"The sky erupted in light, then turned entirely black. This is the story of a city in darkness." Yeah, there are some readers who will find this one overblown, but I was never much for the school of music writing that didn't risk getting at least a little silly. Andi Coulter's basic premise is that there's already a solid Suicide bio available and that, with one of the band now having passed on (albeit much later and less dramatically than early audiences would have expected), a straight factual account would be at once impertinent and superfluous, so this is more a loose fictionalisation. How loose? Someone who knows the official story better would be able to tell you more surely than I can, though I read it as taking liberties in ascribing feelings and incidental details, rather than going freeform with the known facts. How did it feel to be the nascent Suicide, or to watch them? That's where Coulter's interest seems most focused. Which is not to say there isn't factual research here too, like falsifying the oft-repeated story that the duo took their name from a Ghost Rider story called Satan Suicide – not the toughest detective gig ever given there wasn't one, and the band made their debut before the character, but one nobody else seems to have troubled themselves to undertake. Still, there is a strand running through this where Rev and Vega's story is paralleled with Johnny Blaze's. It's hardly a stretch when he's the subject of one of their 'hits', in the loosest possible sense, and there's certainly something to the idea of a link between the way the 1970s saw rock darkening into punk, and Marvel's heroes likewise darkening into antiheroes, both in turn mirroring New York's notorious period of bankruptcy and decay: it makes sense that you'd get a band called Suicide singing about a blazing skeleton in a city that's been told to drop dead. Still, for all that this is a sound angle, underpinned by a clear engagement with the topic, it's undermined by a reference to 'Spiderman', just as the artier side of the equation is let down when 'Anton Artaud' or 'Alan Ginsberg' makes an appearance. As for the use of 'prolix' in a context where 'prologue' is needed, ouch. Charitably, one could note that I read this as a Netgalley ARC, and these typos might be fixed in the final edition, though I'm still not sure what the sentence "They were certainly one of the most musical cult bands around" is trying to do – jazz background or not, I could more readily accept that 'they were certainly one of the most cult musical bands around', or even, given the sonic onslaught, 'they were certainly one of the least musical cult bands around'. As is, if that original meaning was intended, it could have done with some selling. But then that's the risk of ambitious music writing; it will always risk falling flat on its face, and there's bravery in that. And I like that the book isn't some veteran Bangs wannabe (even if it does rate him a little high for my taste), but comes from the perspective of a new-ish fan who wants to make more new fans, someone who came to their revival via the era of Fischerspooner and the Faint. Ultimately I was surprised how much I came to agree with the central argument: "Suicide aren't harbingers of death but instead are possessed by the burning will to live."
I still feel a bit concerned about the section written from the point of view of Bobby Gillespie, mind. Books told from the perspective of murderers, torturers or paedophiles are one thing, but surely there are some limits?