takes the somewhat corny song's implicit wistfulness and makes it a steamroller of melancholy. Paced like a death march and embalmed with a fastidious, airless arrangement, it's like the musical equivalent of the most luxurious casket in the funeral director's showroom: One could lay oneself to rest forever in its easeful, languid groove.

The Carpenters, their third album, was released in 1971, with a novelty faux-envelope that concealed the mawkish photograph of the duo sitting together in a meadow. This was the first record to feature their distinctive logo, lettered in the customary brown and featuring the sort of typography that you see in Christian bookstores. It evokes a hymnal, with Richard and Karen as the priest and priestess of some strange neutered religion. Just as this record comes sealed in its dainty flesh-colored envelope, the Carpenters themselves are hermetically sealed off from the world we know, inhabiting instead a muffled inner sanctum where every dream inexorably goes awry and there is every opportunity to lament and ruminate over what you are powerless to affect. Listening to this record is like drowning in slow motion in a bathtub full of tears.

Side one opens with a musical suicide note called "Rainy Days and Mondays", on which Karen sings cheerless lines like "Walking around, some kind of lonely clown" and "talking to myself and feeling old" with a remorseless, pitch perfect clarity, accompanied by mournful notes on the harmonica and a lachrymose string arrangement calibrated for maximum pathos. The lyrics gesture toward a supposed consolation in love and friendship, but the overwhelming feeling evoked is that depression is impossible to eradicate and there is indeed "nothing to do but frown."

After the brief one-minute interlude of "Saturday", a bouncy music-hall tune sung by Richard that is pickled in nostalgia, a show tune lurched out of context that may have been intended to introduce levity but instead demonstrates how far away such lightheartedness can seem, how much effort it can require, how false and accelerated it can feel, it's a relief to return to lugubrious desperation on "Let Me Be the One," an economical song with a verse that lasts only one line before it hits the pleading chorus. The bridge, which has four lines, seems to last a relative eternity. This subtle reversal of what you'd expect from the verse-chorus structure keeps listeners off balance for the entire duration, mirroring the uncertainty that the lyric evokes and conveying an ultimate sense that the singer is not going to "be the one to turn to" for the "silent understanding" she promises, that nothing but anxiety lay on that path. "(A Place to) Hide Away" returns us fully to the darkness. The lyrics verge on psychedelic -- "Bright colored pinwheels go round in my head / I run through the mist of the wine" -- and dwell on the usual themes of sorrow and self-recrimination. Richard's arrangement, framing Karen's unearthly voice with tasteful woodwinds and swelling strings, is as soft and gentle as always, a downy, fluffy pillow slipped comfortably over your face.

The side closes with readymade wedding song "For All We Know", an apparent attempt to repeat the duo's earlier success with "We've Only Just Begun". Ostensibly a joyful song celebrating the possibilities of love's growing, it nevertheless conjures a stubborn moroseness; it seems to mock the very thing it tries to describe. Again the music is warm and coddling, but it nurtures unsettling contradictions. When Karen sings that the couple remain "Strangers in many ways" and fatalistically concludes that "love may grow for all we know," the outcome of the relationship seems very much in doubt. This is what the Carpenters excel at: creating exactly this kind of self-consuming artifact, producing songs that efface themselves as they play, leaving a chilly feeling of pristine emptiness where you'd expect the heartwarming treacle to be.

The first side forms a perfect suite of purgatorial misery, capturing the way depression can pass itself off as a grim kind of perfection. Hope shimmers only to evaporate before our eyes. But that all pales in comparison to the album's centerpiece, "Superstar", which is the reason why you need to buy this record the next time you see it in a thrift store. On the surface the song is a maudlin account of a groupie hopelessly in love with a musician -- the man with the "sad guitar" -- who's used her; but in the Carpenters' hands the scenario takes on almost existential significance. What's being described through the song's unbearably dramatic mise en scene is the way that pop culture in general invariably lets us down and the irremediable despair that's bred into us when we are taught to respond so thoroughly to the disposable chintz that's sold to us for entertainment. Despite being made for the masses, pop songs can seem to speak to us personally and seduce us. They can seem to have been designed to specifically illuminate our lives, but ultimately they have nothing to reveal; at some point we discover that everything we thought we saw in them came from inside us and that they have duped us into engaging merely in an ersatz emotional dialogue with ourselves. The pathetic groupie in the lyrics is just us, scoring our deepest feelings to songs that were written only to distract us. "Loneliness is such a sad affair," indeed, and our only recourse is to lose ourselves again in another song. It's the most devastating portrait of futility on an album replete with them, and its effortless effectiveness, its irresistible pathos, lures us in to listen to it again and again, condemning us further each time to the peculiar hell it so adroitly describes yet at the same time transforming that misery into bliss. The Carpenters leave us with confirmation of just how good it can feel when our culture betrays us.

