Talk:Sufjan Stevens/Archive 1

Sparse?

Is Sufjan's music really sparse? Some of his songs are packed with so many vocals and instruments at once, I'd hardly say that's sparse.--Ben moss 22:12, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

Illinois or Come On! Feel The Illinoise!

I think there's conflict over whether the new album is Illinois or Come On! Feel The Illinoise!. I've seen both in various places, until I see something official, why don't we just leave it at Come On! Feel The Illinoise! since that's what's up here now.--Ben moss 17:12, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

I agree, especially since the last state album was more than just Michigan, and I have a feeling some of the places calling it Illinois may be doing so just based on the knowledge that it's about Illinois. Euphoria 18:51, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

His record label, Asthmatic Kitty Records, sells the album as "Illinois" (http://www.asthmatickitty.com/music.php?releaseID=16), though the cover art has a graphic design with text that reads "Come on feel the Illinoise". Since his label refers to the album as Illinois, though, the title has been changed to reflect this official title. --jackohare 22:37, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't know who changed it, but I'm changing it back. If you've seen the album cover, you know it's Come on! Feel the Illinoise! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeus (talk • contribs) 03:29, 20 June 2005

I changed "Greetings from Michigan" to "Michigan" and "Come on feel the Illinoise" to "Illinois" because the label site lists them so. [1] and [2]. --Gika 10:47, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

For the record, I'm now of this same opinion. Euphoria 03:18, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

"Come on! Feel the Illinoise!" is the name of a specific track on the album "Illinios" (though the original album was listed as "Illinoise" it was lated edited because it contained a copyrighted picture of Superman). "Come on! Illiniose!" is track #3, but the album is called simply "Illinois". -Japheth Dillman [14:49, 10 September 2006]

Yep, the spine of the album just says "Illinois." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.87.187.92 (talk) 00:34, 18 November 2006

The albums are: 'Michigan' and 'Illinois'

Let's set the record straight here. This is from Sufjan's Record Label, Asthmatic Kitty:

"What are the actual titles of Sufjan's two "state" albums, and why does each appear to have two different titles?

1. Michigan and Illinois.

2. We don't know."

-- unsigned edit — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.237.184.112 (talk) 17:32, 22 June 2005

Please sign your Talk page edits. I'm not going to feel too bad about this. Note that Amazon is selling them as Greetings from Michigan: The Great Lakes State (the "s" is superfluous regardless) and Illinois, respectively. Pitchfork made the same mistake as Amazon [3]. The cover art for the album clearly encourages interpretation as the longer title, although the way the state name is set apart supports the idea that it's just a graphic treatment surrounding the album title.

Anyway, this seems to be a public confusion issue, so the article should address it. --Dhartung | Talk 02:04, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

On the cover of my CD it just says "Illinoise" (no "Come on bring.."). Is there a different European release? --Albrecht Conz 20:23, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

For reference see the official record label's webpage: http://www.asthmatickitty.com/info.php?infoID=2 Officially, the title of the album is simply the state name. Nothing more. -Japheth Dillman

While the label may be using the state names to identify each album, they treated them differently when registering the copyrights. While the first was registered with the title "Michigan", the second was registered with the title listed as as "Illinois : Come on, feel the Illinoise." http://cocatalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?v1=10&ti=1,10&Search_Arg=Asthmatic%20Kitty&Search_Code=NALL&CNT=25&PID=ND3UTnrS2jCurOZYa2uA4Oox&SEQ=20100403142158&SID=3 24.15.191.27 (talk) 18:34, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Next albums

Please check the history before reverting next time! I wrote "SF Weekly interview names next projects as Oregon and Rhode Island, sounds authoritative", referencing Art of the States, a July 13, 2005 interview, which says:

He also says that the next albums, Oregon and Rhode Island, "will have nothing to do with actual place names and histories. They'll be more abstract or more figurative."

