Archive for the ‘criticism’ Category

Away from the hype cycle

Thursday, January 27th, 2011

Sean Adams from Drowned In Sound offers some thoughts on how the flood of new music and the 24/7 music news cycle has lead the site to stop following what might best be referred to as the Pitchfork model. I’m especially impressed by the idea that that sort of coverage is an insult not just to readers but to the artists themselves: “You’d [be] for forgiven for thinking every last morsel of rock’n’roll’s cadaver had been gnawed, yet every day another Forkcast exclusive is mass-mailed out and interview time with bands who’ve done a session for a BBC 6Music evening show is offered up – I have no idea anymore what I’d ask some band who I’ve never seen live and only heard two songs by, just feels insulting – to them, especially.”

In my ample recently unemployed days I’ve been thinking a lot about what to with this blog, what direction to take it in, how much time I can devote to it when it brings me no money at all (those Google ads are there for a reason, folks; one click a day, that’s all I ask), and lot’s of other things that are of no real interest to anyone but myself. But this piece gives me a hint. DiS is right, I think, to take themselves out of the hype stream, but at the same time to take advantage of it. There’s tons of information out there, and though in some ways it is overwhelming, it’s also bound to put you in contact with music and ideas you never considered before and that will lift your spirits, elevate your mind, and maybe even make the world a better place (it has happened, you know). Fishing in the hype stream without becoming a part of it, that’s the trick.

Country Music Critics Poll

Thursday, January 27th, 2011

Every year, Nashville Scene does it’s own, country version of Pazz and Jop. If you ever wanted a quick overview of what’s going on in country music, as well as a good playlist to start with, this is the place. I don’t agree with all their choices, of course (I’ve never been able to get into Jamey Johnson, and would probably put Elizabeth Cook at number one), but this is a solid list of great and/or important country records from last year. Geoffrey Himes’s year-capping essay only scrapes the surface of what’s going on, but the critics comments will fill you in on a lot of the gaps.

The Year Of Difficult Listening

Monday, January 17th, 2011

A great idea from Tom Ewing, though I can’t imagine anyone getting through it who didn’t like the hard stuff to begin with. The most difficult part wouldn’t be the listening, it would be actually hearing the music and coming to some understanding of it and commenting on it afterwords. Don’t look at me; I have a bad enough time with the Hot 100.

Into the woods, and out again

Friday, January 14th, 2011

This Guardian article by the usually flawless Tom Ewing is a perfect example of how looking at pop music almost solely as a rivalry between art and business can you lead you to the wrong conclusions. Trying to explain those moments when artists make records that seems beyond not just their own limitations, but everybody’s, and then retreat to safer ground the next time out, Ewing focuses on nothing but commercial pressures. He seems to ignore the personal and emotional forces that help to create such works, and often make it impossible to create another. The history of pop music is full of the stories of artists who created groundbreaking records of seemingly limitless musical and emotional depth, and then either retreated to safer pastures or collapsed completely: Sly Stone’s There’s A Riot Goin’ On; John Lennon’s Plastic Ono Band; Neutral Milk Hotel’s The Aeroplane Over the Sea; My Bloody Valentine’s Loveless; Van Morrison’s Astral Weeks; Bob Dylan’s string of mid-sixties triumphs (three different albums, but released in the space of a year); Nirvana’s In Utero; Frank Sinatra’s Only The Lonely; Pet Shop Boys’s Very; and, of course, The Beach Boys’s Smile, which stood uncompleted for almost forty years because Brian Wilson crashed and burned in the middle of making it.

Britney Spear’s Blackout and Rihanna’s Rated R share little in terms of quality with these records (though that opinion is subject to change), but they do share comparable stories of creation, coming as the result either of traumatic events, intense personal pressures, or sudden changes in viewpoint (i.e., Brian Wilson’s discovery of LSD). Each represents an artist going farther into themselves and their music than they ever had before and would ever be able to do again. Some moved on to safer, more comfortable ideas, some collapsed and weren’t heard from again for years, or ever. Some died. But I think it’s fair to say not one of them changed course because of commercial pressure. These records were anomalies, not just in terms of pop music as a whole, but in terms of the artist’s careers. They’re the Bob Beamon’s of pop music, and I would no more expect these artists to continue on in the same fashion than I would have expected Beamon to be able to jump over 29 feet every time he lifted both feet off the ground. There’s only so far into yourself you can go, and once you have, if you get out in one piece, you would have to be the rarest kind of human being to dare and go back again.

When Smokey talks

Tuesday, January 11th, 2011

A couple of weeks ago a commenter (I get a few of those occasionally) berated me for, among several others things, the quote from Smokey Robinson at the top of the page. “Classic smart-alecky, superior touch,” he wrote. “I bet you smirk every time you look at it.” To a certain degree, this was true. Most of the quotes I’ve put at the top of the page have been intended to be ironic, or merely funny, and at first this was no exception. Now, though, it is an exception, which is why I’ve kept it up there for so long. Because now I believe it’s true, and I don’t think Smokey misspoke at all (the last thing anyone could accuse Smokey Robinson of is not knowing how to use words); he said exactly what he wanted to say.

