Perhaps some of you spied with your little eyes a relatively new term (hint: three articles down), that caused quite a stir not so long ago. When do expressions, or phrases, start becoming clichés and which can’t you stand most?
Archive for February, 2008
Question of the Week: What Are the Worst Music Journalism Clichés?
Posted by A.C. Rhodes on February 25, 2008
Posted in Question of the Week | 18 Comments »
Perfect Sound Forever’s Summer Session with The Dean of Rock Critics, Robert Christgau
Posted by A.C. Rhodes on February 25, 2008
Robert Christgau, of course otherwise known as the Dean of Rock Critics, will be editing the June 2008 edition of Perfect Sound Forever.
Needless to say, the folks there are pretty excited about the prospect of having the Dean serving as guest editor for the summer issue.
“We here at Perfect Sound Forever are very proud to be working with Robert Christgau on our June 2008 issue,” said Jason Gross, editor and main scribe. “So far, we’re mulling over the papers but I’ve been very impressed with what I’ve seen so far – this could be the next generation of music scribes.”
The Dean has been a longtime supporter of PSF, going from interview subject to contributor to editor (though, as Gross asserts, he likely won’t take the next step to become owner).
For this special issue, Christgau will select from his Princeton University class’ articles, many of which were final papers that the class submitted and cover a wide range of subjects (at this point is still being worked out). According to both Gross and Christgau, the promising young writers may turn out to be the next heralded generation of music journalists.
“Since PSF has long worked with up-and-coming wordsmiths, we’re also pleased to be giving these writers a forum and one of their first forays into the world of journalism,” adds Gross.
Yet, before that, the decision for Christgau to even take part was, according to him, very simple.
“I’ve taught a required music history and writing course for REMU, NYU’s Clive Davis Department of Recorded Music, for four years, and also taught a course in cultural journalism at Princeton last fall,” the writer said by weekend email. He also shed some light into the student thought process.
“The REMU students usually don’t conceive themselves as writers, although every term one or two get the bug, and many more prove to be excellent writers once they’re shown how, with a special facility for describing music because a career in music is their life plan (and, quite often, music is their life). Most of my Princeton students were not music specialists, but I got a few good music papers there as well.
“Since some of this work taught me stuff, and much of it seemed much better than most of what I encounter online, I thought it would be cool to make the best of it available to the public, and Jason volunteered an issue of PSF for the purpose.”
But, Christgau shares that the process hasn’t been that even.
“There have been setbacks – lost manuscripts and files, students studying abroad, and in one case proprietary information that the student wasn’t supposed to use outside of an academic context. But we should have an issue, with topics ranging from pre-Stankonia OutKast and the metal band Killswitch Engage to Janet and Britney and The Hills, from the Shirelles to Cajun music. Still need to sort it out, but those are some candidates.”
Christgau graduated from Dartmouth University in 1962. While there, he explored his interests in jazz to rock. Ever the consumate east coaster, Christgau went on to writer for Playboy, Spin, aside from Creem. After teaching at the California Institute of the Arts, he became an adjunct professor in the Clive Davis Department of Recorded Music at New York University (NYU).
Likewise, among other things, Perfect Sound Forever is the longest running and one of the most entertaining and successful online music publications.
Posted in News | 4 Comments »
Old Letters #10
Posted by s woods on February 24, 2008
[Rolling Stone, June 22, 1968]
Posted in Dear Ed. | 3 Comments »
Scott’s Bookshelf, Part 5
Posted by s woods on February 24, 2008
30. Route 666: On the Road to Nirvana (Gina Arnold) – The gap between my enjoyment of Nirvana’s music and my disinterest in reading about them is more pronounced than it is with just about any other major pop/rock artist I can think of. I can’t really explain this gap aside from admitting I’m just being an unreasonable, stubborn bastard on the matter. I do have a vague sense that, back when they stalked the earth, there was an awful lot of nonsense written about them, and that the nonsense increased exponentially after April 1994. Can I point to anything specific to prove my case? Not really — like I say, it’s just a vague sense. I think part of it stems from the fact that the whole Seattle moment was one of the few genuine pop explosions of my lifetime that I not only didn’t feel part of, but in fact felt a little alienated by (though not alienated enough to prevent me from hearing the music). I wouldn’t say I felt any particular animus towards it — well, maybe a little bit towards goatees – I just never felt like this scene was mine, nor did I want it to be mine. If I was left out, that was fine; I didn’t really want “in.”