[SOURCE:http://www.popmatters.com/music/features/cutoutbin/5-carpenters.shtml]

[Rick Henry]

Well Dreams... isn't it true that Karen's death was tragic and highly publicized in all the tabloids (as well as respected newspapers and magazines). This is a reality not so much an insult. And didn't Karen actually struggle with anorexia. At least Fitts isn't making jokes like the one about Mama Cass and the sandwich... now that is truly tasteless. Some people out there make jokes like that.

In her use of the word seminal, I take Fitts comment as that Karen's struggle with anorexia was the process and development of what happened in the future... that being Karen's death.

"all amidst circulating trays of canapés and desserts"... is Fitts' idea of what will be served at this event which Bill Hosley was to curate (well now the event has happened).

Thinking about the comment Fitts made about Carpenters seeming out of place in "her own" musical landscape brought to my attention that Carpenters happen to be somewhat out of place in my very own musical landscape. Amidst my Jimi Hendrix CD's, Led Zeppelin, Talking Heads, Mars Volta and Radiohead CD's also lies the magnitude of Carpenters/Karen Carpenter discs. Where do the Carpenters fit in with the other types of music which seem to dominate my collection? Obviously they fit in somewhere and they fit in prominently.

In reading Rob Hornings article, I say bravo to him for being bold enough to write what he honestly thinks of the Carpenters. Not everybody is going to love them like we do. And as good as the Carpenters album (Tan Album) is... it also has it's parts that are going to be critiqued. songs like "Saturday" and "Druscilla Penny" are really not the strongest songs in the Carpenters catalog. "(A Place To) Hideaway" is a lovely song... but it is also very high in the "sugar" department this giving it a "fluff" factor, although the song does have several redeeming factors. Between his colorful expressions it seems Rob actually does like "Superstar" quite a bit... and understandably so.

Rob certainly has every right to call Carpenters... the most terrifying and emotionally exhausting album ever made... hey I'd like to see what some of the people on this forum call Jimi Hendrix's "Are You Experienced?", Frank Zappa's "Apostrophe" or Rolling Stones' "Goat's Head Soup" albums... It's really subjective. Carpenters are a popular group to write about. All types of writers will continue to write about them in many different perspectives. Carpenters are viewed in different ways by the different segments of humanity. So, why shouldn't each segment be free to write it as they see it?

The important thing is that people continue to write about them as widely as they do. A writer like Fitts and Hornings, though you may not agree with this, are part of the big "whole" that is keeping the memory and the music of carpenters alive. Of course I'd like to think that authors like Paul Grein and web sites like Richard and Karen Carpenter Avenue are doing more for the Carpenters' memory. But, hey Fitts, Hornings and also Todd Haynes are going to bring Carpenters into communities that they normally wouldn't show up in. And in Haynes' case his movie is a big factor in the Carpenters gaining a cult following amongst a population of the "goth" crowd... who would have thought that such a movie would have that much influence.

By the way I find Hornings writing style to be quite colorful and descriptive... whether or not I agree with his take on Carpenters' music he does have an interesting way of describing his viewpoints. Quite creative I would say.

I find his statement, "pretending to casualness when you are in fact suffocating" to be quite interesting. Maybe a statement of the fact that the Carpenters' image was so guarded by A&M executives that it seemed almost unreal... like pretend. Richard and Karen both complained about the image they were expected to keep... there must be some hints of reality in what Hornings is saying here. From what I've read in Carpenters biographies and in movies I get the feeling that they were suffocating in a world of high expectations in a whirlwind pace.


Back to a comment Dave made...

dave said:

What you missed was that the original article was aimed at an audience whose sole exposure to the Carpenters is during Christmastime. Most of the readers probably responded with a "Oh yeah, I remember them" type of reaction.

Maybe 20 years ago or so this comment would be half true... but nowadays the general public's exposure to Carpenters is far beyond just their Christmas music (and really always has been). Carpenters are extremely popular on the internet... and as we proved from the airplay log we kept last year they are very popular on a daily basis (throughout the entire year) on internet radio. On the hour every hour there are several Carpenters songs being played somewhere on the internet. Along with internet radio we have site's like YouTube in which Carpenters music videos are being viewed and listened to on a daily basis. But even beyond the internet Carpenters are heard on a daily basis through piped in music... which is what we hear in retail stores such as Home Depot, Target, WalMart, Thrift Stores, shopping malls, grocery stores and so forth. I've heard everything from "Close To You" to "Calling Occupants..." in these public places and still do on a regular basis. Although "Merry Christmas Darling" is an extremely popular song... I believe more people (in general) are familiar with (and identify the Carpenters with) songs like "Close To You", "We've Only Just Begun", "Rainy Days And Mondays", "Goodbye To Love" and "Superstar" quite a bit more.

On the "oh yeah, I remember them " comment... this again would only be about half true... as many of those people who only know Carpenters casually because they may have heard "We've Only Just Begun" in the mall or saw a music video for "Superstar" on YouTube are only 19 or 20 years old and are just discovering Carpenters for the first time... they're not old enough to say... "I remember..." As a matter of fact we have a few of the younger fans on this forum... and to the younger set Carpenters are not a memory... but a part of their current day musical landscape. I believe Carpentersgermany (a new member on this forum) discovered Carpenters when singing the song "Sing" in her choral group... this was a discovery not from Christmas music... but from one of their pop hits. Another is Sunnybunny ( a 14 year old fan)... she discovered Carpenters when she saw the Karen Carpenter Story... again this is a discovery from venues other than the Christmas music.

