The first reviews of Duran’s new album are coming out. Some of the reviews are professional ones done by actual music critics and many are like our review of the single in that they are done by fans. Besides the reviews, the fans are discussing the new music to death, including the whole album, which some have apparently gotten a hold of (which is a topic for another blog entirely). Part of every review, every comment about the new music is constant references to Duran’s history. Many of these statements are directly comparing one song to another in Duran’s extensive collection and usually go something like this, “The Man Who Stole a Leopard reminds me of the Chauffeur”. Other statements bring up former band members, especially Andy and Warren with questions about what they think of the new material or what would the new material sound like if they were playing guitar for it. Obviously, Duran cannot escape their history, musically and otherwise. No band who has been around for 30 years can. Yet, this history must be such a blessing, at times, and a curse, at others.
One thing that I always hear when I go on tour by non-fans is the question about why I have to go to so many shows as the assumption is that all of the shows are the same. I try to explain to these not-mean-spirited but clueless people is that no show is the same, if for no other reason but the setlists can change. Yes, yes, we all know that Duran tends to play a LOT of the same songs on tour but there is always a chance to hear a song that isn’t played often. For example, I loved hearing Election Day live in the summer of 2009. Duran’s amazingly full catalog always allows them to be able to pick and choose, at any point, to change the setlist. Their long-lasting career has given them many chances for success, both commercially and critically, and they have experienced a lot of both. Of course, they have also experienced a lot of negatives as well. This has given them the chance to grow as people and as a band. While I’m sure that they never like going through management or personnel changes, for example, I’m sure that they have learned something each time, which has given them an opportunity to be stronger for it.
Of course, their long history also must create a tremendous burden for them. At one point in their careers, they were the biggest band in the world by having number one hits, selling out stadiums, having platinum records and gaining a very large and intense fanbase. Every new song, every new album gets compared with their past work and it is very common for them to be compared to what is deemed as their most popular and/or most successful work. Is it ever possible to really met those expectations? Most Duranies and most of the media agree that Duran’s best work was the first two or three albums with a few standout moments later on in their careers. Was it easier to create gems then? After all, they didn’t have all of those expectations put upon them? They didn’t have anything to prove except that they could be a success. Now, they are forced to prove that they are still good, still worthy. It must be easier to have that one big hit rather than have the 25th hit, for example. When they first started at, they didn’t have as many fans who had to like what they did as they were still working on gaining fans. Now, there is a chance to disappoint a ton of people.
I plan on keeping this awesome responsibility that they have in my head as I continue to read reviews and reactions of the new music. I know that I, too, have expectations for them. Yet, I want to always remain understanding in how difficult it must be to measure up to past successes. Now, that doesn’t mean that I won’t say that something isn’t good if I think that something isn’t good but I hope to do it from an understanding perspective.
-A