I agree the 2004 source is more speculative, but that was over a year ago. Put the two together and they actually confirm each other, since the Junkmedia article turned out to be correct about Illinois, after all! No, I don't recommend just randomly throwing in speculation, but when we have a good attribution directly from the artist, I don't see why we can't include that (even given Stevens' playful approach to the project). Given the way he set this up as an album cycle (which could conceivably last his entire career, whether it reaches 50 or not), some speculation is inevitable; we'll be playing this game for a long time. In any case, it was my bad for not doing this as a proper reference. I'll fix that. --Dhartung | Talk 21:25, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

While technically the speculation on Sufjan's next album still (arguably) falls under Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, I agree with everything Dhartung said. Citing somewhat speculative content to a credible source and labeling the content as rumor, report, or the like in the article itself is fine, in my book. - Jersyko talk 22:12, July 27, 2005 (UTC)

Heh. Well, I see that as mainly arguing against articles for future events. So there's no justification for creating Oregon (album) just yet ... but it certainly isn't a future event that this has been reported, and the music Wikipedia is full of references to future albums, e.g. X&Y hit the Coldplay article almost 7 months before release; and the article for X3 has been around since 2004, and the film won't be out for almost a year! Then we have future visits of Halley's Comet ... and of course there's this. Hey, just had to tweak you a bit. --Dhartung | Talk 08:08, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

I completely agree with you that those articles belong here and would vigorously argue with anyone that said they didn't. However, I think they fall under the first exception to the WP is not a crystal ball policy because they are all "well documented speculation." The speculation on Sufjan's next album is, well, not entirely well documented yet, so i would understand if someone argued that it didn't belong in the article (though I would disagree). But now i'm arguing a technical point that I don't even think applies (or maybe i just don't want it to apply) to what we have in the Sufjan article now anyway. - Jersyko talk 12:30, July 28, 2005 (UTC)

Deletion?

I'm sorry, I'm from west Michigan and I've never heard of this guy. I am not sure he deserves a Wiki-site for being some small regional act. Has he won any notable awards? Had any songs chart? -- added by User:66.72.215.225

• He's extremely notable in indie circles. His most recent album, for example, was (might still be) in Amazon.com's top 10 or 20 in terms of online sales. Certainly not a small, regional act - I'm in Memphis, Tennessee and I know at least three other people here (I'm sure there are more) that are fans. Incidentally, 680,000 Google hits for "Sufjan Stevens." - Jersyko talk 19:27, August 16, 2005 (UTC)

Please sign edits to Talk pages. Jersyko is correct; Sufjan Stevens may not be a mainstream artist, but he isn't a "small regional act". The Metacritic Best of 2005 has Illinois the top-rated album of the year, with 35 glowing reviews in professional media, including the Los Angeles Times, The Onion, Spin magazine, Billboard magazine, Entertainment Weekly, Rolling Stone, the New York Times, and the Guardian. Oh, yeah, and this outfit called Pitchfork mentioned it in passing, I think. It's a slam dunk that Illinois will be on many ten-best lists for the year. So with that resume, Stevens is definitely on the move; in a couple of years he might even be a midrange regional act!

As for charting, you may want to familiarize yourself with the indie music scene [4]. By definition nobody's on a major label (though many frequently graduate to one), and sales of 100,000 are "hits". There are no charts because it's not a single-oriented demographic and radio (in this age of Clear Channel) ignores them. Sites such as Last.fm, however, allow them to find an audience and demonstrated fanbase. --Dhartung | Talk 21:10, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

if the guy has been reviewed in reputable publications like Rolling Stone, he qualifies, however, someone ought to reference this is the article, anyone without a record deal can be an "indie" artist by definition, wiki can't have a page for all of them...jme

He has a record deal, with Asthmatic Kitty; he isn't self-published by any means. Recognize that we shouldn't have to assert notability in every article, just because you aren't well-read. --Dhartung | Talk 08:46, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

In any event, you ought to give Sufjan a listen, you might enjoy his music. Not to belabor the point, but please see WP:MUSIC, which is a guideline (but not a policy) for deciding whether a musician should have an article. Stevens meets criteria 2, 4, 6, and maybe 3 (meeting only one of them is required). It has been suggested that every article must assert the notability of its subject (especially bands and musicians), but this suggestion has been rejected by community vote/consensus in the past, i believe. - Jersyko talk 13:59, August 23, 2005 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Notability, which is not a policy or guideline; Wikipedia:Importance, which is a proposed policy; and especially Wikipedia:WikiProject Music/Notability and Music Guidelines, which is a policy. The text used in that article is

notability is required for a musical topic (such as a band) to deserve an article here

and not assertion of notability is required. Such assertions are only necessary if an apparent vanity article without easily discovered notability (many VfDs start with an assertion of non-notability, derived from a google search).--Dhartung | Talk 17:53, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