Carpenters are to widely spread amongst the different types of media in our daily daily lives that we can't just narrow it down to anyone who isn't a die-hard fan only knows Carpenters from their Christmas music (or during the Christmas season)... that just isn't so.

[Dave]

Rick, you touched on something quite relevant, that being "subjective".

The music reporter for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette recently railed against the R&R HOF inductees because his personal favorites, Iggy Pop and the Stooges, were invited to play by Madonna yet have so far failed to be enshrined.

I read his article, compared it to many posts I've read here, and come up with a rather simplistic observation: if our favorite (group or singer) is maligned (as we interpret it to be) and/or not inducted into the Hall, we become defensive and offended.

In my case, Rob Horning lost my attention about halfway through his opening sentence. He made me wonder if perhaps his other job is as a creative writer for Despair.com.
To my eyes, the man could make a case against oxygen!

A lot of bandwidth has been expended here because we, meaning the indigenous community, felt offended.

I didn't feel that way. And in my eyes, no one here should feel offended either. But that's just me.

[carpentersgermany]

I'd like to link a comment to what Rick said, about the younger fans because it might help to understand why some of you got so offended by the Fitts article.
I had the chance to get to know the Carpenters somehow in a kind of vacuum (not a100% vacuum of course because I had a certain knowledge about 60/70ies pop music, but more or less the simile makes sense I think ).
I began to listen to their music, without knowing anything about them and just began to love it.
Today I know that back then it was not "cool" or "hip" to be a Carpenters Fan and so I can imagine that some of you (like Tim maybe) often had to defend their self for loving C.'s music. That can be very burdensome, especially in your school days, were most often we just long to be part of the cool kids.

For me, being a Fan of the Carpenters, none of this "image"-stuff ever was of any concern, because in my generation the Carpenters just are quite immaterial (might be different in the US).
So, I had the chance to receive the Carpenters just over their music. I had no idea, if they supposed to be cool or square.
Of course sometimes I thought, that they were just dreadfully dressed and some of their photos seemed quite odd, but to be honest thats what I think about most of the people during the 60/70/80ies - so it just made no difference to me and I just did not care.

So, when Fitts says the Carpenters are kitsch, that doesn't offend me at all, because she's right, and it's good. Of course there's also another side of them, that we (as true fans) all know and appreciate and thats even better!

I think, I see things so easy-going, because I had the chance to "devote" myself to the Carpenters in this vacuum (to come back to my simile) where the image etc is just of no matter.
But I know that you get sensitive when you have to defend something you love over and over again.

I think Fitts article was OK, didn't blew me away, but didn't tell lies either.
I found the Horning article quite interesting to read..

[Rick Henry]

Some very good thoughts by both Dave and CG...

but first I must say I am surprised that this topic which began quite innocently turned into a hot topic. I actually enjoyed the back and forth.

Now on to Dave's last comments... you are right when we read something that we don't agree with or are offended by we want to automatically think that it is rubbish and dismiss it as trite. Sounds like what happened to Carpenters in the 70's. And maybe some of this is true... there are quite a few journalists who are just "okay" writers. But this is the U.S. and we have freedom of speech and it is okay to not like the Carpenters. For every negative review written on the Carpenters there's also a glowing review written on them... so it all seems to even out. Actually I think Carpenters come ahead because they're being written about (whether negative or positive).

Years ago I would get upset by negative reviews and commentaries written on Carpenters, but than just a few years back I took a good look at exactly what was being written about them and realized that some of what the critics have to say about them is true. And I also came to realize that each person has a right to express their views on any given topic - pro or con. And why should I be offended by someone else's views. Why not learn from their views and try to understand why they may have that viewpoint. Obviously there is something behind the way so many critics feel and have felt about the Carpenters... because it's not only Fitts and Hornings who have made comments like this... a fair amount of critics and journalists have panned Carpenters (for a variety of reasons) and it will continue as long as the human race continues.

My very own friends here on this forum, I'm sure have their viewpoints on some of the music I listen to... take Jimi Hendrix for example... I'm sure some of you call his music screeching noise... and you can say that to me and that won't offend me... and I also won't think that you're lacking in intelligence because you don't like the same things I like. That would be utterly ridiculous. Obviously someone thinks Alexis Fitts does a good job because she's the one getting paid to do what she does. Journalism, like music, is subjective. There are many types of writing styles and different viewpoints out there. There are some people out there who enjoy reading literature where every other word is a curse word and they think it's art... and I may think it's trash. You know the old saying... "one person's trash is another person's art".

