hehe, i don't agree with that, i find the title track quite flattering
i imagine from the public success i've had that one becomes cautious of what one says due to it's influence on people who seem hyperreactive to youe every nuance. i think i turned onto JE about the time of robot rock - and teh internets was already like OMGOMG RONNIE UR SO
a strong point for me is that imo a *good* artist (little overlap with a "commercially successful artist") should challenge their listeners.. maybe at an extreme to disappoint and upset them.. with the objective of improving their discretion.
modern music is a lot like.. waking up and eating twinkies and tang for breakfast, memetically speaking. tang never upsets or challenges or disappoints (until premature aging
). you know that what's good for bodies is a breakfast of locally grown, organic sustenance.. so a *good* musicians wants to wean their listeners off of tang, even if they have to package themselves in the form of tang to do it. ergo MGTC??
i think this is sort of the message of "draw for me, 'em see, ah sure" - the sounds are so pure and simple, and hermetic (phase modulation or something on the bass osc? it sounds very *particular*).
it is a load of bollocks though..
he's _got_ to have a good idea of the worth of those albums. maybe cubist is the challenge he's wanted to record throughout.