Harry Styles Has Finally Found His Mold

When Harry Styles released his solo debut single in 2017, he sent critics, fans, and the world a clear message. Sign of the Times was an epic rock ballad, as tragic as it was climactic. It was deeply emotional, and completely different from anything he’d done as a member of the boy-band One Direction. It referenced the sounds of the iconic artists like David Bowie and Queen. When Styles belted that final, climactic “just stop your crying it’ll be alright” it’s like he was telling everyone: “I’d like to be thought of as a songwriter now, thank you very much.”

https://open.spotify.com/track/5Ohxk2dO5COHF1krpoPigN?si=f5290aebf36042dc

He sent the same message with the rest of his self-titled soft-rock debut album, and with this second album, Fine Line. Both albums pull much of their inspiration from the great songwriters of the 60s and 70s. He even tracked down the maker of a specialty instrument used on Joni Mitchell’s Blue and had one made for himself to use. Around the same time, he befriended Stevie Nicks. He associated himself with the greats of the past, became a diligent student of their work, and learned to emulate them very effectively.

The problem for him, then, is that by making every effort to be thought of as a Great Songwriter™, he fit himself into a mold that wasn’t the most conducive to his talents. All of those greats from the past he was trying to emulate were famous for their originality, and by emulating them to a tee, he was essentially making imitations. That isn’t a dig at his first two albums, by the way. I’m a fan of both, and well-executed imitation certainly has a place in the pop landscape (see: Silk Sonic and Machine Gun Kelly). But by trying to fit into the mold of a great rock-and-roll songwriter, Styles actually limited himself creatively and limited how he was viewed from a critical perspective.

Luckily, Styles has now adopted a new mold, one that suits his strengths and makes for a more original, more on-the-whole effective body of work. On Harry’s House, Harry-Styles-the-Songwriter is no more. Meet Harry-Styles-the-Creative-Director.

Some of the greatest pop stars of all time have primarily been creative directors more than anything else ⁠ — think Madonna, Lady Gaga, Beyonce. Their talents lie less in their ability to write amazing songs and more in their ability to make strong creative decisions that support their artistry and find collaborators that can effectively execute their big-picture vision.

That’s exactly what Styles has done on Harry’s House. The album sets out to transport the listener into a unique and cohesive sonic world. There’s still that clear nostalgia to his work, but now it operates as inspiration, not imitation. The hosts of the podcast Every Single Album ⁠ — which just wrapped up a series on One Direction ⁠ — likened Harry’s House to a Pinterest board. It’s highly curated, highly stylized, and highly pleasing. Nothing here is raw or unedited; everything has been filtered. Each song acts as a little window into an aestheticized version of a moment in Styles’ life, and together they form a musical gallery, one so transportive it feels like you can live inside it.

A common criticism of the album has been a lack of substance in the writing, and I won’t disagree. There’s quite literally less writing happening here than on his previous albums. The lyrics are generally more sparse, and many of the tracks trade concrete imagery for abstract, euphonic lines. On the album opener, Music for a Sushi Restaurant, Styles seems more interested in the way that words sound and interact with music than he does with what they actually mean.

https://open.spotify.com/track/5LYMamLv12UPbemOaTPyeV?si=63feda7b073247e1

What that lyrical choice means is that, from a songwriting perspective, no individual song on Harry’s House reaches the peaks of Fine Line. That’s not to say the songwriting is weak by any means, but that the writing isn’t prioritized over any other creative decision made on the album. Here, the lyrical choices support the music, and vice versa. Every creative decision works together equally well to transport the listener into that Pinterest board-like experience.

So does Harry’s House lack substance? Sure. But I would argue that assessment is a remnant of the Styles-as-Songwriter label ⁠ — a label that, mind you, he put on himself back in 2017, but one that he has since eschewed. Viewing Harry Styles as the David Bowie-imitator he was back in 2017 will make Harry’s House a disappointing journey. But viewing him as the Madonna-like Creative Director he has become makes Harry’s House seem like the well-constructed sonic world that it is.