Talk:The Fragile

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
GA toolbox
Reviewing

1[edit]

Scigatt 08:05, 15 April 2006 (UTC) Well, to me, this article is obviously not NPOV.[reply]

  • Huh? Then why did you put a POV tag on it? I think you mean POV, not NPOV, in your above statement. Please provide some examples, as I can't find any POV material in this article. I'll remove the tag in seven days unless anyone objects. --TonySt 14:50, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

""The Fragile" is Reznor's most sophisticated work, requiring the listener to consider the entire album instead of being a collection of singles and b-sides. Several tracks contain no vocals whatsoever, but are instead symphonic soundscapes that flow in and out of each other, like streaking, mixed paints on a canvas.

That is not to say that Reznor's style "goes soft" on this album. This is still adolescent angst at its best, filled with nihilistic disappointment, rage, and sorrow. The difference is that this album is, in many ways, the most richly detailed and beautiful mosaic for such subject matter. There are more pauses amidst the noise in this album, and the artist's struggles seem that much more painfully rendered here."

The Fragile: Deviations 1 is mentioned as "consists of a one-off 4xLP pressing, available through pre-orders only." With that pre-order it was also immediately made available as an MP3/wave download. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.24.221.98 (talk) 04:56, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • just one man's opinion, but the preceding two paragraphs sound more like a album review than an encyclopedic entry, lending itself more to a POV than a critical analysis. --anon
    • Good point. Let me see if I can clean up the article... --TonySt 01:00, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

digipack[edit]

should it be mentioned that it's a nice double digipack? Kansaikiwi 06:07, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

quotations[edit]

There's too many quotes in the beginning of this article. I think one or both ought to be removed. --Raid0422 20:17, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Hidden" track[edit]

Between tracks 4+5 on the 2nd disc, Reznor can be heard faintly saying something like I'm getting closer/I'm getting closer all the time as the clock on my CD player ticks back a minus number (approx. 15 seconds). You need to start playing from the start of track 4, and not skip back from track 5. Lugnuts 11:04, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. That's where "10 Miles High" would go if it were still on the album.-ABigBlackMan (talk) 12:50, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Album Cover Meaning?[edit]

Are there any news stories out there about the cover art? The top portion looks like a pixelized waterfall, and I am very curious of to the origin and meaning. Steveprutz 20:36, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What I see on the cover is a hand holding a gun and pointing at the head (and a red background). the hand is on the left and i can see blurred fingers. the head is on the right and there is a blurred eye under the nin logo... --79.184.167.226 17:49, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Fragile (The Song)[edit]

I have a song called The Fragile (Unplugged) in my iTunes, and I was wondering if anyone could tell me if this is a cover of the song, or if Trent Reznor actually did do an acoustic version of The Fragile. 

 This is probably the "Still" version of "The Fragile". See Still_(Nine_Inch_Nails_album). Steveprutz 16:07, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vinyl vs CD[edit]

I think a discussion about the vinyl and CD editions is warranted; I.E. how songs are edited, and the different track listings.

yes! please someone who has this knowledge do this, i've dont what i was able, but there is more info to be added on extended/alt versions of songs on the vinyl pressing. --AlexOvShaolin 22:48, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions[edit]

1. The History section needs a rewrite and much better sourcing. The opening part reads, "The album was not as much of a commercial success as The Downward Spiral, most likely accredited to Interscope Records' lack of promotion of the album, and the lack of a stand-out single. Despite a strong start at #1 on the Billboard Top 10, the album quickly slipped out of the Billboard Top 10 only a week after its release, and Reznor was forced to provide funding for the subsequent North American tour out of his own pocket.[1]" A few problems. The source for this cannot be found. There especially needs to be a reliable source for the opening statement here, where it claims the album was not a commercial success compared to TDS and that this is likely due to poor promotion by the record label.

The last three sentences of this section, which are all stand-alone paragraphs, read more like a collection of facts than they do about the history of the album. They need to be distributed more appropriately into the article.

2. The Critical Response section has no sources and I'm puzzled as to why the review from Pitchfork was taken with such seriousness as to warrant mention in the article, much less in the side box with the rest of the reviews. I think, if we're going to use a variety of reviews that include both praise and criticism, we might want to use a better, more professionally done review than the review from Pitchfork, as well as include quotes from the reviewers to supplement the section.

