Kalle Posted April 26, 2009 Share Posted April 26, 2009 So if the album is going to be self titled I think we should come up with a consensus acronym for it. Now we can't use ST as that is obviously for Summerteeth, WTA? for Wilco the album? if we started calling it just Wilco that will just cause mass confusion! WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO? Via Chicago is based upon acronyms! I remember first coming here and getting utterly confused by all the three letter short forms! We must keep up with this long tradition of lazy typing! Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted April 26, 2009 Share Posted April 26, 2009 I really hope it isn't titled 'Wilco' - if an album is self-titled and it's not your debut album, it's pretentious.I think that normally I would agree with this, but I'm not so sure I would in this case. Jeff has made comments in recent years about how highly he values the current lineup of the band, and I get the impression that, perhaps for the first time, it really feels like the band he wanted to be in. If this is true, and if the rest of the guys are on the same page, then calling this album Wilco could merely be a statement that now, after all the lineup changes and everything else that's happened, they're finally comfortable being Wilco. That said, I am hoping for a different title, but if they do go the self-titled route, I won't mind. Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted April 26, 2009 Share Posted April 26, 2009 ...perhaps for the first time, it really feels like the band he wanted to be in. If this is true, and if the rest of the guys are on the same page, then calling this album Wilco could merely be a statement that now, after all the lineup changes and everything else that's happened, they're finally comfortable being Wilco. See, and I think the above could come under "pretentious" in the dictionary. Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted April 26, 2009 Share Posted April 26, 2009 I think we have somewhat different ideas of what "pretentious" actually means. Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted April 26, 2009 Share Posted April 26, 2009 Maybe - but the idea that Jeff finally feels like he's in a band called Wilco makes me nauseous. Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted April 26, 2009 Share Posted April 26, 2009 Well, I'm speculating. So attribute that idea to me, not him. Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted April 26, 2009 Share Posted April 26, 2009 Fuck this shit, lemme buy you a drink. Link to post Share on other sites
Beltmann Posted April 26, 2009 Share Posted April 26, 2009 I'd like to buy you both a drink. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Hollinger. Posted April 26, 2009 Share Posted April 26, 2009 I'd like one of you to buy me a drink. Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted April 26, 2009 Share Posted April 26, 2009 I could certainly use a drink. I'm at work on a beautiful Sunday afternoon. OK, so would it be better in any way if they name the album Wilco VII? Link to post Share on other sites
H.Stone Posted April 26, 2009 Share Posted April 26, 2009 Did someone mention drinking? Link to post Share on other sites
random painted highway Posted April 26, 2009 Share Posted April 26, 2009 If they're going to do a self-title, I hope this means that either a ) they've changed their name to 'Crush The Cities'b ) there's a picture of cities being crushed for the cover, so it can be called the "crush the cities lp". Link to post Share on other sites
explodo Posted April 26, 2009 Share Posted April 26, 2009 If they're going to do a self-title, I hope this means that either a ) they've changed their name to 'Crush The Cities'b ) there's a picture of cities being crushed for the cover, so it can be called the "crush the cities lp".I think it's going to be called "Random People Bundled Up in Milwaukee with Dogs: The Album" Link to post Share on other sites
jc4prez Posted April 26, 2009 Share Posted April 26, 2009 I really hope it isn't titled 'Wilco' - if an album is self-titled and it's not your debut album, it's pretentious. even The Beatles- The Beatles? Link to post Share on other sites
jmacomber68w Posted April 26, 2009 Share Posted April 26, 2009 Fuck this shit, lemme buy you a drink. now THATS an album title!!!!! Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted April 26, 2009 Share Posted April 26, 2009 even The Beatles- The Beatles? You got me there. Link to post Share on other sites
radiokills Posted April 26, 2009 Share Posted April 26, 2009 I suppose every band has to do it, but I have never liked it. Link to post Share on other sites
Preferred B Posted April 26, 2009 Share Posted April 26, 2009 I've always been a namer of things. Fisher Price Little People, Barbies, Christmas ornaments, my TI-85, our family cars. Coming from that perspective, it's hard for me to understand passing up the chance to uniquely name something that actually needs a title. Thinking about this as the conscious decision it clearly was, though, it's pretty interesting. Especially as a band's seventh album. Reports indicate John mentioned that it fits in with the album artwork, but it's not like album artwork just appears out of nowhere and dictates an album title. It's a pretty bold statement, if you ask me, and it speaks to the band's opinion of this record. Link to post Share on other sites
Sparky speaks Posted April 26, 2009 Share Posted April 26, 2009 Is it really all that important now a days what an album is called? Many people will be downloading it from amazon or wherever and never actually hold the album in their hands, except most of us who post here probably. Outside of having a name to allow it being identified in sales charts and being nominated for a Grammy, the whole concept of albums is changing from the decline of the CD to the decline of record stores. They could call it Wilco's next release for all I care. We'll probably refer to it as the "camel album" if that camel is on the cover that they photographed last week in Milwaukee. I still like the concept of the White Album. Don't name it and let the audience come up with his own title. Link to post Share on other sites
SarahC Posted April 26, 2009 Share Posted April 26, 2009 i kid you not, on the way into work this moring i thought "i wonder if the new wilco record is going to be slef-titled" and then i read in the after the show thread from jazz fest it is indeed going to be self-titled! whoa! Link to post Share on other sites
RainDogToo Posted April 26, 2009 Share Posted April 26, 2009 I've been thinking about this all day today... what does self-titled actually or usually mean? Does it mean the album will just be called "Wilco"or could there be something else attached to it? To me, it just doesn't seem right to simply call it "Wilco." Just seems odd- Wilco: Wilco... Link to post Share on other sites
ben Posted April 26, 2009 Share Posted April 26, 2009 I love the trifecta. Band song and album all in one called Wilco. They are now amongst the ranks of Black Sabbath and Bad Company. Link to post Share on other sites
bleedorange Posted April 26, 2009 Share Posted April 26, 2009 I think they decided to go with a self-titled album so that they could come on here and read all of the hand-wringing posts they expected would materialize. Good thing a lot of posters didn't disappoint. Link to post Share on other sites
Jay Sutton Posted April 26, 2009 Share Posted April 26, 2009 I love the trifecta. Band song and album all in one called Wilco. They are now amongst the ranks of Black Sabbath and Bad Company. "Iron Maiden" by Iron Maiden off of Iron Maiden or "Mot Link to post Share on other sites
chooch Posted April 26, 2009 Share Posted April 26, 2009 "Iron Maiden" by Iron Maiden off of Iron Maiden or "Mot Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts