Self-titled albums, eh?  Why go to all that trouble to write and record your new songs, pick a lovely cover photo, and then don’t bother to give it a title, annoying shop assistants and reviewers everywhere (should the title of a post such as this be Band X, Band X (label Y) or just Band X (label Y)?  I’ve never been sure)?  Leaving aside your pompous serial offenders on whom I’d rather not waste any words (your Gabriels, your Seals) I reckon the usual reason - whether stated as such or not – tends to be that of trying to create a sense of importance to the album it may or may not actually merit.  As if to say: “We are this album.  We live these dusty grooves.”  Which kinda makes sense if it is your first album, and the record is very much the summation of your life to date i.e. you are The Clash.  It is a bit different a few albums in though, and to me feels a bit like your previous records are being disowned somewhat.  And that is a tough thing to do when you are following up a couple of terrific records.  Which is where Liars come in.

So is this to be their flag-waving manifesto?  Nah, but there is a definite repudiation of their past.  There is a noticeable lurch to the centre ground, away from the witchy fragments and voodoo churn of their preceding two records.  Liars positions the band somewhere in a distant and discordant corner of the pop universe; using their elbows to make some space amongst the likes of the Jesus and Mary Chain (“What Would They Know”, “Pure Unevil”) and even Gorillaz (I kid you not, check “Houseclouds” or “Sailing to Byzantium”). Digging themselves a trench.  Or a grave.  Is this self-titled thing a monument?  Or a tombstone?  Vote with your feet when this thing is released in late August.