Regarding Amy

Amy Winehouse died last week at 27 from an apparent overdose. Cause of death hasn't been confirmed, but the toxicology report did find every drug you can name and then some, as well as 23 different brands of paint thinner, in her blood. While death is sad and few will argue that her 2006 album Back to Black isn't a very good one, everyone is suddenly a huge fan and the album is being canonized as a timeless masterpiece. RIP, but the hyperbole machine is just a bit out of control.

Any death is sad, especially when a person is young. Add a bunch of wasted or unrealized talent, and it becomes more sad. There's a certain mysticism for recording artists, actors, athletes, writers and entertainers, because their work - typically considered a manifestation of the person, however misguided - is something we consume in a way that brings them into our lives and causes many people to feel some kind of personal connection. I get that, especially with music, because so much of it is so personal and while we don't actually know the artist, the artist is sharing some piece of him or herself through the work. How much varies by artist, but with rare exception how much is something we'll never know. I once saw Bruce Springsteen asked in a Q&A audience session, "As personal as your music is, do we know the real you through your songs?" The Boss' answer? "No. Not even close."

I will agree that Back to Black is a magnificent record, one I listened to quite a few times in 2007. It was a common soundtrack to my domestic engineering that year. I find it hard, though, to reconcile its absence from the top-end of many prominent and taste-making annual Best Of lists from 2007, and its incredibly enhanced post-mortem treatment. It's a very good album, sure, but certainly not the genre and generation-defining classic so many are making it to be in the shadow of the artist's untimely death. True, some albums age and grow better than others, and many of the all-time classic albums were not necessarily the biggest chart-toppers in their years of release. But for a record that's barely four and a half years old... while some of the music rags ranked it high in '06 and '07, many didn't (released in December '06, BtB registers in either year depending on who's defining the cut-off date, so I looked up the lists from both years). Rolling Stone had it at #40. The Guardian UK had it at 5, Mojo at 7 (they've always loved her at home). The Village Voice, 4. Pitchfork did not have it in their Top 50. Spin, 7. Chicago Tribune, not in the Top 20. Billboard, 24. Amazon editors, not in the Top 24. A popular record indeed, but not quite considered a galvanizing masterpiece in its day, contrary to what recent public discussion may suggest. A handful of albums those two years were staples in virtually every Top Ten list, and this wasn't one of them. Not that it isn't a really good album. It is. Alas, hyperbole abounds in death.

It's sad when anyone dies at a young age, even if we can't be surprised given the style and fashion with which Amy Winehouse lived her final four years. But as for our treatment of Back To Black, is it possible that too many people are making it out to be a Sgt. Pepper or a Pet Sounds when it's more like a Synchronicity or an Exile In Guyville?