3. Many songs from this album have been used in various movies, and TV shows, including 300, Man on Fire, Final Destination, CSI, etc. A section could be made to reflect this and other uses of songs from this album in popular culture, including any covers.

4. The Track Listing section and "The New Flesh" sections need sources.

5. Could benefit from a few more fair use images. --Ubiq (talk) 17:16, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]


I strongly suggest you change some things... first - "The album continues the plot of The Downward Spiral, despite the complete change in sound and style of the album. Instead of heavily distorted instruments, and gritty industrial sounds, the album relies much more on soundscapes, electronic beats, ambient noise, and heavy metal-laden guitar, such as in the single Starfuckers, Inc." - I don't know who initially wrote this, but I strongly disagree. First and foremost, The Downward Spiral and The Fragile are two VERY similar albums...second...how in a world can you say "despites complete change in sound and style of the album"???????? are you serious??? "instead of heavily distorted instruments and gritty industrial sounds..." again - ARE YOU SERIOUS?!?!?! The Fragile is just as heavily distorted and gritty industrial-sounding as The Downward Spiral... Tracks like - Somewhat Damaged, The Wretched, Pilgrimage, Where Is Everybody?, The Big Came Down, Starfuckers - what more distorted can you get!? what more industrial-sounding can you get? - yes I know TDS is also, of course, but the point is that both are pretty alike. I insanely love both TDS and TF and I just want to turn your attention on this, with the good intentions of course... In my opinion it is pretty wrong...I understand if someone wrote "its a little bit different then The Downward Spiral" but exaggerating THIS much, for some mysterious reason is pretty wrong IMO.--VEGETA_DTX (talk) 12:15, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A continuation to The Downward Sprial?[edit]

Alot of people say that it isn't a continuation, People outside Wikipedia in forums like Songmeanings.comsongmeanings say that The Fragile is it's own album and not a continuation. This continuation thing isn't really a fact, but a theory of what Trent Reznor thinks it is. Should that be taken off or left? A theory isn't a fact is it? --Nightingale12 (talk) 07:25, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, delete that last comment.[edit]

That was refering to the time before it was edited, my bad. delete this comment and the other one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nightingale12 (talk • contribs) 07:36, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Concept Album[edit]

I know this is one of those albums that everyone calls a concept album, but is there an proof of this? No sources online call it one, I don't remember Trent ever really describing a concept, and I can't find a single reliable source that calls it one?. Ridernyc (talk) 13:53, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Genres[edit]