His music has been featured on BBC Radio 2's Bob Harris show (see www.bobharris.org playlists). This is the most popular radio station in the UK as measured by RAJAR audience figures (Reach of appx 13m in a country with 60m citizens)Wikipedia:BBC_Radio_2

Christmas eps

The first christmas ep is titled Noel! Songs for Christmas - Vol. I. The second one is Hark! Songs for Christmas - Vol. II. The third one is Ding! Dong! Songs for Christmas - Vol. III.

Will you please cite the source that is telling you this? A google search for "Noel! Songs for Christmas" doesn't reveal anything of note. Of course Google isn't definitive, but i'd like to see some evidence, please. - Jersyko talk 22:52, August 23, 2005 (UTC)

I don't have time to do an exhaustive google search just to prove it to you but I know someone that has a real copy of it. The MP3s that are floating around are tagged wrong. If you must have some kind of online reference for it I saw it mentioned here and here.

Sufjan Stevens & Matt Morgan: Noel '01 (CDR/Asthmatic Kitty)

I've looked around, and I'm satisfied about Noel!, Hark!, and Ding! Dong! being the successive titles. I'm beginning to be disturbed by Sufjan's punctuation habits, though ... --Dhartung | Talk 04:12, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

If people Google "Sufjan Stevens" "Christmas" they should be able to get a few places confirming it, including mp3s. But according to some sources it looks like they may have been 'released' last year. Could someone check this out in more detail than I have. It's 5am and I have no idea what I'm doing up and on here. --Jellypuzzle 04:25, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

In my onw googling, I didn't find anything I would consider authoritative about any single one of the EPs, not even a half-nicely-organized fan discography. --Dhartung | Talk 07:02, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Two sites: [5] and [6]. Only the first link has files that work it seems. It also has a track list if you scroll down. As they seem to only be in scattered mp3 form and mentioned on a few message boards [7] is another with a nice track listing, I think they're probably unreleased officially and will remain so sorry, [8] reveals they were limited, not unreleased. I'm not sure if that means we can provide a link to them as he may re-release them or continue to sell some on tour, in December not now, it being summer and all. --Jellypuzzle 07:38, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

None of those are "authoritative". See WP:V. --Dhartung | Talk 18:33, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

FWIW, it doesn't look like the Christmas eps are included but this fan site has a discography.

Isn't it patently absurd to list "unreleased" records under the heading "other releases"? --Albrecht Conz 20:30, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

I'm from Musselburgh, just outside of Edinburgh, Scotland. He's impacted enough to be known over here. Make of that what you will. Reckon it'd be a bit churlish to deny him his place here but if you're sufficiently fraught about it, well there ya go. Rob

Other works

Hey, I added the song "Lord God Bird" from the NPR website. It's a great song and I think it will spread easier if listed here as well. --CPQD 06:25, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

"He has contributed to the music of David Crowder Band" - he hasn't contributed to David Crowder's music, David Crowder did a cover of a Sufjan song.

Template

I made a template (basing on Template:Radiohead) to use on Sufjan Stevens-related pages. Suggestions? --Gika 14:39, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

I don't like the term "regular albums", somehow. I'm not certain this is really needed for an individual artist, either (as opposed to a band, with side projects, former members, etc.), but I suppose it doesn't hurt anything. --Dhartung | Talk 22:30, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

genre?

i'm unclear what genre this singer belongs to... folk, indie rock? Also, is he a christian musician (evidently, he is a christian, but do his songs focus on christianity)? Gflores ^Talk 03:17, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

• Ehh, indie pop or folk works for me. While he is open about his Christianity, he is not a "Christian musician", per se, and seemed to distance himself from such a label in an interview with The Onion's AV Club, if I'm not mistaken. Seven Swans contains a lot of personal, religious expression, but his other albums do not, and it's only one personal album about religion, anyway (not a consistent pattern). - Jersyko talk 03:38, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

