I don't get it.. in the same article Jim says if noel continued to write songs like; then he lists songs from a 13 yr old album, then he goes onto say they arnt original. and they are banging out the same stuff..

which one is it Jim?? do u want the same stuff over and over.. or do u want originality.. im confused?!?

anyone else think something similar?

Fucking hell people call Oasis lazy, but in every review, good or bad, all they bang on about is the Beatles' references and barely mention the music. Lazy journalism.

It's funny how Oasis get slammed for being inspired by their heroes isn't it?
When will people get in their thick sculls that it doesnt matter who wrote what or stole what, it's about if it sounds good or not. It's art for fucking out loud!

"Ooohh, he swipes his paintbrush like van Gogh, this must mean it's a horrible painting" what the fuck!?

I'm from Chicago. Just for the record, Jim DeRogatis has said in the past he...and I quote, "Hates Oasis". So to say this is a fair and balanced review of "Dig Out Your Soul" is not exactly true. How can a critic write an honest review about anything if he/she already has a predisposition to hate the artist? I wouldn't take anything he says as to be a fair critic review. It is just unfortunate that he has such a large audience for his biased critique.

One more note, Jim DeRogatis has a stiking resemblance to the "Comic Book Guy" from The Simpsons...just a fat, miserable, lonely human being who hates everything. Most likely he wrote this Oasis review from his studio apartment in Chicago while mumbling to himself..."Oh, lonliness and cheesburgers can be a dangereous mix"

Message to Jim DeRogatis - if you ever come across this post..which most likely you will since you probably have your fat ass parked in front of the computer 95% of the day (the other 5% is spent ordering food or masturbating)....we obviously all know you are not hanging out with friends, the opposite sex, or getting laid....you can go FUCK yourself

Sincerely - L4E Forum Community

This passes off as journalism? Sounds like he gathered a bunch of quotes from some forums and plastered them together.

I think I'm pretty fair with the post selection in the newsroom
. If it were pro Oasis articles only it wouldn't be have as fun and would not entice readers to partake in discussion

I didn't think it was possible, but i've discovered a music journalist who is worse than any tosser from Q Magazine.

Bends my mind...........

I've just sent the tosser an email.

Considering he is a so called music journalist of many years, i found his review to be shabby, unproffesional and misleading.

I will let you know if the tit replies.

wrote this:


Jim,

I recently read the review you wrote for "Dig Out Your Soul", the new Oasis album. I was left feeling that the review was lazy and therefor hypocritical. You seem to be of the opinion that Oasis are a 'lazy band', yet you use the exact phrasing as a number of the other reviewers who have criticized this album. You claim that Oasis are ripping off their influences and not showing creativity, yet your review shows many similar traits.

I feel like you begun this review with preconceived ideas about what you would hear in this album and that these preconceived notions caused your review to suffer from bias. You have obviously intentionally constructed this review in this way to achieve a desired result, one which it appears you had set upon even before your first listen.

When push comes to shove Jim, someone who is attempting to review an album should do so in the least biased way as to increase the reviewers credibility with the reader. You have not done this. I am also of the belief that if you are not willing to put yourself in the position to understand fully what any band/genre of music represents then you are not fit to review the album. As an example Jim; I have never been a man of the opera and therefor would feel unqualified to review a piece of operatic music, do you not think that this should be the case for you. Rock and Roll music is about having fun and not letting others opinions inhibit your lifestyle, I feel like a man in your position is unqualified to give a review on any music in this genre as you seem to have very little grasp on the ideals of rock and roll.

As someone who sits on the other side of the Oasis fence to you I feel that it is only fair that before finishing this letter that I give my thoughts on the album.

This is by far the best collection of songs Oasis have put together, it is not the usual hit single plus filler compilation that Oasis's have become more and more know for. In fact this album to me has no obvious singles and this is evident by the fact that the lead off single, The Shock of the Lightning, was not a huge success in the UK.

A large number of the songs are of a very high quality, in my opinion the first five songs on the album rank highly within the last decade of work by Oasis, all these songs have a driving effect on me and I find myself being drawn into the song. This very much excited me upon listening to the album as I have not felt this from many of Oasis's previous 3 albums and have not had this effect from many songs released this decade. The use of instruments other than guitars fascinates me and begins to show a more adventurous side of Oasis, who generally play it safe behind a wall of guitars and snarling vocals. The incorporation of more striking drum patterns has introduced a new element to the band as drums have never been an instrument of a huge priority in this band, I find that it adds to the album and helps connect the songs whilst also contributing to the 'driving effect' that i spoke about earlier. Liam, whose vocals have returned to a similar position to what they were in the late 90's, also contributes to this.

The album then concludes with a range of different sounding songs of both a rocking nature, such as The Nature of Reality, and slower more burning songs, like Soldier On. These final four songs are not what I have come to expect from Oasis. It is true that they are of a lesser quality than the opening seven songs but they also serve a purpose in relaxing and soothing the listener after the initial confrontational opening.

A fair amount of my review has been positive, it would be biased to leave the less inspired moments untouched. This album most definitely has some 'clunky' moments. Songs such as Get Off Your (High Horse Lady) and Ain't Got Nothin' felt me feeling as if the band has chosen these songs to fit the album, rather than selecting their best songs. This has contributed to the overall consistent feel but has detracted as well because of the noticeable holes they leave in the album.

I also find songs such as Gem Archer's To Be Where There's Life a tad uninspired. Even-though this song incorporates that guitar-less sound that i praised earlier it also seems to be lacking a clear and concise melody, something of which Oasis are renowned for. This has we beginning to doubt the inclusion of Archer's songs as I have yet to see him produce anything in the way of classic song writing.

Keeping all of this in mind I have given the album an overall rating of 7.5/10. This is because I, as everyone else, know Oasis can write better songs and can produce better music than this. But in Dig Out Your Soul they have still given us their most compelling effort in 13 years, leaving me with an expectation of greater things to come.


Jim would it be too much to ask that from now on when you attempt to review an album you try to establish some connection with the ideologies of that genre and write a review that shows a depth of knowledge, rather than one that displays blatant ignorance?

Yours Thankfully