First Listen (Finally!): Radiohead – In Rainbows

Get your news from a source that’s not owned and controlled by oligarchs. Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily.


mojo-photo-inrainbowscover.jpgOkay, after much ado, your intrepid reporter with the silly DJ name was able to download the new Radiohead album In Rainbows (for which I paid £5), and my first reaction is it’s worth the trouble. The title at first put me off a little; its girlish cutesiness (will the next CD be called With Unicorns?) seemed to combine with the whole “almost-free mp3” thing to give the album an air of disposability. Was it all going to sound like homemade blog-house?

Perhaps this image was intended as contrast, since the music itself is more organic and, well, rock than the band has been in a while, a 180-degree turn from Kid A, the band’s most electronic release. Even “All I Need,” which nods to downtempo experimenters Boards of Canada in its synth-y bassline, turns out to be almost a traditional love song, with live-sounding drums and piano as well as a soulful side to Thom Yorke’s vocals we haven’t really heard before. “Soulful” is, in fact, the operative word here; there’s the Motown-style reverb and falsetto crooning on “Reckoner,” and the Beck-like acoustic number “Faust Arp.”

Not that it’s anything but Radiohead. I’ve always said the band sounds like they’re making music to be sent into space as an artifact of a dying-off human race, and the usual bleak majesty and immense mournfulness haven’t gone anywhere. But when the three-chord pattern from Paul McCartney & Wings’ “Silly Love Songs” pops up, you know this isn’t “Idioteque.” It may even grab some new fans who found the band’s screaming intensity rattling: play your anti-Radiohead friends “House of Cards,” a sweet, quiet ballad, with Yorke singing, plainly: “I don’t wanna be your friend/I just wanna be your lover.” Fine, let’s put on In Rainbows and make out.

ONLY HOURS LEFT—AND EVERYTHING RIDING ON IT

A full one-third of our annual fundraising comes in this month alone. That’s risky, because a strong December means our newsroom is on the beat and reporting at full strength—but a weak one means budget cuts and hard choices ahead.

With just hours left, we need a huge surge in reader support to get to our $400,000 year-end goal. Whether you've given before or this is your first time, your contribution right now matters. All gifts are 3X matched and tax-deductible.

Managing an independent, nonprofit newsroom is staggeringly hard. There’s no cushion in our budget—no backup revenue, no corporate safety net. We can’t afford to fall short, and we can’t rely on corporations or deep-pocketed interests to fund the fierce, investigative journalism Mother Jones exists to do. That’s why we need you right now. Please chip in to help close the gap.

ONLY HOURS LEFT—AND EVERYTHING RIDING ON IT

A full one-third of our annual fundraising comes in this month alone. That’s risky, because a strong December means our newsroom is on the beat and reporting at full strength—but a weak one means budget cuts and hard choices ahead.

With just hours left, we need a huge surge in reader support to get to our $400,000 year-end goal. Whether you've given before or this is your first time, your contribution right now matters. All gifts are 3X matched and tax-deductible.

Managing an independent, nonprofit newsroom is staggeringly hard. There’s no cushion in our budget—no backup revenue, no corporate safety net. We can’t afford to fall short, and we can’t rely on corporations or deep-pocketed interests to fund the fierce, investigative journalism Mother Jones exists to do. That’s why we need you right now. Please chip in to help close the gap.

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate