http://www.oregonlive.com/music/oregonian/...coll=7#continue

Since I'm both a huge The National-fan and Springsteen-fan, it's always a thrill for me to see them both mentioned at the same time. Thank you for sharing!

humm..

i kind of don't see it.

i really like 3 or 4 springsteen albums... the river (some of it), the ghost of tom joad, some one off tracks scattered here and there where he takes up that rockabilly role and sings about cars (for me his best songs)...

and nebraska is one of my favourite records of all time, to this day i still record to a tascam 244 cause that old thing was recorded on a 144. but i digress.

but having all national albums, i really don't see it, especially not in the horrible arrangements the E Street band always manages to push into records, though i'dd guess that has more to do with the producer that's been with him for most of his career...

where does the springsteen thing comes from? the story telling? the voice?

i think the national has a lot more to do with, for instance, my favourite band, the red house painters, than it does with springsteen or even morrissey or something, but..i dunno..

i'dd like know what springs the springsteen comparisons..

I don't see it either - I have never enjoyed Springsteen's music. The National really defy comparison, in my opinion.

listen to nebraska

Certainly The National have said in interviews that they are fans of Springsteen. I get a sense of joyousness in life, hope through the bad times kind of thing from both Springsteen and The National, although I don't really think they sound alike, not in the way that, say, Arcade Fire sound like Springsteen. (By the way, I love Red House Painters too, but I also don't think The National sound like them - I'd be curious to hear more about where you hear similarities.)

And, hey, the National have some great songs that are set in cars!

hehe...set in cars but not in the 60s with a buick the size of a house...

listen to the ending of the cardinal song...that ending part where he goes "jesus christ you have confused me...", the instrumentation makes me think of every red house painter song ending before ocean beach.

i really think they pick up bits and pieces of the painters early stuff, especially arrangement wise. guitar flourishes, keys, etc. especially the rollercoaster album...but i hear stuff in their songs that pretty much sums all the painters albums up until ocean beach.

but i totally agree with you on the vibe you get from both the national and springsteen. although i'm glad the national ain't exactly singing about death row convicts with sort of a human side to them

OK, I see what you mean.
Maybe that will be on the next album!

The only similarity I can see is that both (Bruce and Matt) have kind of monotonus melodies when they sing, but the melodies are still not that alike.

It's tough to compare a band who has been around for 8 years compared to a artist who has been around for 35. Bruce has much more commercial and critical success than The National. It's tough comparing what some would call an "arena" or "dinosaur" act to a band that is just dipping their toes into the arena world of performing.

One of Bryce's interviews after The Nebraska Project notes that when he was talking to Springsteen, Bruce mentioned something about them reaching people in the back of the large halls that becomes a tough thing. Bryce said that he didn't know how that would apply to them. Oddly enough and not that long after he said that, they'll be opening for R.E.M., have to face just such a problem. That's a problem I think they can handle. Some critics, I can already imagine their disdain. Boo! But, I digress.

At this same point in his career (a fourth album), Springsteen already released Born to Run, considered one of the greatest rock albums of all time, and he was working on Darkness on the Edge of Town. Not to say that The National aren't great, they certainly are. It's just different. The music business itself is different as well. Eight years into his career, Bruce was already touring behind The River. his third album to reach the top 5. Back to the music itself.

I think the comparisons or name-checks come from the fact that journalists would have to rely too hard on their audience to get more obscure and more correct comparisons. It's easy to compare them as journalists did when everyone was the new Dylan. It smacks of laziness to me.

I think the comparisons can come in themes of alienation, insecurity, and faith. Springsteen has always been a storyteller. The National are the same. They're telling stories against a "rock" music background. Springsteen's always talked about having a connection with his album buying audience or his concert-going audience.

Arcade Fire comparison? Maybe it's best to quote Springsteen himself:

"I want people to look onstage and see themselves. That idea of the band as a representative community -- all the bands I like have some element of that."

I've been a Springsteen fan since 1976. I haven't felt the connection I feel with Springsteen until I discovered The National. There's an undeniable charisma in Matt that I've seen in Springsteen the some 15 times I've seen him.

I guess what I'm saying that any comparison is futile. I enjoy the music. That's good enough for me.

The most intelligent thing posted in this thread. . . . by miles.

This is absolutely true. That said, I do think that Alligator is every bit as vital as Born To Run.

Maybe even in this forum!

exactly, storytelling can be used to describe most songwriters..

i really think a springsteen comparison is even less pertinent than say a red house painter one, or even a very far fetched nick drake one over a song like racing like a pro..

when i hear someone comparing the national to springsteen..for me it's like when ppl compared mark kozelek to van morrison..i just don't get it, other than a relationship over common stuff that's equally common in other good songwriters.

A lot of The National/Springsteen connection for me stems from Bruce going on record saying he's a big fan of the band. As far as the sound of the two bands - apples and oranges. Claiming they are both "storytellers" does not make them or their music similar. I love them both, but they're very different animals.