I think that his other albums besides Seven Swans do contain a lot of his religious expression. Michigan has a lot of redemption issues brought up, hope, etc... It's more of a mindset for him than explicit religious talk. In this way, I think he has more religious themes/undertones than people give him credit for. --PhilKao 23:29, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

• I think of what he does as more of an indie-pop rather than folk. It would be helpful if I could find a tour schedule. Does he play in rock clubs or coffee houses? What sorts of festivals does he play? What radio shows play his material? I suspect he does not fit in with the more traditional singer-songwriters. -MrFizyx 20:24, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Indie-pop, definitely, with reviews from Pitchfork and appearances at indie-oriented festivals. It's a cliche to call someone genre-defying, but he is hard to classify. His songs are very clearly folk-influenced in that they often tell stories or, in the state albums, populist sentiments, but there are also electronica influences (more in Illinois) and he's done one EP that's completely electronica (Enjoy Your Rabbit). Some people call what he and a few others do chamber pop but that isn't a widely used term. --Dhartung | Talk 21:20, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

I've removed him from Category:American folk musicians. There appears to be no Category:American indie-pop musicians and I'm not expert enough in that genre to populate one. He might fit in Category:American alternative musicians. What do you think? -MrFizyx 21:49, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

I would keep him in folk, and add indie rock and electronica. Groups I would consider quite similar (or of similar appeal) such as smog, The Postal Service, The Unicorns, and others are listed as "indie rock", even though it's a stretch to say that any of them is really working in the "rock" genre. Certainly there's no requirement that he be in only one musical genre category. --Dhartung | Talk 03:57, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure that I agree. I'm not looking to pigeonhole Stevens, but when I look at the names in Category:American folk musicians or Category:American folk singers I see people who normally appear at folk festivals and small folk clubs (or once did so). Stevens doesn't have much in common with these groups. Don't categories become less useful when the acceptance for inclusion becomes too wide? -MrFizyx 19:19, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Let's judge the music by what it sounds like, not by where the musician plays or doesn't play his music. If you've ever listened to "Decatur" from "Illinois," I don't know how you can claim that Stevens doesn't have a quite folky sound on at least some songs.--Hraefen 21:28, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Gee whiz I must be sounding like some sort of folk snob, but I'm not a purist really, just trying to help sort out some gray areas. I suppose genre should be reflected in how the music sounds, the venue where it is played, the artist's influences and marketing. I don't think a few folky-sounding songs alone make an artist a folk singer. I confess that I'm less familiar with Stevens than I am with most of the artists in the folk category. I very much enjoyed a concert that I listened to online and I've been on the waiting list at my local library for nearly 2 mo. to borrow Illinois, so I suppose I should reserve judgement. I recently was trying to describe the "50 states project" to Chuck Brodsky and Jonathan Byrd. These guys know all of the other obscure acts on the folk/singer-songwriter circuit, but they had never heard of Sufjan Stevens. This is not a knock against Stevens, he just exists in a different musical world. None-the-less those of you who know his music best should feel free to add him to categories where you feel he truly belongs. -MrFizyx 22:18, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Mews Too Link/50 States

There's a link under "Fifty States Project" saying that Asthmatic Kitty said Sufjan wasn't going to release an album for each state in their article for the Mews Too compilation. I followed this link and found nothing. Am I missing it, or was it removed? If so, can we remove that paragraph?--Evisruc 10:37, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

• Just reviewed, the text this referred to was there but has been changed. Currently, the text reads - "18. Sufjan Stevens can fold a fitted-sheet (he once worked as a professional folder in a commercial Laundromat)." I will add this to what is in the description, but I did confirm what was originally on the website.--Fresh 17:45, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Misc

I wanted to explain my reversion of the article. The previous edit claimed "A Good man Is Hard To Find" was unreleased, despite the fact it appears on Seven Swans. Even if this had been fixed, it did not seem relevant. -- Elusivespoon 18:11, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

• Agreed. I was going to go in and change it this morning but I havent had time. The Lord God Bird, as far as I know, was only written in response to an NPR piece and not due to the possibility that it would be the next state recorded.--Fresh 19:28, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Lord God Bird

The song was written in response to an NPR piece about the ivory-billed woodpecker not about Sufjan himself.

• Have you listened to the piece? There are two - one is about the ivory-billed woodpecker, and one is about Sufjan and how he writes his music. The piece about Sufjan and how he creates music is what the song was written for.
  • I edited this to make it clear the piece is about Sufjan while the song is about the woodpecker. Hopefully this makes everyone happy. -- Elusivespoon 19:00, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Where is this second piece "about Sufjan and how he writes his music"? On the NPR page it says this: "Producers Collison and Meister spoke with people in the town, then shared the interviews with Stevens. He wrote a song about the ivory-bill, known as the "lord god" or "great god" bird because of its breathtaking appearance." Where are you getting this info that the song was written for an NPR piece on himself?
    • Listen to the piece instead of just reading the synopses.--Fresh 22:21, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
      • The piece is clearly about the ivory-billed woodpecker and is over 12 minutes long. Less than 1 minute at the beginning is devoted to Sufjan's involvement with the project. The audio says basically the same as what is printed on the site and reprinted above. See also: Long Haul Productions.
• I've reworded the description, removing any reference to what the NPR piece is about. The subject of the piece is only of secondary importance to noting the fact that Stevens recorded the song for an NPR piece in the first place. - Jersyko·talk 03:35, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Why would we remove something that is correct because people don't listen to the webclip and simply read the description on the website? I added something closer to what the piece was produced for, but there should be no reason to remove it.--Fresh 07:10, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
    • Because you're not correct. The piece is about the ivory-billed woodpecker and the piece would still exist even if Sufjan had not contributed his song to the project. The short part at the beginning of the webclip about Sufjan's involvement is similar to the short author bios that are often included in the back of a book dust jacket. It is just to acknowledge that he helped out with the project, but the piece is not about him.
      • Just put a direct quote from the piece. The entire piece is more about the town of Brinkley and less about the bird anyway. The entire piece is made to show how Sufjan takes pieces of information and puts them to song. Is there still a question here?--Fresh 00:52, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Rosie Thomas baby rumor

There is some Internet talk right now about how the whole thing about Sufjan having a baby with Rosie Thomas just being an April Fools-induced rumor. It might be best to mention that it's only a rumor as of yet. Check out this post on Buzzgrinder Perfect13thStep 21:39, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

• The baby thing is a joke started by Denison & Rosie.

"and several guest appearances by singer Rosie Thomas, who, contrary to popular rumor, is NOT carrying Sufjan's baby. The new baby is due in stores July 11, 2006." from [[9]] JohnRussell 15:42, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Regarding the name Sufjan

I'm pretty sure the entire bit about his name being Armenian is bullshit.

Isn't he a persian christian... I've heard the name is Persian and means something about with sword. I'll do research into this, I'm almost certain it's true.

Him being persian would make sense in Detroit as well. (fullerton)

It appears the Washington post agrees with me:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/22/AR2005092200655.html

and the Los Angeles Times:

http://www.azcentral.com/ent/music/articles/0813stevens.html

So... I'm changing it. I hate when things are just absolutely and blatantlt incorrect. Come on, fact check people!

oh wait... I that was endnoted... now I have to research this more. (sigh) The armenian thing is just random and weird.

• Lets get our facts straight before you start to bestow your pompous bullshit better-than-thou posts on the talk page. If you read how it is phrased within the article, it refers to what Sufjan has stated himself and not necessarily a scholar on the origin of names. It is then properly end noted to the article where Sufjan states it. Add something from the Post article that disagrees with it, similar to what is already in the following sentence, and improve the article if you want to. And sign your talk posts.--Fresh 00:42, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

If it REALLY is pronounced as it says it is, then it is an Arabic name, though its more usual translation would be Sufyan, and means devoted. Its a name that pre-dates Muhammad, so its not Muslim. --Irishpunktom\^talk 21:28, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

I've edited the section on his name, and the footnotes section to include the WaPo article. I am leaving out any reference to the actual meaning of the name in Arabic and/or Persian because I have found conflicting accounts. Ab85 02:12, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm no phonetician (I'd be glad in case one would just help us out), but what about something like ['sufɪɔn] or ['sufɪɘn] or whatever istead of the misleading [SOOF-yon]? That way people whose first language isn't English would know how to pronounce it correctly. Thanks. Duducoutinho 11:26, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Why not just use the pronunciation as listed on Asthmatic Kitty's Q&A and be done with this whole discussion? After all, Sufjan co-owns the label so this is as definitive a source as you can get.

