head mutterings
by sirje niitepõld

when the matter of “the worst suede album” (or whatever grim way you want to put it) is discussed, the votes seem to be rather evenly split between head music and a new morning. there are those who think head music was fascinating and experimental in its coldness but a new morning was bland. then there are those who think head music was mindless and soulless (and pick “elephant man” and “she live in a house” as obvious proof) whereas a new morning saw suede coming back to their roots and doing an album of songs with the songs as the main point again. (we, who take the risk of sounding like blind fanatics and say we actually are fond of both albums, as well as those who say suede haven’t done anything half decent after bernard, haven’t got much to say in this discussion). the press, however, seem to me to have been unanimous since around the time a new morning came out. their consensus of opinion goes something like this: a new morning may be a bit better or a bit worse, but head music, now that was the worst album ever made, not only by suede but by pretty much anyone in pop.

the funny thing about that opinion is that everybody seems to have forgotten that when head music came out, it was actually widely praised as a masterpiece. 

steve sutherland, famous for thinking suede were the “best new band in britain” in 1992, decided in his melody maker review in may 1999 that suede then were the – ratata – “best band in britain”. head music, he thought, was “absoruddylutely marvelous”, the “quite probably best ‘proper’ album” by them and worth four and a half stars (same as dog man star, half a star more than coming up). melody maker later declared head music their album of the year. gig reviews were heartening, like one by robin bresnark (who later slagged a new morning off pretty much as badly as you can slag an album off) in november 1999, where he complains about a lack of chemistry, yet praises old and news songs alike, and gives the show a whole five stars.

nme gave the album 7 out of 10 possible points (a new morning got the same later). the reviewer, as most of the head music reviewers in fact, did write with a slight smirk on his face – especially when it comes to brett’s vocabulary and all that (and he naturally has to mention the house mouse line), but tried as he might have, he couldn’t dislike the album. it’s “hair-rising pop” after all.

magazines such as select, the face and uncut welcomed suede back with open arms, dedicating covers and dozens of pages to them. 

brett might have had one or two problems with the face a few years earlier, but edward harrison’s 1999 article (“sleaze! – what have suede been up to?) is written with an apparent understanding of what suede were about – thus also seeing the relevant factors of head music. a little funny is his statement that “finally, the rest of the world has caught up with suede. – they arrive in 1999 more loved and valued than ever, and more in tune with their times.” was it really their year to that extent? daft me who thought they’d been pretty popular and influential since a couple of years before. 

roy wilkinson’s story in select is almost as understanding, bringing up in several places how suede “stand as unchanging as granite” and how head music is “suede but more so”. wilkinson treats the songs he hears like they’re little babies: a tad silly, but what’s not to love about silly babies. (he also makes a comparison that i think is one of the most fitting attempts to describe the album, saying head music sounds like the result of prince having been forced to produce placebo. indeed!) head music gets to number 14 in select’s “albums of the year” chart. “a misunderstood masterpiece” it was called even then.

uncut’s tom sheehan salutes suede with an 18-page retrospective article. he starts the story from, well, from the very beginning, goes through the ups and downs and finishes the saga, agreeing that head music is “the album of their career”. he describes it with words such as – in fact, these are the six adjectives he uses – heady, euphoric, saucy, silly, classic, effortless. not bad. did suede get any coverage at all in uncut in the 21st century? not that i know of anyway.

as far as i can remember, q had no big cover story dedicated to suede. their dislike of anything post-butler had been long known already, but hey look! it’s a head music review by tom doyle and it includes the following final communiqué: “even if there might be a strong sense that suede will definitely have to return to the drawing board for their next record, in fear of dangerously stretching the point, head music is easily – almost effortlessly – their best and most wholly realised album to date.” like select’s wilkinson, doyle writes about the staticness of suede, about them taking the risk of becoming a ridiculous parody of themselves (an accusation often heard ever since head music) – but “against all odds -- it’s a gamble that pays off.” 4 stars. 

did i prove my point already? people liked suede a hell of a lot more in 1999 than they did in 2003. 

when you count together the press head music got and the promotion it got, and then the press a new morning didn’t get and the promotion it didn’t get, it’s not very difficult to see why the former sold (well at least something!) and the latter didn’t. they might not be perfect albums, but neither of them – oh stone me if you like, i won’t step back – neither of them is bad. they don’t deserve to be slagged off on a “gotta pan this eh? right let’s see…” basis. 

it’s not that i’m saying you aren’t allowed to change your opinions. i’m not even saying you’re not allowed to be illogical, because who cares about logic, especially in art. and believe it or not, i’m not saying you must like head music. what i’m saying is that the press are a flock of dogs, or is that sheep – or are they indeed stupid as mice? what suede were in 2003 wasn’t trendy. but you can’t say, “suede are shite, period.” you can say “suede are shite cos they wrote a shit line about mice”, though. it’s a very practical thing to say, too.

it’s just that it’s an inane thing to say, and with the power the press have in their hands, they should know and do better than that. all i’m asking for is a little bit of courage and a little bit of sincerity.

© 2004 suede fanzine.  All rights reserved.