CG... I think it's great that you can view Carpenters on a slightly different level than us old-timers do. That stigma has always been there for us. I remember back in the 70's I had no problem with singing out Carpenters tunes to my friends and taking my Carpenters albums along with me to a party... but I also was toting around my Gary Numan, Police, Cars, ELO and Led Zeppelin albums right along.

[Dave]

Speaking for myself, I tend to view the decades I've lived through and recall them through events that mattered to me. For instance, as a seven-year-old the main thing I recall about Kennedy's assassination was that they took the Saturday morning cartoons off to cover the event. It wasn't important to me.
I entered the Seventies at age 15 and exited at age 25. There were a lot of changes, not only in my world, but the larger world as well

There is a tendency in pop culture to disrespect that which is not "hip" and fashionable right at this moment, and so things that once were "in" become "out", and subject to ridicule and even outright scorn. Poodle skirts, hippies, flower children, teenyboppers, white polyester suits, leg warmers, big hair...they all became parts of the crazy quilt called Americana.

Truthfully, it's not only the Carpenters that periodically become the subject of ridicule. Pretty much anyone who was in the public eye at one time or another draws fire. Olivia Newton-John, for instance, who was every bit as squeaky-clean back in the day draws fire for her attire worn in the video for "Physical"...yet that "look" lives on even now in every exercise parlor out there. John Travolta gets it for "Saturday Night Fever". Carly Simon gets it for her "No Secrets" album cover. Basically, no one is immune.

And so, it goes on and on. The Carpenters didn't dress any better or worse than anyone else in show biz at that time, and I remember Elvis having been pilloried for performing in jumpsuits. If they can hammer Elvis, they can hammer anyone.

So, when I read obviously derogatory press about anyone that was written by someone who didn't actually experience the era, I pass on by.

As far as how I personally feel about the Carpenters? They earned a star on the sidewalk in Hollywood, Grammys, made bank, and influenced a lot of people, not only in the music world but far beyond. It's always been my belief that because Karen didn't go out as Janis Joplin, Mama Cass Elliott, Jim Morrison, Hendrix, or Bon Scott did, it simply wasn't "fashionable". Witness the reported attempt by Donny Osmond to fabricate press by creating a drug bust. Pitiful.

Perhaps a component is that fact that Richard devotes himself to his family, and stays out of the limelight. He has become savvy enough to not give the Britney-loving paparazzi another target.

[Rick Henry]

Some interesting points here Dave...

Two I will touch on...

dave said:

So, when I read obviously derogatory press about anyone that was written by someone who didn't actually experience the era, I pass on by.

I personally don't feel that one had to live through a particular era to know about and be aware of how and what happened. also I think that a person can have their own current day viewpoint on something that happened in an era past. Just because Carpenters' heyday was in the 70's doesn't mean that anybody nowadays can't have a current day viewpoint on them. Fitts most likely didn't experience Carpenters in their heyday... but she is experiencing them today and they're the same Carpenters with the same looks and same music... it's easy to deduct the situation and come up with a viewpoint today which most likely is going to very similar to the viewpoints held by those who were around in that day. I find Fitts' viewpoints valid... as she is entitled to her viewpoint and opinion.

As I mentioned earlier, if this were the case then we might as well stop writing books and making movies on what has happened in the past, such as about Jesus, George Washington, Napoleon Bonaparte, Christopher Columbus (all who have received more than their share of derogatory press)... because none of us lived this firsthand and we will never get it right... and in your viewpoint Dave would be invalid... and should be passed on.

dave said:

Perhaps a component is that fact that Richard devotes himself to his family, and stays out of the limelight. He has become savvy enough to not give the Britney-loving paparazzi another target.

Even if Richard wanted to create controversy for himself today, I really don't think the paparazzi would pay much attention... he just simply is not a person of interest for the media. But Britney Spears or Madonna (Madonna not as much anymore) keep their careers alive this way. Fortunately for Richard Carpenter, he does not need to go this route to keep sales of Carpenters music alive.

[GoodOldDreams]

goodolddreams said:

I would like to think that music critics are generally more respectful and professional, but Alexis Fitts certainly isn't one of them. As I noted in my first post in this thread:

"More of a reflection of the author rather than her subject, Pitts finds morbid delight in concocting phrases like "after Karen's tragic, tabloid-friendly death" and "...Karen's seminal struggle with anorexia nervosa—all amidst circulating trays of canapés and desserts." Fitts makes a sport out of how many ways she can insult and poke fun of her subjects..."

admin said:

Well Dreams... isn't it true that Karen's death was tragic and highly publicized in all the tabloids (as well as respected newspapers and magazines). This is a reality not so much an insult. And didn't Karen actually struggle with anorexia. At least Fitts isn't making jokes like the one about Mama Cass and the sandwich... now that is truly tasteless. Some people out there make jokes like that.

In her use of the word seminal, I take Fitts comment as that Karen's struggle with anorexia was the process and development of what happened in the future... that being Karen's death.

"all amidst circulating trays of canapés and desserts"... is Fitts' idea of what will be served at this event which Bill Hosley was to curate (well now the event has happened).