Discography

Is there any logical reason why the studio releases are in chronological order but the other releases are in reverse chronological order?

Christian Music

Sufjan is a Christian and a Musician, but NOT a Christian musician. Sources:

• "His faith shines through every note of his music - in his wonder at every tiny yet monumental scrap of human endeavour, and in his ultimate (if at times shaky) acceptance of a celestial Big Plan that will rid us of what he has described as 'all the nonsense of suffering' - but it's as far removed from 'Christian rock', with all the deadly dull connotations of that phrase, as it's possible to be.

'I feel like I'm doing a disservice to myself, and to my convictions, in speaking publicly about these things, because they're too easily misconstrued,' he says, bristling at the very thought of elaborating on his faith."[10]

• "I don't think music media is the real forum for theological discussions," says Stevens. "I think I've said things and sung about things that probably weren't appropriate for this kind of forum. And I just feel like it's not my work or my place to be making claims and statements, because I often think it's misunderstood." So Stevens apparently believes the "Christian artist" stamp is a deal breaker. Likewise his publicist, who reminded me that "Sufjan has asked that the topic of religion not be discussed in interviews from this point on."[11]

--M@rēino 17:01, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Okay, when I read "Christian musician," I didn't think "Oh, he makes Christian music." I thought "Oh, he's a Christian who's a musician." If the category is meant to be for the Amy Grant/Jars of Clay/DC Talk type of musicians, then I agree, leave it off. If the category is merely "Musicians who identify as Catholic," then it should stay on. --badlydrawnjeff (WP:MEMES?) 17:04, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Anyone have any proof that he is Roman Catholic?

Added a link yesterday. --badlydrawnjeff (WP:MEMES?) 22:38, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

What link? List the link here please. This is what i have found: "I'm more Episcopalian" -- Pitchfork interview

• • This is getting VERY interesting! Thanks for the most recent link! I put in a stub section about Sufjan's religion. If we can get to the bottom of this and produce a thorough and accurate account of his religious beliefs, I think that this could easily turn this article into a WP:GOOD candidate. --M@rēino 20:14, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Crikey, that section on 'Religion' was badly written. I had a 5-minute stab at editing it, but I'm a bit busy right now. Anyway, I took out the POV and spelling errors. Also, does anyone have any further information as to whether Stevens is a Catholic? I remember reading that he attended a 'high-church' Episcopal church, and some of the recordings on 'Illinois' were made in such a building in Brooklyn, but there would be quite a leap from even high-church Episcopal to Roman Catholic. Would like to know! Cravenmonket 01:42, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Those were good edits. I didn't want to touch this section because I don't have Swans. Also, my impression is that the Stevens family moved around, religiously, so there may not be one answer. --Dhartung | Talk 21:38, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

• [12] It's in the second paragraph perhaps. There are other references that he is Episcopalian as well across the internet, but they range from 'devout Episcopalian' to Sufjan's Pitchfork interview where he says he is 'more Episcopalian'. SportingFlyer 08:44, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

I added a request for assistance at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Christianity. --Dhartung | Talk 21:25, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

• [13] "In Brooklyn, Stevens splits time between two churches: one Episcopal, one Presbyterian." (Harp, Jul/Aug 06)

In the AV club article, http://www.avclub.com/content/node/23410, he says he goes to an Anglican catholic church, which is different than Catholic. It's a type of "high church" closer to Episcopal, but with more traditional methods of worship and such. Amandamae 20:40, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure the in-depth analysis of every Christian metaphor presented in his songs is needed to be posted on this page. (including biblical references, etc.) It just seems to take things way to far for this wiki page? Any other thoughts? I suggest keeping it simple with a couple quotes and his religious position. Onishenko 23:29, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Asthmatic Kitty v. Asthmatic Kitty Records?

