data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f12f7/f12f7bdfb57ca71e9011497f5668ab164734f927" alt=""
Take, for instance, the heartbreaking evocation of somebody's England, 'The Last Living Rose'. 'Goddamn Europeans!' spits the singer to start off, completely unconvincingly on any level; 'Take me back to beautiful England' - an England whose 'beauty' is described in images of rain, rot, and waste. What is being condemned and what approved here? If anything, it's about the impossibility of love, the longing for home and distress at what home has become; or, perhaps instead of distress, we should read perverse, defiant endorsement. Everything is ambiguity. The much-discussed war-inspired pieces, even those that seem to relate to Afghanistan, are so decontextualised, so reduced to an experience, a feeling, that it's impossible to know where we are treading exactly. Each snippet of emotion is made simultaneously tiny and universal. It is nothing else than PJ Harvey has always done, though the keynote here is distance, reflection, rather than visceral immediacy. She uses again the high, thin voice she first showcased on White Chalk, and plays her usual games with instruments she doesn't really know very well: her description of herself as an artist rather than a musician is very accurate (just as well she can attract such proficient musicians to work with her). Both these serve to distance the emotion from the expression. Yet what pictures she manages to paint. Let England Shake is a series of drownings, losses, seen through veils of mist. Like the Dorset coast.
She is immensely talented and poetic. Hence, incomprehensible and nuanced.
ReplyDelete