I don't view all critical reviews as being insulting or invalid if they are well-researched, fair and well-balanced. However, it's vexing when the authors are trying to tailor their articles to a certain negative conclusion so that they can do some sniping with their supposedly "clever" and "witty" put-downs and exploit their unfortunate subjects and their dour situations for the "entertainment" or "amusement" purposes of the readership.

Tabloids and gossip magazines like The National Enquirer and The Star do not thrive because of their journalistic integrity, but for their famed shameless parade of innuendoes and sensationalistic spins on celebrity news, gossip, and crime. The New Haven Advocate aspires to be not much higher, so Alexis Fitts truly fits the bill and is paid accordingly.

My objection to the author's phrase "tabloid-friendly death" is the double insinuation that Karen's demise was treated well by the press and that it was a great opportunity (and therefore lucrative and justifiable) for the press to hound on this topic. Unfortunately, Karen got more attention in headlines around the world the moment she died than she ever did when she was alive, and in many people's minds Karen was more famous for being the first public figure to die from the complications of anorexia rather than one who made good as a singer, musician and performer when she was alive. Fitts strangely juxtaposed the word "death" with the word "friendly," as if Karen's passing were merciful death by euthanasia to put her out of her misery or a deliberately-planned suicide that succeeded beyond expectations. (In military terms, I find the euphemistic phrase "death by friendly-fire" equally appalling.) To the press, Karen was fodder worth more dead than alive.

My objection to Fitts' phrase "...Karen's seminal struggle with anorexia nervosa—all amidst circulating trays of canapés and desserts" is based on the odd juxtaposition of a person who was suffering from the ravages of anorexia next to food that would be served in her memory decades later, which is a far stretch to coax an ironic and unsympathetic image of Karen not being able to help herself. My distaste for this lame phrase is the same as the running "joke" that "Cass Elliot and Karen would both be alive today if only they had shared the sandwich." Although it has been established that Cass Elliot died of heart failure in her sleep, urban legend maintains that she died choking on a ham sandwich as a perpetual joke. The attitude seems to be: "Who needs facts when you can laugh at someone else's expense?"

[Rick Henry]

goodolddreams said:

goodolddreams said:

I would like to think that music critics are generally more respectful and professional, but Alexis Fitts certainly isn't one of them. As I noted in my first post in this thread:

"More of a reflection of the author rather than her subject, Pitts finds morbid delight in concocting phrases like "after Karen's tragic, tabloid-friendly death" and "...Karen's seminal struggle with anorexia nervosa—all amidst circulating trays of canapés and desserts." Fitts makes a sport out of how many ways she can insult and poke fun of her subjects..."

admin said:

Well Dreams... isn't it true that Karen's death was tragic and highly publicized in all the tabloids (as well as respected newspapers and magazines). This is a reality not so much an insult. And didn't Karen actually struggle with anorexia. At least Fitts isn't making jokes like the one about Mama Cass and the sandwich... now that is truly tasteless. Some people out there make jokes like that.

In her use of the word seminal, I take Fitts comment as that Karen's struggle with anorexia was the process and development of what happened in the future... that being Karen's death.

"all amidst circulating trays of canapés and desserts"... is Fitts' idea of what will be served at this event which Bill Hosley was to curate (well now the event has happened).

I don't view all critical reviews as being insulting or invalid if they are well-researched, fair and well-balanced. However, it's vexing when the authors are trying to tailor their articles to a certain negative conclusion so that they can do some sniping with their supposedly "clever" and "witty" put-downs and exploit their unfortunate subjects and their dour situations for the "entertainment" or "amusement" purposes of the readership.

Tabloids and gossip magazines like The National Enquirer and The Star do not thrive because of their journalistic integrity, but for their famed shameless parade of innuendoes and sensationalistic spins on celebrity news, gossip, and crime. The New Haven Advocate aspires to be not much higher, so Alexis Fitts truly fits the bill and is paid accordingly.

My objection to the author's phrase "tabloid-friendly death" is the double insinuation that Karen's demise was treated well by the press and that it was a great opportunity (and therefore lucrative and justifiable) for the press to hound on this topic. Unfortunately, Karen got more attention in headlines around the world the moment she died than she ever did when she was alive, and in many people's minds Karen was more famous for being the first public figure to die from the complications of anorexia rather than one who made good as a singer, musician and performer when she was alive. Fitts strangely juxtaposed the word "death" with the word "friendly," as if Karen's passing were merciful death by euthanasia to put her out of her misery or a deliberately-planned suicide that succeeded beyond expectations. (In military terms, I find the euphemistic phrase "death by friendly-fire" equally appalling.) To the press, Karen was fodder worth more dead than alive.

My objection to Fitts' phrase "...Karen's seminal struggle with anorexia nervosa—all amidst circulating trays of canapés and desserts" is based on the odd juxtaposition of a person who was suffering from the ravages of anorexia next to food that would be served in her memory decades later, which is a far stretch to coax an ironic and unsympathetic image of Karen not being able to help herself. My distaste for this lame phrase is the same as the running "joke" that "Cass Elliot and Karen would both be alive today if only they had shared the sandwich." Although it has been established that Cass Elliot died of heart failure in her sleep, urban legend maintains that she died choking on a ham sandwich as a perpetual joke. The attitude seems to be: "Who needs facts when you can laugh at someone else's expense?"