Could someone from here go help make this merger happen? Thanks. -MrFizyx 00:26, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Done, there wasn't that much to do! Thanks for the heads up. --Dhartung | Talk 00:56, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Criticism section

A recent edit by an anon added a "criticism" section to this article. While I believe that such a section could possibly be appropriate, the section as written violates Wikipedia policy and guidelines. While I believe this violation is self-evident, I am posting the explanation for my reversion here because of a message left by the anon on my talk page.
The relevant policies violated by the section as written include verifiability and no original research. Avoid weasel words and citing sources are also relevant. First, the section references "many people" who compare Stevens to Alan Keyes without a source, thus violating the two policies I mention above. The wording "many people" is actually one of the examples given at WP:AWW of weasel words, and the phrasing is repeated throught the section ("Many Illinoisians" & "many residents"). The only source cited in the section is in reference to an online review of one of Stevens' albums. The review says "some people just found the man and his music to be flat-out boring", but then goes on to give the album a positive review. The review does not cite a source for its claim. In any event, the source does not support the claim made in the section added to this article that "The album itself has also been called "boring" by journalists", or any other claim made in the section, for that matter. This is an easy call per Wikipedia policy. · j·e·r·s·y·k·o talk · 17:20, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Jersyko is correct; the section as written is not encyclopedic. A negative review of Stevens and Avalanche was recently posted on All Music Guide[14], a better starting point for such material. --Dhartung | Talk 20:08, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Influences

"...his influences are very broad, including electronica, the jazz of Vince Guaraldi, and the academic minimalism of Reich and Glass."

I recognize the value in discussing musical references, but these need sources. A brief look around Wikipedia reveals a rather worrying tendency among editors of articles on musicians to include an ever-expanding list of inferences comprising artists and genres that they felt were similar. This cannot happen here.

We must recognize that musical inspiration is an extremely intangible and unverifiable animal. The most we can probably do is say things like "Critic X draws a link between artists A and B, finding that... [and here's his/her explanation]", or "In a poll, listeners agreed that Sufjan's music seemed influenced by...". If we do find some legit article which categorically states that Sufjan drew inspiration from certain genres and artists while working on the album, then perhaps it can go in the article without attribution (although certainly with a reference). Until then I'm adding a {{citationneeded}} notice. Omphaloscope » talk 00:24, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

I should add that the above does not mean I think Sufjan's music has nothing to do with electronica and minimalism. (It certainly sounds heavily influenced by both.) It's just that I don't trust my own judgment enough to put these beliefs in the article as if they were so many obvious facts. With the greatest of respect, I extend the same skepticism towards the judgment of other Wikipedians in this matter unless something published and peer-reviewed/-critiqued can support their assessments. Omphaloscope » talk 00:29, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

I've removed the references to Guaraldi, Reich and Glass, as per the pretty strict requirements at Wikipedia:Verifiability. I encourage the editor who added them to put them back in with sources. Omphaloscope » talk 22:43, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

I added them all back in with sources, and the two amazon.com sources are for their Editorial Reviews and not for user reviews. JohnRussell 23:47, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Nice work, John. Since those sources make claims about what the music sounds like, rather than what influenced it, I've changed the wording. It now reads: "His music has been likened to..." rather than "influences include..." What do you think? Omphaloscope » talk 21:34, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Baby rumor

As far as I know, this hoax was debunked two days after it came out. If there's a more reliable source debunking the debunking, it should be cited per biographies of living persons policy. --Dhartung | Talk 21:04, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Hometown

He doesn't say anything about this in the interview cited here, but I'm pretty sure this guy grew up in the Petoskey/Little Traverse Bay area, which is nowhere near Detroit.--WadeMcR 08:58, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Cool. Is there a document somewhere on the web confirming that? Omphaloscope » talk 09:16, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I'd let this one in under the common knowledge exemption. It was mentioned in the Free Press at least once google cache. --Dhartung | Talk 18:27, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Here's the alumni magazine where I read that.

google cache.--WadeMcR 20:53, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Links

Does anyone know the real myspace page for Sufjan Stevens? theres like 20 clones but i dunno if theres a real one or which one it is

Decatur - It's the great _____?

I thought the line in Decatur was "It's the great IL" which seems to fit better in an ode to the richness of Illinois that people might overlook - "Stand up and thank her - it's the great IL!" While there's lots of religious imagery in many of his lyrics, there is very little in Decatur.

