Since I read the reconstituted, on-line-only version of the venerable CRAWDADDY! [thoughtfully bundled in with my weekly Wolfgang’s Vault concert archive e-mails] with some regularity, I can vouch for its residual interest, though I seldom look at more than one or two articles per virtual “issue”. On the whole, it’s fine.
But this li’l bit caught my eye, quite naturally, given the Postpunk Mount Rushmore faces involved, and I must admit to feeling a bit sick by the second or third ‘graph.
It struck me as similar to some of the least appetizing elements of PITCHFORK, with which I am admittedly less familiar, and embodies a great many of the half-assed, namby-pamby, proudly ignorant trends/tropes I’ve encountered in much latterday music “criticism”, from whatever source.
I also couldn’t help but contrast this particular “faux dialogue” with the much meaner, funnier and wittier one Timmy and I engaged in at just the cusp of Sonic Youth’s downturn in 1993 [“Bullshit in the Heather”, no longer findable on-line, so far as I know].
Perhaps I’ve become something of a snob during these my Postpunk Elder Statesman Years, or so it has been said, but I just don’t think undifferentiated drivel like this ought to be showing up “in print”, as it were, or even on any blog worth its literary salt.
Fine as conversation over coffee, of course, which is all it probably ever was, or perhaps on Facebook, but the idea that anyone was paid to provide this “content” I find appalling.
And it’s not as though these are “obscure” bands, at least not to anyone who liked Nirvana and The Pixies once upon a time! Or even that the two writers don’t actually know a fair amount about them. They simply have nothing to say re: The Fall or Gang of Four that’s not press release boilerplate, at best.
The thing I crave, particularly in the absence of wit or malice, is ANALYSIS, or HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE, or even just cogent, above-average writing. And to me this shite is nothing more than dual-navel gaze chitchat writ small.
The sign-off was perhaps most disheartening of all. Don’t think I’ve encountered this sort of half-witted self-congratulation since I was regularly in the company of sophomore high school debaters thirty years ago:
And with that, I think our work here is done: Once again we’ve listened; we’ve considered; we’ve researched and weighed in, providing our readers some necessary content on which they can chew. Ultimately, the listener will decide for him or herself what she or he likes, though hopefully we’ve passed on a little useful information. With any luck we’ve made some people laugh; I hope we haven’t made anyone cry, but then, there’s always next time. Now that’s what I call entertainment.
By the end, I was truly sorry I’d wasted my time, hence this attempt to make some critical “hay” outta said misfortune!
Anyone care to weigh in further, particularly re: this piece possibly embodying a new “default setting” for published music crit? [It appears to be a regular feature, hence no “straw figure”!]
– Tom Kipp
******************************************************************
As someone with painfully little credibility at writing criticism or reviews (or writing anything at all, for that matter), I will still venture out on a limb to offer my agreement with Mr. Kippp and Mr. Midgett about these “publications” (if they can be called that) and the quality of the writing. “Pretentious” is a the word that I find appropriate. However, regarding the closing remarks of the Crawdaddy piece discussed by Mr. Kipp, I take slight (only very slight) exception to his comparison of these “writers” and sophomore high school debaters. Surely the latter have accomplished something (only very) slightly more significant to justify their self-righteous attitude then these “writers” (and they can prove it – just take a look at the flowsheet from their last round that they are so proudly passing around to their teammates).
Though I never found myself to be a very qualified critic, and I certainly have never been particularly well connected to current, or very sadly, past music trends (i.e. the post punk period), I find that I have deteriorated into the definitive novice on the subject; however, my interest and love of music has never waned, and I have of late found a renewed desire to learn much more about said subjects. Recommendations from you good people regarding online blogs and other critical writings which may have won your respect would be greatly appreciated anytime the moment may strike.
Thanks!
Out on a limb,
– Jay Schuschke
******************************************************************
Here’s one Tom won’t want to miss:
http://www.crawdaddy.com/index.php/2011/01/20/james-williamson-the-return-of-raw-power/
So far as a coupla rock crits sitting around talking, I’m reminded of Lester Bangs and Paul Nelson, who used a transcribed tape recording of themselves to fill out one whole chapter in their “Rod Stewart” bio. They called this “Two Jewish Mothers Pose as Rock Critics,” and Nelson later told Jim DeRogatis, “That’s my favorite part of the book, and one of my very favorite things I’ve ever been involved in.”
A prehistoric precursor to the podcast!
Out now: New ones from Gang Of Four, Wire, and one of the bands called Faust (who’ve just split into two identically-identified lineups, an Amon Düül in reverse if you will). Tom (and/or anybody else): Your thoughts?
– Andrew Hamlin
******************************************************************
I like the idea of a podcast. This roundtable needs a podcast and I’d love to promote it.
– East Portland Blog