Well Dreams... Maybe your interpretation of what Fitts said is different from mine.

I wouldn't be surprised if Fitts' original writing of this article was much longer but had to be cut down and edited for print in the newspaper. this happens often thus changing the juxtaposition of comments and thoughts. Again, your viewpoint on what she said is your viewpoint. I see it as just being talk. She's mentioned Karen's death as something that people may be speaking of as they are treated to refreshments... there's no hidden agenda in this statement... it's fairly clear as to what she's saying.

In your mentioning of "tabloid-death"... again her death was picked up by all the tabloids along with the respected press. Truth be told, yes, the tabloids did see Karen's death as an opportunity... but that's not a reflection on Karen. That's a reflection on our very own society... as long as people keep buying this stuff there will always be tabloids that jump on the latest hot news. If anything Fitts' comment on tabloid-friendly death was a jab at the very establishment she works for.

Now, I do agree with your comment on what you have to say about critical reviews being well researched. I agree a well researched critical review is always going to hit base much better. And there have been more than a few well researched critical reviews on Carpenters and some which have hit the nail on the head. Let's face it not everybody is not going to like the Carpenters and there are going to be critical reviews written on them and fans probably won't like any of them.

goodolddreams said:

I don't view all critical reviews as being insulting or invalid if they are well-researched, fair and well-balanced.

[GoodOldDreams]

admin said:

...Now, I do agree with your comment on what you have to say about critical reviews being well researched. I agree a well researched critical review is always going to hit base much better. And there have been more than a few well researched critical reviews on Carpenters and some which have hit the nail on the head. Let's face it not everybody is not going to like the Carpenters and there are going to be critical reviews written on them and fans probably won't like any of them.

[/center]

goodolddreams said:

I don't view all critical reviews as being insulting or invalid if they are well-researched, fair and well-balanced.

[/quote]

Hi Rick,

I would love to read the "more than a few well researched critical reviews on Carpenters and some which have hit the nail on the head" if you can direct them to our way.

In my Reply #19 in this thread, I suggested some alternative perceptions and recommended to you what I thought was a fairly well-researched critical review that you might enjoy. Since you haven't responded to that posting yet, you might have missed it.

Also, my Reply #20 in this thread pretty much summarizes my take on why Alexis Fitts' article was misguided in the first place.

As for Rob Horning, who also writes about economics, consumerism and films, I find his article well-researched and promising until he terminated the review about half way through the album. Taking uncharacteristic cheap shots, even for him, he could not resist coming up with the many forced death similes and metaphors:

"Paced like a death march and embalmed with a fastidious, airless arrangement, it's like the musical equivalent of the most luxurious casket in the funeral director's showroom: One could lay oneself to rest forever in its easeful, languid groove."

"...the Carpenters themselves are hermetically sealed off from the world we know..."

"Listening to this record is like drowning in slow motion in a bathtub full of tears."

"Side one opens with a musical suicide note called "Rainy Days and Mondays"... accompanied by mournful notes on the harmonica and a lachrymose string arrangement calibrated for maximum pathos..."

"Richard's arrangement, framing Karen's unearthly voice with tasteful woodwinds and swelling strings, is as soft and gentle as always, a downy, fluffy pillow slipped comfortably over your face."

"The first side forms a perfect suite of purgatorial misery..."

"...condemning us further each time to the peculiar hell..."

At the beginning of the article, Horning made the all-encompassing, sweeping judgment: "Forget horror-core and death metal, the most terrifying and emotionally exhausting album ever made may be this soft-pop classic." Curious, I was looking forward to see how he would support this view. He meticulously dissected the first six of the ten songs (or fifteen in all if you count each component of the medley) on the album, but then inexplicably ground to an abrupt halt before finishing what he set out to do, a glaring failure on his part. If this album as a whole has so little or no redeeming value to Horning, why would he even bother to revisit it so many years later? Is his real motivation just to find an easy target for him to make death jokes at every turn?

[Rick Henry]

goodolddreams said:

admin said:

...Now, I do agree with your comment on what you have to say about critical reviews being well researched. I agree a well researched critical review is always going to hit base much better. And there have been more than a few well researched critical reviews on Carpenters and some which have hit the nail on the head. Let's face it not everybody is not going to like the Carpenters and there are going to be critical reviews written on them and fans probably won't like any of them.

[/center]

[/quote]

Hi Rick,

I would love to read the "more than a few well researched critical reviews on Carpenters and some which have hit the nail on the head" if you can direct them to our way.

In my Reply #19 in this thread, I suggested some alternative perceptions and recommended to you what I thought was a fairly well-researched critical review that you might enjoy. Since you haven't responded to that posting yet, you might have missed it.

Also, my Reply #20 in this thread pretty much summarizes my take on why Alexis Fitts' article was misguided in the first place.