Has Sufjan Stevens ever posted "official" lyrics? Given the complexity of so many of the songs, it would be nice to know the true lyrics, undistorted by our own ears. Jzerocsk 20:30, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Sounds like a humdinger of a mondegreen. The line is "It's the great I am". I am is another way of referring to the Biblical God (see the article on I am for more details). Sufjan has the "official" lyrics written in the booklet that accompanies Illinois. If you don't have the booklet, this and most other song lyrics can be found on the internet: just call up Google and type in the name of the artist and the song (or half a lyric), and you should be able to dig up the full transcription. You can also find the lyrics to "Decatur, or Round of Applause for Your Stepmother" at SongMeanings. Hope this was of some help. Omphaloscope » talk 22:43, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

here you can find full transcripts of Stevens' lyrics as they were printed on the booklet. --Gika 23:38, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Gika. Unfortunately, most of the lyrics one finds online at places like sing365 and songmeanings seem to be submitted by users, so I never trust them to be correct...in fact I often KNOW they are not correct! I am (no pun intended) familiar with the Biblical phrase, which is precisely why I did not think that was the actual wording - it just doesn't really fit the theme of the rest of the song - but I guess that's how it was written! Jzerocsk 13:13, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Songs for Christmas

Asthmatic Kitty has announced that a collection of the 5 (I thought there were only 3, go figure) Christmas EPs will be released in one box.[15] Should we combine the three articles we have, put them with the two we haven't created yet, and have one massive article for the Christmas release? --badlydrawnjeff talk 01:19, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, only three have been leaked onto the internet. The most recent two were recorded December 2005 and June 2006. I think there should be a huge Christmas merger to Songs for Christmas

because this is the first time that these have been officially released and there is a lot of official information at : [16]

"It started in 2001, the year of Epiphanies, and continued onward (skipping only 2004), culminating into an odd and idiosyncratic catalog of music that has only existed in the Asthmatic Kitty archives (and on a number of file sharing sites)"

so,

• Noel! Songs for Christmas - Vol. I
• Hark! Songs for Christmas - Vol. II
• Ding! Dong! Songs for Christmas - Vol. III

should all link to Songs for Christmas with good information copied over from those pages and the press release from asthatmic kitty records. JohnRussell 20:23, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

I think an official release should take precedence over a bootleg, if they're substantially the same. --Dhartung | Talk 20:57, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Michigan (album)

Template:Michigan (album) has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Gpollock 06:06, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

"Anglican catholic"

As has been mentioned above, Sufjan notes he goes to an "Anglican catholic church". In the article that was changed to "Anglican" on the grounds that Anglicanism does not equal Catholicism.

The problem with this argument is that "Catholic" and "catholic" mean different things. Uppercase "Catholic" means Holy Roman Catholic Church. Lowercase "catholic" literally means "broad or wide-ranging". In the sense of church, not all Anglicans regard themselves as strict Protestants; some see themselves as having liturgical connections to the Catholic Church, though not formal or necessarily theological ones. As such, "Anglican catholic" is a perfectly feasible description of a church. (I should know; I attend one.) El T 05:38, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Even Catholic with uppercase makes sense. Anglo-Catholicism is a branch of anglicanism that has close liturgical connections to Catholism, whilst still being anglican. It is a High chuirch branch of anglicanism - it does make sense, anglicanism isn't the same as other forms of prostenatism, such as lutheranism etc.

• This recent Catholic Herald article is a must-read.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.158.250.115 (talk) Please remember to sign your posts using four tildes (~~~~).

Illinoismakers/ Michigan Militia/ Band of Butterflies

Someone should add a section that covers some of the usual members of Sufjan's band, maybe with a short blurb and a list of other bands/projects that they are involved with. I am currently looking for information on the web, but if someone else wants to put something like this up, I think it would be a great addition to this article. Fmalcangi 04:50, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

• I would agree. This is very unique to Sufjan Stevens and should be noted. Noting other members bands as well (one that comes to mind is My Brightest Diamond would be helpful too.--Fresh 00:25, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
• And there are a lot of Danielson Famile members on Seven Swans (and on other Sufjan albums). Sufjan is also an honorary famile member and plays on at least Brother Is to Son JohnRussell 08:48, 14 November 2006 (UTC)