First Listen (Finally!): Radiohead – In Rainbows


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.

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our newsletters

Subscribe and we'll send Mother Jones straight 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

Share your feedback: We’re planning to launch a new version of the comments section. Help us test it.