Why is Tull's "A Passion Play" rated so low?

Hi,

It's a three star album in my book. Some fine moments, but as a whole rather incoherent to my ears. It was released in the middle of a decline with the masterpiece TaaB as the high and the disappointing Warchild as a low.

^I like DE's interesting explanation of the piece. I know little more of mystery plays than their existence, but the point is... I don't listen to music on an intellectual level, with the attitude of those pedantic self-declared art lovers who are used to frequent musea and talk pseudo-exalted poppycock about what they see... never did and never will. So here I prefer to take my due place among those consuming plebeians and stay in tune with my questionable level.

The Dark Elf wrote: For a rock album, it is actually quite well-researched and a brilliant modernized rendition of the Passion Plays (better referred to as Mystery Plays) of the late Middle-Ages/early Tudor epoch, when such "Morality Plays" would be seen in town streets and squares prior to the playhouses and actual dramas and comedies of Elizabethan England. Springing originally from Easter Pageants, where indeed the devil and the Resurrection were integral parts of "Passion Plays", the Mystery/Morality Plays expanded on the theme to include prostitutes, criminals and various other reprobates who eventually were "saved" by divine intervention.  It would be rude of me to say that perhaps the subject matter and presentation is well above a few folks' heads here, but it is what it is, even if you don't quite get it; yet as a Medievalist I have always found the album fascinating. Rather than a Renaissance Faire approximation of early music, Ian Anderson instead takes the actual bones of the original play concept and gives it a modern take, with modern, progressive music, rather than lute and tabor mimicry. Even the name "Ronnie Pilgrim" is a nod to early English narrative poetry featuring the "Everyman" as an allegorical character (such as Langland's The Vision of Piers Plowman), and his journey from death to rebirth is an ironic twist on the crucifixion and resurrection of the early Passion Plays. "The Hare That Lost It's Spectacles" rather than being misjudged as some bizarre oddity plopped in the mid-section of the album by modern critics is actually a fair representation of the Interlude, a break in the more serious play that often featured a humorous or absurd fable to keep the commoners and groundlings from drifting off from the heavier sermonizing. That A Passion Play ends not in the Lord's Resurrection but Ronnie Pilgrim's reincarnation is another ironic twist and a punch to the gut of the religiosity Ian Anderson loved to skewer. A splendid album, well worth a serious listen. Particularly if you take the whole in context and realize this release was far beyond the trite and rehashed hedonism of most rock albums in 1973.

Listen to side 2 of the remix. It’s a very solid 4.3 stars. Side 1 is pretty good at 4 stars. The 15 minutes of extras which aren’t on the Passion and Warchild albums is a pretty good 4+ stars. Not far off Thick which is 4.5 stars. Warchild would have been a 4.3 star album if it wasn’t a soundtrack. Several cool tunes on the double album remix. As I’ve said countless times Tull are the best going around. The remixes prove they should have made a great album every year of the 70s apart from sh*te Minstrel lol. Even Too old could have been cool. Warchild and Too old weren’t cool because they were soundtracks. Otherwise we would have heard more of Tulls new gems on those . Aqualung, Thick, Passion, Warchild, Songs, Horses, Stormwatch remix sets are stunners. Warchild has gone from an average pop album to a proggy triple album of goodness. When you have more quality surroundings you really appreciate a song such as Bungle more. But Sealion and Two fingers are a bit crap

Edited by dr prog - October 05 2019 at 15:22

I prefer it by a tuppin to TAAB.  I like the stark darkness.  The puns and humor.  The soprano and sopranino sax.  The ebb, flow, and intensity.  Yeah, I like PP a lot!  

It's OK 

moshkito wrote: PP is only rated low by those that won't make the effort to find out what the whole thing is about ... plain and simple!

I’ve always felt it was way more enjoyable than Thick as a Brick. So I’m puzzled by its general reputation too.

chopper wrote: moshkito wrote: PP is only rated low by those that won't make the effort to find out what the whole thing is about ... plain and simple!   I'm quite sure it's possible for someone to fully understand the background to the album and still not like the music. It might give you a better understanding about the concept as a whole but that doesn't mean your opinion of the music will necessarily change.