Obviously, music cannot technically be defined as a genre; most people would call it an art, though in a way I find even that term misleading, since people tend to think of art today as consumable objects, the more “artistic” they are the heftier the price tag. Music is more than that. The best I can come up with is “mode of human expression” which sounds academic and jargony, but will have to do for now. There’s no reason why “mode” can’t be replaced with “genre”, at least for everyday purposes, even if it isn’t technically correct.

Whatever the case, I would much rather have music be a genre itself, with no subdivisions, than have to deal with the current crop of genre breakdowns that clog up so much thought and writing about music. Sometimes the genre names are good for a laugh, like my favorite, technical death metal, and sometimes they’re properly descriptive, like drum and bass or grime, but often, especially when the genre name is based not on the sound of the music but on where the genre first became known (house, garage, balearic, goa) they’re confusing to anyone too far outside of a particular scene.

Confusion, I admit, is sometimes the point, and often genre names are derived with the intention of limiting access or shutting out those who aren’t part of a particular scene, but often they result in the reverse—instead of shutting people out, they shut the music in, limiting its possibilities and making it difficult for it to change and grow. The bonds are always broken in the end, but too often not until stagnation has almost killed the scene and either driven the best people away or trapped them in a rut they can never break out of.

Part of the problem is that almost all music writers use the word genre incorrectly, anyway. Where Robinson uses it to describe too much, many music writers use it too describe too little. Genre should only be used to describe large musical divisions: classical, pop, country, hip-hop, heavy metal, electronica (or techno, or simply electronic dance music, depending on your taste or age), etc. Everything that comes under those headings should be referred to as a style, not a genre. I don’t expect music writers to be well-versed in taxonomy, but the occasional application of logic wouldn’t hurt.

As much as Robinson is right about music being music and all these genre breakdowns being essentially meaningless, he’s also wrong, because genre divisions are real, and important. What they define, though, is not a difference in style so much as a difference in intent or purpose. Heavy metal isn’t trying to do what hip-hop does, which isn’t trying to do what classical does, which isn’t trying to do what country does, etc. Each has a totally different purpose from the other, which is why it’s so difficult to break down genre barriers as opposed to stylistic barriers.

Yet, once again, Robinson is right, because when he says music, he actually means the music he knows best, pop. Pop music is the one exception to all of this: the genre without barriers, the genre that possibly isn’t a genre at all, but the great mongrel form that takes them all in and turns them into something both greater and less than the original. Being something of a dilettante, it’s that nebulous, ill-defined quality about pop music that appeals to me—the opportunity to go genre hopping without ever leaving the comfort of your living room, so to speak. If there is such a thing as music as nothing more than music, something that defines what music can be in all it’s aspects, pop is it. Smokey Robinson has known that for most of his life, and he couldn’t have expressed it better.

The trouble with Kanye

Monday, January 3rd, 2011

Ta-Nehisi Coates lays out the main problem with My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy far better than I ever could. Despite all the great music, the casual sexism and hints of racism that fill the album undermine whatever other message West may be trying to deliver. If he really is wrestling with his demons, it seems as if he has half a mind to throw the match before it even starts. Much of this is rooted in hip-hop, and even earlier black culture, and didn’t originate with West, but it’s obvious now that his idea of being the King of Hip-hop doesn’t include any actual desire to reform its moral view point—he’s just trying to cover it in more style and musical sophistication. Which makes it difficult to take much of anything he says anymore seriously.

Quote of the day

Sunday, December 26th, 2010

“…great art offers a necessary alternative to an over-mediated culture. Art writers should use the internet to counteract the dematerialization of a hyper-connected world, not encourage it through false promises.”

—James Panero in The New Criterion

Worth reading in full.

Stop this train

Wednesday, December 22nd, 2010

Maura Johnston and Christopher R. Weingarten eviscerate “Hey, Soul Sister”. I had no idea it was based on a fantasy of hippie chicks dancing around a bonfire at Burning Man, and I can’t possibly describe how much more that makes me hate it.

Finishing the Hat

Wednesday, December 22nd, 2010

The intro from Stephen Sondheim’s new collection of lyrics with commentary includes a simple, charmingly self-deprecating primer on lyric writing, and explains why good poets make lousy lyricists. Learn from the best, my friends.

What’s wrong with Bruno Mars?

Tuesday, October 19th, 2010

Nitsuh Abebe does a great job with the paradox of Mars: an obvious talent with a somewhat serious edge dulled by a too-eager-to-please streak wider than some oceans. That’s why I find Mars so fascinating—there’s a tension, almost a war, between his pop sensibilities and his more serious sides, and both want to capture and use his talents to the fullest (right now, the pop side seems to be winning). Everything I’ve heard from his first album is a mess in one way or the other, but it’s going to be interesting to see what he comes up with next.