If people feel the genres for this article should differ from the con consensus reached at Talk:Nine Inch Nails, they need to speak up and form a consensus, not simply keep changing them at whim, to whatever source happens to agree with them. You can source this article to dozens of genres if you wanted to. Ridernyc (talk) 22:56, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As Nine Inch Nails and the Fragile articles are seperate, the consensus on the main article's genres do not necessarily apply to this albums article. (As far as I can see the consensus is only reached for the main band article) Besides the art rock classification (which is sourced [1]), I'm in favor of the classifications such as industrial rock or alternative rock (or maybe dark ambient). Myxomatosis57 (talk) 23:02, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I agree but as there is no consensus here and a total refusal of people to discuss these constant changes the only way I can see to settle the debate until there is a discussion is to point to the main article. I'm all for the Industrial and Alternative labels I think Art Rock is far too broad and meaningless. I'm not sure Dark Ambient really applies to this album, but would not object to it. Ridernyc (talk) 23:06, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Also am I safe in assuming we would both agree that removing all the genres and leaving only Art Rock is not really appropriate and fails to describe that style of the album. Ridernyc (talk) 23:09, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I think you might be right about art roc. Art rock would just look obsolete and confusing all next to the other genres. However. I think we can express the art rock labeling in the article's body, I guess. And I definitely agree upon the last statement you made; removing all other genres and leaving only art rock would be just misleading and wrong. Myxomatosis57 (talk) 23:15, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If you ask me what style an album is that and I say Art Rock it's not descriptive at all. I would argue I'm not even sure if it is a genre. If you read the Art Rock article they list everything from the Steve Miller Band to Laurie Anderson in the article. Seems to be just a catch all for "not mainstream and different". Ridernyc (talk) 23:27, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I guess the only reason for art rock labeling was album's new soundscapes, ambient tone and more melodic structure, which starkly contrasted chaotic The Downward Spiral and was new to the band. Apart from this, I can't see any other reasons to affilate this album with this labeling. Myxomatosis57 (talk) 23:39, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Consensus isnt needed if it's sourced. A source verifies it. Find a different source verifying your position. I'm not going to start a discussion on our opinions. Dan56 (talk) 23:50, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If you're challenging the sourced material, you're doing it b/c you dont agree with it, which is genre warring. As is reducing one artist/group to certain labels (User:Realist2/Genre Warrior#Behavior pattern and motivations). Dan56 (talk) 23:52, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Regardless of what you believe consensus can override sourcing particularly an area such as this where sourcing is known to fall short. YOu are displaying some major WP:Ownership issues now. Ridernyc (talk) 23:56, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Cite a guideline please. You are disagreeing with a reputed source that calls it an art rock album. Replacing another genre warrior/IP's genre change with your own unsourced changes is the same thing. Consensus is useful when there are conflicting sources, but you arent bothering to find any to begin with. If we really get a consensus among editors who understand the importance of verifiability and NPOV guidelines, then I would be seriously surprised if that "overrides" verifiability. Sourcing doesnt fall short if the source cited conflicts with your personl opinion on music genres. We instead use verifiable public or scholarly critiques to describe aesthetic opinions (WP:SUBJECTIVE), such as genres. Dan56 (talk) 00:25, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
So do you want to build consensus or do you want to fling essays at each other? Not interested in going down this road with you and if you continues to argue against consensus building I will have no issue going to the appropriate notice boards. A quick look at your block logs shows you should be very familiar with the process. Ridernyc (talk) 00:32, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Genres are a thing that change from album to album, song to song. Not every single thing an artist (or band in this case) releases is the same genre. Just because a band is generally one genre, doesn't make everything they release the same one. If they did a, I don't know, dubstep album, would it still be "Industrial rock, industrial metal, alternative rock, alternative metal, dark ambient"? Of course it wouldn't. That's ridiculous. There's a reliable source stating the album is art rock. Provide a source otherwise, or move on. Also, may I remind you of a little thing we call "no personal attacks". "Comment on the content, not the editor". What exactly does Dan's block log have to do with the genre of an album, again? Remind me, I must be forgetting.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 01:09, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Show me where Dan has commented on the content of the album? His total resistance to discussion is where that comment comes from.Ridernyc (talk) 01:14, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Show me where you've provided a source to prove the album isn't art rock. That's right! You haven't. He doesn't have to.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 01:17, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Show me where Dan has provided a source that states it is not the 4 other genres he has removed twice. We can go back and forth like this all night. That's why we work with consensus and do not blindly follow sources. Ridernyc (talk) 01:20, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The burden of proof is on the one who disagrees. I actually can't believe you just said that.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 01:27, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I just repeated what you did to me so not sure why you seem to think it's so unbelievable. So anyway do you have comments on the album, or you just here to further derail this because as far I can this is going nowhere fast. We are simply trying to build a consensus here and all this distraction is not helping. Moving on. Ridernyc (talk) 01:30, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You clearly haven't even read what I said. No consensus is needed here. There's a source. It calls the album art rock. End of story. Unless you'd like to bring up a source calling it something else, it's art rock. The burden of proof is on you. If you can't provide a source for anything else, move on. If you can, feel free to share it and add it to the article.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 01:36, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Both of you can keep saying that but it plain and simply is not true. So as I said moving on. Ridernyc (talk) 01:39, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It is. You can keep saying otherwise, but that's untrue.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 01:44, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Schemin', are we? Maybe you should readjust your perspective on genres here with what professional music journalists have written about this album? If you really want to a consensus, then I'll present a straight flush of professional critiques on this particular aesthetic opinion: Rolling Stone ("NIN’s monumental double-disc bid for the art-rock crown"), USA Today ("art-rock opus"), Will Hermes ("art-rock epic"), Ann Powers ("the art rock of King Crimson and Roxy Music ... borrows details of those styles"). And the funny thing is I didnt have some genre warrior's predisposition that made me Google "The Fragile" with "industrial rock". All I did was research the most reliable sources on the topic while I was looking through reviews to expand this article, and voila!. It is what it is: the majority of public or scholarly critiques for this topic seem to say "art rock", so what's the big deal? Dan56 (talk) 11:26, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I do not object to "art rock" label. It is sourced and further mention of this classification exists. Nevertheless, sole classification of "art rock" is misleading and inadequate, considering the depictions of industrial, (the album manages to be still industrial) noise and ambient properties in the reviews. To fill this up, I've tried to find some other explicit sources. I've found a source (which I thought that would satisfy the policies) about industrial rock. However, at the end, I was deemed as to be a typical genre warrior who deserved to be sneered at, although the industrial rock edit was sourced. (Nevertheless, I must also admit that I've made a stupid mistake by misinterpreting the A.V. Club source. Sorry for that.)
I guess there isn't any confusion left though, considering that everything is sourced. Myxomatosis57 (talk) 17:43, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I guess it's pretty appropriate to say that it's partially industrial metal, I mean just listen to No You Don't (Rammstein/Ministry reference basically) or Starfuckers Quality Jokes (talk) 17:31, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is clearly original research, please prove a reliable source for the industrial metal genre. TheDeviantPro (talk) 06:27, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Fragile motif[edit]