As for Rob Horning, who also writes about economics, consumerism and films, I find his article well-researched and promising until he terminated the review about half way through the album. Taking uncharacteristic cheap shots, even for him, he could not resist coming up with the many forced death similes and metaphors:

"Paced like a death march and embalmed with a fastidious, airless arrangement, it's like the musical equivalent of the most luxurious casket in the funeral director's showroom: One could lay oneself to rest forever in its easeful, languid groove."

"...the Carpenters themselves are hermetically sealed off from the world we know..."

"Listening to this record is like drowning in slow motion in a bathtub full of tears."

"Side one opens with a musical suicide note called "Rainy Days and Mondays"... accompanied by mournful notes on the harmonica and a lachrymose string arrangement calibrated for maximum pathos..."

"Richard's arrangement, framing Karen's unearthly voice with tasteful woodwinds and swelling strings, is as soft and gentle as always, a downy, fluffy pillow slipped comfortably over your face."

"The first side forms a perfect suite of purgatorial misery..."

"...condemning us further each time to the peculiar hell..."

At the beginning of the article, Horning made the all-encompassing, sweeping judgment: "Forget horror-core and death metal, the most terrifying and emotionally exhausting album ever made may be this soft-pop classic." Curious, I was looking forward to see how he would support this view. He meticulously dissected the first six of the ten songs (or fifteen in all if you count each component of the medley) on the album, but then inexplicably ground to an abrupt halt before finishing what he set out to do, a glaring failure on his part. If this album as a whole has so little or no redeeming value to Horning, why would he even bother to revisit it so many years later? Is his real motivation just to find an easy target for him to make death jokes at every turn?


[/quote]

When you make comments like "uncharacteristic cheap shots" I think that right away because you don't like what is being said you dismiss it as being a cheap shot. The fact is there are a good amount of people who think Carpenters' music is kitsch, whether it is or not. I ask you Dreams; why can't someone just simply not like the Carpenters' music? Why can't a critic pan their music without being called "inaccurate" or a "cheap shot"? If the same were being said about a musician you didn't like would you feel the same way?

In reading over Alexis' Fitts' article again, this time looking for inaccuracies or signs of poor research and I came to the conclusion her article is not all that far off. The comment about "jazz singers or blues singers" is a comment made by singer Anne Tofflemire. That's the only part of this areticle I found to be quite inaccurate and Fitts didn't even make that comment. The rest of what Fitts says seems to be a reflection of history... let's face it Karen's death was tragic and the tabloids found opportunity in her death... as much as we may not like it... this is true. And although, we may not consider Carpenters' music as kitsch the public perceives them that way and has since 1970. The Carpenters are a band that has been contextualized by kitsch since their beginnings. Fitts mentions how today the popular media insists on viewing them as synonymous with the 70's... well this is also true. some critics and some media just can;t and won't accept the fact that Carpenters are quite relevant in today's society.

For the most part Fitts' article really isn't that bad, the more you look at it. She seems to hit on some thoughts that others haven't touched upon and brings some age old views of Carpenters to light.

On Hornings... you pinted out...


"Side one opens with a musical suicide note called "Rainy Days and Mondays"... accompanied by mournful notes on the harmonica and a lachrymose string arrangement calibrated for maximum pathos..."

"Richard's arrangement, framing Karen's unearthly voice with tasteful woodwinds and swelling strings, is as soft and gentle as always, a downy, fluffy pillow slipped comfortably over your face."

My comments on this are big deal. This is Hornings viewpoint, this is his critique. Is his critique inaccurate? No. Is his critique trash? No. What his critique is, is his own viewpoint. That's what critics are. They share their viewpoint. In viewpoints there is no right or wrong. Is there?

[Rick Henry]

Here are a few reviews written for Rolling Stone Magazine. Seems like these reviews really hit on Richard's arrangements as being somewhat bland... but all agree that it's Karen's voice that saves the Carpenters.

From Rolling Stone Magazine… this article eludes to the image the public and critics have of the Carpenters. But this time the remark comes straight from Richard’s mouth.

Karen Carpenter sang and drummed; her brother Richard arranged their lushly melodic music. Both contributed to their thoroughly wholesome image. "It's like we're Pat Boone, only a little cleaner," Richard lamented to Rolling Stone in 1974. "As if all we do all day is drink milk, eat apple pie and take showers. I don't even like milk." Close to You, their second album, has two of their best ballads: "(They Long to Be) Close to You" and "We've Only Just Begun." In the early Seventies, the Carpenters epitomized the mainstream, but now their influence is audible in cooler, slightly less-clean indie bands: the Cardigans, Stereolab and "chamber pop" acts such as Belle and Sebastian.



