One of the most positive pieces of feedback you can give a band is that they dared to change. That they had the nous and willing to take apart what they had already built and put the parts back in a different order or added brand new parts entirely. That they took their machine and modified it to adapt to new fields and circumstances. However, the resulting finished product isn’t always a good thing. We have to accept that all musicians (with the exception of David Bowie) are human and thus are affected by things happening in their personal lives and these changes affect their musical output, resulting in us the ever loyal fanbase to effectively take it or leave it.
The thing with UK indie band Editors is that they have changed their sound with EVERY subsequent album. They’ve reinvented themselves as a brand new band with each release, which has its pros and its cons. While the purists will scorn that the constant displacement leaves the Editors’ fanbase sometimes clutching at straws, many will also celebrate the band’s artistic viewpoint that every album is a blank canvas and an opportunity to create something new. Editors’ fifth album In Dream is a projection of said notion and it is perhaps the band’s most daring change to date.
For those such as myself that have followed the Staffordshire band from its roots, we’ve come to accept that the days of tracks such as “Bullets” and “Munich” are long gone. In fact, we must count ourselves fortunate that the band still plays these songs live. Their musical end products of late sound less and less like the brilliant debut album The Back Room and have started leaning towards a more electronic, synth based persuasion.
In Dream when viewed from a distance is ten tracks featuring an equal amount of haunting disposition. Attempting to pick each track apart individually is a fruitless venture into trying to salvage anything at all that sounds familiar. In fact, without vocalist Tom Smith’s recognisable baritone singing style, this wouldn’t sound like an Editors album at all. Opening track “No Harm” swirls its way into a dark depression-filled room where the only light is filtered in by Smith’s occasional falsetto delivery. “I’m a go getter” repeats Smith, sounding like the least go-getter-sounding person you’d ever heard. Track two, I thought to myself, this would be the one to add some meat to this album’s bones. I was kind of right. Track two is “Ocean Of Night” which begins with a jaunty piano melody and Smith’s poetic drawl, this song really did threaten to break out of the stupor afflicted by the opening track. But just when you thought it would start a fire, the flame would be snuffed out almost instantly. It all results in a frustrating exchange of grabbing on to something positive only to open your hand and find that its gone.
“Forgiveness” has echoes of previous album, 2013’s The Weight Of Your Love and so that’s definitely something worth clinging onto. I personally enjoyed that album despite it’s complete division of reception from critics. One of my most recent times seeing Editors live was at a festival in Spain. I remember sitting on a grassy embankment facing the main stage during their set, full to the brim with Sangria, with the afternoon sun bearing down on me and having an absolute blast. Songs such as “A Ton of Love” and “Sugar” from that album sounded good live because despite the album’s almost complete upheaval of the accustomed Editors ‘sound’, the songs still featured a guitar in some form, which brings me to one of my biggest gripes with In Dream.
I’m quite aware of the band’s ear for a ballad, there’s been plenty in Editors’ back catalogue so far. But there is a time and a place for them and an album comprised of 90% ballads is just a step too far for me. An album featuring seemingly no guitars whatsoever automatically leaves you feeling a little isolated, especially since Editors prized themselves so successfully as an indie rock band in their early stages. The Weight Of Your Love was saved by it’s slower songs still featuring guitars. My point being that band’s still need to have a familiar core sound for its fanbase to fall back on. Something recognisable that brings you back to them in the first place. You wouldn’t tell the DJ at your daughter’s 5th birthday party to play nothing but Nine Inch Nails after all. This factors results in In Dream having to be reviewed purely as a standalone release with no other dots to connect it to. Despite it being ten tracks its still a lot to take in, with only one song being less than four minutes long. Each song just sort of blends into the next, making this an almost anti-Spotify release. The Millennials will hate it. How dare there be an album that I have to listen to all the way through!?
For me, In Dream isn’t a step in the right direction for constantly shapeshifting band. I’ve liked Editors for a long time and I’ve come to begrudgingly accept the different phases of the band. A lot of the time you find yourself saying to people you really liked the album four era of Editors, for them to respond with they much prefer the era album two. This makes Editors seem very incomplete as a band and you long for them to finally figure out what they want to be. In Dream is just an okay album, which is a damn shame because it could have and should have been brilliant.
Rating: 2.5/5