[Firstly, go to youtube or grab your album because you're going to need it.]

A careful listener can name at least 4 motifs (but who knows, there can be more!) of "The Fragile":

1. (mentioned in the article) "THE FRAIL" piano melody is later played on guitar in "THE FRAGILE".

2. (mentioned in the article) the piano melody which appears at the end of "WE'RE IN THIS TOGETHER" in a tempo of 100BPM is later played in 124BPM on "LA MER" and on "INTO THE VOID". (of course these two songs share some more elements than just the piano theme).

Now the less obvious stuff:

3. In the song "THE GREAT BELOW" there is a three-note melody played between the words "I can still feel you" and "even so far away" (many times in the song). The words "All I do" from "Underneath It All" are sung in exactly the same melody. Moreover, the words, "I can still feel you" are also sung in the same way in both songs.

4. Part of the acoustic guitar melody motif introduced in the 17th second of "THE BIG COME DOWN" is later played in the last song "RIPE (WITH DECAY) (only on CD and casette versions) starting with 6:03 in the song.

5. As a bonus: the wordless vocal harmonies from "THE GREAT BELOW" are shared with "AND ALL THAT COULD HAVE BEEN", a fan-favourite non-album song from The Fragile era of NIN. ;)

You can check it out yourself.

And my point is: should these informations be written in the article? They are very interesting and add depth to the album. Everyone can check what I have written. So it's kind of reliable. So? I think it would be nice to write at least that there are more motifs on The Fragile than it seems. Reznor did a great job with the album, why not inform others about it? I'm really curious of your answers. PS Sorry for all the mistakes, I'm a non-english speaker. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.6.174.199 (talk) 12:57, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on The Fragile (Nine Inch Nails album). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:13, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on The Fragile (Nine Inch Nails album). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:00, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on The Fragile (Nine Inch Nails album). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:17, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Fragile (Nine Inch Nails album). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:22, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 13 January 2020[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved. (non-admin closure) Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:40, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]


The Fragile (Nine Inch Nails album) → The Fragile – I was pretty taken aback to see that this article has such a specific disambiguator, so I had a look at the Fragile dab page to see what other topics have this name.

Turns out that, although there are quite a few things named just Fragile (including other albums), the only other thing named THE Fragile that has an article is another album.

Between the fact that the Nine Inch Nails album has page views in the thousands while the O'Hooley & Tidow album doesn't even come close, a quick Google search that almost exclusively brought up results related to the NIN album and the other album being by a seemingly much less well-known and culturally significant artist, this album seems like an obvious WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Vaporgaze (talk) 15:23, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Fragile&oldid=1211409335"