A knowledgeable reader sets the editors straight on the question of Toto’s suckiness.
[The editors here at the Good Men Project Magazine are open-minded folk. We’re willing to entertain the possibility that, from time to time, we might get it wrong. In this case, “it” was insisting that “Toto sucks,” and that we’d dismiss the thoughts of anyone who disagreed. Well, here it is: we were wrong. Not to mention woefully uninformed. Their hit album, Toto IV, is schmaltzy. It’s the kind of music you hear when you’re at the dentist, staring at the ceiling, with a couple of complete strangers’ latex-gloved hands wrist-deep in your gaping mouth. But that doesn’t mean Toto sucks; it may just be a bad association with Mr. Thirsty. Anyway, Toto was the backing band on Michael Jackson’s Thriller and Steely Dan’s Aja, and on that basis, we hereby retract our previous statements on the subject. And we’d like to give equal time to someone who clearly knows a hell of a lot more about music than we do.]
♦♦♦
It’s hard to know exactly where to start with your recent post, “Steve Almond’s Dissection Of Toto.” There’s so much to disagree with regarding both the editors’ introduction and the video, but let me try: with all due respect, you don’t know what the hell you’re talking about. Your ignorance about Toto, and pop music in general, is laughable.
Maybe laughable isn’t quite the right word, since, as a Good Men Project Magazine reader, life-long musician, and voracious rock fan, my first reaction wasn’t laughter. There was some head shaking, accompanied by a mixture of sadness and disgust. Toto sucks? Please. Pull your head out of you-know-where.
To dismiss anything that a Toto fan has to say about music and pop culture is ridiculously ironic considering they were one of the top session bands of the late 1970s and early 1980s. Pull out your old copy of Steely Dan’s Katy Lied or Aja—hands down one of the best pop albums of all time—or Boz Scaggs’ Silk Degrees. Guess who’s on the back—it’s not the Guess Who—it’s Toto. They did a ton of session work on those classics. And if you aren’t familiar with those, they were also Michael Jackson’s backup band on—wait for it—Thriller.
Thriller!
Yes, Toto was the session band on what may be one of the most pivotal albums in all of pop music, one that’s sold around a hundred million copies. But we should dismiss anything a fan of their work has to say about pop culture, right?
Let me lay to rest the confusion upon which the Toto post was based. Toto IV—the album the band released in 1982—is the one folks who consider themselves music hipsters can’t stand. It was the band’s last shot at making a name for themselves on the charts after a string of very unsuccessful albums. The album spawned four huge singles. It was their most successful release and—like it or not—is now the only thing anyone remembers by them. Or, I should say, it’s the only thing that casual music fans and hipster posers remember about them. Real music fans know better.
Which makes Steve Almond’s “breakdown” that much more infuriating. I’ve watched it four times and I can’t figure out if he’s actually trying to make a point. The whole thing strikes me as pretty cheap way to get laughs, like treating die-hard liberals to a highlight reel of George W. Bush mangling the English language. Sure it works, but it’s so easy, is it even really worth it? The audience is laughing before Steve even opens his mouth.
Is “Africa” good? No? It may be “complicated,” as Steve says, but it’s not Toto’s fault. Duke Ellington’s death was in there somewhere at the beginning, and then Almond deteriorates into a stream of consciousness rant about the lyrics, the band, and some other things that I lost interest in after about the five-minute mark. I think his point is that the lyrics don’t make sense. But as a rock critic, Steve ought to know that few pop songs make much sense. And plenty of really great ones make no sense at all.
Sure, “Africa” is dated pop music. I can’t argue with that. However, I can think of plenty of other music that came out of that era that is far, far worse than Toto IV.
—Matt Frawley
Recommended Websites…
[…]below you’ll find the link to some sites that we think you should visit[…]…
Toto® obviously doesn’t suck when showcasing their finer talents; i.e., that of backup band to the stars. Where they get into trouble is when they A) write their own lyrics, and B) sing them out loud. The melodic line attatched to the lyrics is an integral part of their musicality, but couldn’t they just hum?
As a lifelong Toto fan and having seen them play Hammersmith Apollo a few weeks ago to a sell out audience i thank you from the bottom of my heart Matt Frawley! When i first saw the post and saw the completely humorless and disrespectful video i almost threw my laptop against the wall in anger! Theres not more i can really add as you have perfectly summed up the very ridiculous article and so called ” Rock critic’s” banal and drivellous video. Nothing new though as the great Jeff Porcaro once said instead of retaliating to the critics he… Read more »