* * * * * * * * * *

This review of the album “A Song For you” was written by Stephen Holden for rolling Stone Magazine

While the Carpenters' music is not particularly compelling, its lack of pretension lends it a bland integrity that is uncommon for middle-of-the-road pop music. The basis of this integrity is Karen's singing, which grows more assured with each album. She is especially strong in her lower register, and she shows the potential of developing into an interesting stylist. The musical value of Richard's contribution to the Carpenter phenomenon, however, is another matter. The best that can be said for most of his arrangements is that they provide adequate support for Karen's voice and have a recognizable stamp. What they lack is a sense of dramatic structure or interpretive style.
The formula that Richard applies to his own songs, he applies to everyone else's as well. This is a shame, since many of the Carpenters' records begin strikingly but then fail to gather momentum. The most obvious way in which this happens is that, time and again, the clarity of Karen's vocal line is interrupted or joined by multi-tracked "choral filler," which tends to drain a song of its personality. It is the same fault that weakened countless pop records in the Forties and Fifties.
Five songs are authored or co-authored by Richard. They vary in emotional range from cotton candy to ice milk, the best of them being the current hit single, "Goodbye to Love." Richard sings solo on two cuts—"Piano Picker" and "Crystal Lullaby." His voice is pleasant enough, but he seems to be afflicted with a very noticeable lisp. One cut, "Flat Baroque," features Richard on the piano playing in a style that can only be described as Peter Neromanque.
The title cut, Leon Russell's "A Song For You" is far and away the album's finest moment. It is a great song that is rapidly achieving the classic status it deserves, and Karen communicates its poignancy with effortless serenity. The Carpenters have done well by Leon in the past, their version of "Superstar" standing as perhaps their finest record to date. Unfortunately, the album doesn't contain any other very strong material. "Hurting Each Other," which preceded "Goodbye to Love" as a hit single, does not approach the level of the Carpenters' first hits. Karen's interpretation of Carole King and Toni Stern's "It's Going to Take Some Time" shows only that the song requires Carole's personal touch in order to work "Bless the Beasts and Children," title song of the movie, has lavish production values going for it, and nothing else. Mention should be made of Bob Messenger's pleasant flute and tenor sax breaks on "Road Ode" and "A Song For You," respectively.
If the Carpenters are to grow with their audience, they will need more of this sort of instrumentation. But above all, they will need to be more discriminating in their selection of material. Karen is capable of giving us considerably more than tiny sugar valentines. (RS 119)
STEPHEN HOLDEN


* * * * * * * * * *

A review on the album “Carpenters” written by Jon Landau for Rolling Stone Magazine


The Carpenters make good singles. "Close to You" was Bacharach and David music at its best. Karen Carpenter's lead vocal bordered on soulfulness, while the arrangement was exceptionally sharp middle-of-the-road (MOR) music. The record sold well over two million copies in the United States alone.
The follow-ups, included on Carpenters, have been phenomenally successful too, if not quite the equal of the initial hit aesthetically. "We've Only Just Begun," written by Paul Williams and Roger Nichols, has a fine tune but the lyrics and arrangement are ultimately too saccharine, even for a song as sweet as this. However, "Rainy Days and Mondays," written by the same team is a superb example of the craft of MOR music. The melody is more than catchy: it is downright memorable. Richard Carpenter's arrangement uses woodwinds as the perfect counterpoint to his own, sensitive electric piano playing. And once again, Karen Carpenter's vocal is central to the record's success. While she has all the qualities of a good pop singer, she also uses a slightly excessive tremolo to give herself a vaguely rock sounding quality, while she phrases with subtlety and ease. With all this going for it, it is a shame that what was a good lyric idea was not developed particularly well.
With one excellent single and one acceptable one giving it a head start I was hoping that Carpenters would be an unexpected delight. Unfortunately, the album shows that the Carpenters are as depressingly ordinary as you all knew they were in the first place. I don't know what it is they do different when they are making album cuts instead of singles, but whatever it is, they should stop it instantly.
On Carpenters, Richard Carpenter tries his hand at song-writing. Richard can arrange, play the piano, and sing pretty in the background but his three songs are so horrifyingly Fifties cutesy-pie vulgar that I am amazed their producer allowed them to be released. Particularly outrageous was his idea of following Karen's more than respectable reading of Leon Russell and Bonnie Bramlett's "Superstar" with a ditty of his own about groupies called "Druscilla Penny."
Another Williams-Nichols song "Let Me Be the One," is fine. Randy Sparks "Hideaway" is adequate and a five and a half minute Bacharach-David medley is more nightclub material than recording material. On this last, Karen sings and Richard plays piano extremely well, but because we never hear more than bits and fragments of any one song it is impossible to really get involved with it. I would have like to hear Karen sing "Do You Know the Way to San Jose" all the way through–the bit she does here is mighty tasty. A closing piece, "Sometimes," is embarrassingly hokey.
Ultimately the Carpenters have more going for them than against. There is no question that they have contributed mightily to the inherently limited genre of MOR music. that they bring a little light soul and sensitivity to a music that is by definition (almost) emotionally dehydrated. They have a WASPish charm that is pleasant to admire from a distance. And they do make fine singles. Period. (RS 85)
JON LANDAU




* * * * * * * * * *


I will come back with more articles written on Carpenters... from other sources.