Villa Blur

I know we're not quite there yet, but I've been thinking a bit about this recently. How does everyone feel now about the album with the passing of time? Still blown away? Maybe still underwhelmed? Perhaps your perspective or appreciation has altered over time?

My journey with the album, like all of us, started in a frenzy of excitement and I can well remember my first play and initial feelings. And I'll be honest. That first play, maybe if I recall wasn't a time I could be most attentive, but I didn't immediately feel ecstatic. I liked it, I just wasn't 100% grabbed. And that was that for the initial play. Then came my next play, in the car, on my own, no distractions. And wow. I still remember now grinning as I drove along and actually talking to myself / the band, congratulating them on these songs. 'This is bloody fantastic!' No, not insightful but it felt like pure joy.

I had by that point become pretty obsessed with the album and played it almost every day for, well, it must have been months. In those early days I had a sort of rule that I had to play the thing all the way through, no skipping, no hopping about. I just wanted to hear it as the whole each and every time.

I made a list a few weeks in to rate each song. Looking back now, this is what I had.

The Ballad - 10/10
St Charles Square - 10/10
Barbaric - 10/10
Russian Strings - 10/10
The Everglades - 9/10
The Narcissist - 9/10
Goodbye Albert - 10/10
Far Away Island - 8/10
Avalon - 10/10
The Heights - 8/10

The Rabbi - 4/10
The Swan - 7.5/10

Sticks and Stones - 7/10

That's right, I adore the album but the bonus tracks do little for me. I never listen them.

I still feel about the same about it now. I think the only things I would change might be to knock St Charles Square and Avalon down a mark to 9 and 8 respectively. I'd knock a point off The Swan and Sticks and Stones too. Just not on my radar. But still an absolute dream of an album to these ears.

It's the songs amongst those 'perfect 10s' that I find interesting and how they have changed in pecking order amongst themselves. For example, other than that first uncertain listen, Goodbye Albert always blew me away. But now, I would put it very near if not at the very top. I really think it's that good. The mood, the lyrics, Damon's delivery, the woozy atmosphere. It's the dark heart of the album, in the middle of the record, in the same way that 1992 was for 13.

If it proves to be the last record they ever make, that will be sad. But I like to think it's going to stand the test of time as classic Blur.

It's not a bad album but it's at the bottom of the discography for me. St. Charles Square, The Narcissist and Barbaric are the best tracks by far, the rest I can kind of take or leave.

Definitely the most Damon-centric Blur album and also the most melancholic/low key. On first listen it reminded me a lot of Damon's solo stuff.

I recall someone on the old forum saying that Blur don't make bad albums and I agree with that. To me, it's a "this is what Blur sound like in their fifties" kind of album. I haven't listened to much of Damon's solo stuff so can't really compare it.

I do hear the Damon solo album comparisons, I get it. But it feels like Graham is all over the tracks too, so every bit a Blur album to me.

And yes, a band in their fifties so the slightly world weary but not yet not resigned mood feels entirely natural. It happens that Damon’s solo albums often have a similar tone.

Absolutely, The Outsider! They don’t have a ‘bad’ album in their entire output. I think evidenced by the fact that when you ask fans to list their favourites you get such varied combinations of top to bottom listings. To me, Leisure is weakest which kind of makes sense as they were so young and finding their feet. But it’s certainly not bad. Loads of good tracks.

I still really like it. It feels more like a Blur album now, although I do only listen to a few tracks really.