the first half of the song 'Suns of Temper' cannot be conceived of anything less than having a purpose, and thus existing for that. in this respect, it gains a life which most music fails to have, for what is music's purpose? this half of this song is there to provide a space for the second half, which would not work if it came out of nowhere. it lays the red carpet, it clears the air. for this reason it has a purpose within music unshared with other pieces; it relates directly to its 2nd half in an explicit way which whole pieces fail to do themselves; indeed, throughout an album only a continuity of mood is shared usually. thus, where the first half serves the 2nd half, realising its efficacy, doing the manual labour, the 2nd half, of which the importance is assumed to be centralised, lacks any purpose beyond the abstract purpose of music.
so, when this half of the song finally fades away, leaving a lingering tension and an uneasy space where the mess has been removed, the full impact of the 2nd half can be felt, which enters like a huge monster happy that you didn't predict his entrance. but the severe depth of this part is compromised within itself, albeit not as a fault but a necessity. that is to say, it is as if the clarity of its force should not be truly exhibited, for it is a cliché threatening to happen. the layers of noise prohibit the cliché from emerging. that is its necessary compromise.
here we are reminded of the irony which flows through the album, made obvious by a glance towards the 1950's American (assumedly) suburbanites on the record sleeve. but of course in the digital age music (potentially) has no image, so the irony may never be known. we are further reminded of Barthes' proclamation of the Death of the Author, which makes itself relevant once again. it is in its destination, not its origin, where we can ascribe meaning. let us not assume. we can receive the changing quirks of the album, the clichés and disruptions to form as a playful appropriation and reinvention of standards. or we may see these as serious musical gestures. and is either one wrong? Barthes would say no, for intention is secondary to reception, and the resulting opinion validates itself. Clark is thus offering us a wealth of material to consider, occupying some space outside the judgements of cool and uncool. keep your dubstep, i've got irony-core.
