david k frampton

I always distrust common consensus. Especially when it comes from the critics. Metallica and Lou Reed’s album Lulu has been absolutely panned from everyone from the Gaurdian to Pitchfork to The Quietus. It has been dubbed ‘the worst album ever made’ in some quarters. At this point I’d like us to recall that Lou Reed is no stranger to courting controversy. Berlin and Metal Machine Music were both slated at the time but now are seen for their own reasons as very significant pieces of work if not masterpieces. However it’s all very well looking at Lou Reed’s 70’s output, but really ‘Lulu’ belongs to a continium starting with the collaboration with John Cale ‘Songs For Drella’ through ‘Magic and Loss’, 2000’s ‘Ectascy’ and 2003’s the ‘Raven’. A continuum of sombre, conceptual works that don’t make a lot of sense if you’re looking for the thrills of ‘Transformer’ or ‘Rock n Roll Heart’ but fashion within themselves a unique  universe containing song, spoken word, sound art and the release of straight up rock music. ‘Lulu’ is perhaps the fullest realisation of that dream yet, and I can understand why Lou refers to it as his best work. Each element that has been tugging within his albums since ‘Songs For Drella’ are now allowed full space, a space that Metallica know how to fill. With ‘Lulu’ Lou Reed has managed to elicit from Metallica some of their most abstracted material, but also some of their most intense. I know 3 Metallica albums..so I’ll stop there, but what I think Lou Reed has successfully done is bring their teutonic metal out of context and chewed it up with poetry and epic collages involving orchestra, electric guitars and Lars Ulrich constantly questing drums.
I think people have reacted against it because it’s not an easy pill to swallow. And I don’t mean to patronise. But this album is unquestionably Marmite. Don’t let a few influential haters put you off.