Posted in Bookshelf | Leave a Comment »
Weekend links roundup
Posted by s woods on February 23, 2008
- Robert Christgau
slums itblogs and throws in his three cents about Pazz & Jop vs. Idolator: “I really don’t have a horse in this race. I like Idolator and have no love for the guys who fired me, and of course there would be a certain schadenfreude in seeing PJ fail without me–I resist it, but it’s there.”
- Marshall McLuhan blasts the Ford-Carter debate: “…the most stupid arrangement of any debate in the history of debating”; “the vibrations got through to the amplifier and said, ‘this must not continue’”; etc.
- Frank Kogan revives the rockism-antirockism discussion: “My problem [with the term 'rockism'] is more personal: I can’t tell if I’m a rockist or not, or whether a lot of other rock critics are rockists or not (Dave Marsh, Greil Marcus, Richard Meltzer, Lester Bangs, Robert Christgau, Chuck Eddy), and I think the confusion is in the concept, not in me.” (My quick response is perhaps similar to what Frank himself says in the same piece about the word “authenticity”; “rockist” works okay in describing a tendency, but clearly sucks as a defining label. )
- Hillary Clinton resorts to political rockism: “If your candidacy is going to be about words, then they should be your own words…”
- David Moore (and others) talk about Carl and Celine and taste: “I get no sense of Carl being moved by Celine, before or after his thought experiment. I get no sense of Carl really caring about Celine as an artist who makes music (though he cares about her as an object of study — although artists I have no sense of as even human routinely move me more than most Celine Dion — I think I’d rather write a book on Jojo than a Celine Dion album!”)
- Devin McKinney at hey dullblog nails (pretty much) my problems with Marsh’s recently released Beatles book (though he, unlike me, was at least able to finish the thing). So much in McKinney’s review I agree with, but his last line says it best: “‘In print,’ Marsh writes of the other Dave [Dexter--the villain who takes up a sizable portion of the text], ‘he comes across as a nasty, vindictive son of a bitch.’ I grant Marsh the respect of assuming he sent his book to print fully aware of how easily that might be applied not just to his target, but to himself.” Too bad–the idea of Marsh writing about The Beatles Second Album was intriguing to me on a number of levels (as Marsh himself points out near the start, TBSA is the sort of “great story” record any smart critic would like to tackle). But as McKinney points out far more eloquently than I could (and BTW he’s completely on the money about the bullishness of Marsh’s taken-for-granted stance about ‘Till There Was You”), the rancor in Marsh’s voice just becomes too much after a while.
Posted in Links | Leave a Comment »
Dr. Shakey’s Flip-flops
Posted by A.C. Rhodes on February 18, 2008
Related to the Q. of the Week… I heard old Neil put her down, at least fairly recently. At the Berlin Film Festival last week he said, “I think that the time when music could change the world is past. I think it would be very naive to think that in this day and age.”
And in a rather Devo moment he added, “I think the world today is a different place, and that it’s time for science and physics and spirituality to make a difference in this world and to try to save the planet.”
However, like any good revisionist he later amended that in the commentary found here.
But, of course, that wasn’t the end of it, and he had to throw this near-Belinda Carlisle curve. And continue along those lines with his former bandmates. Sheesh, make up what’s left of your mind, Percy.
Posted in Blabbin' | Leave a Comment »
Question of the Week: Can Music Influence Change?
Posted by A.C. Rhodes on February 18, 2008
Did it ever, really? Either way, is it doomed to an agenda of mediocre money making trends?
Posted in Question of the Week | Leave a Comment »
Old Letters #9
Posted by s woods on February 12, 2008
[Nerve magazine, Toronto, 1986. Mr. Page was right BTW - we did hear of him, we did.]
Posted in Dear Ed. | Leave a Comment »
Scott’s Bookshelf, Part 4
Posted by s woods on February 12, 2008
25. Sound Effects: Youth, Leisure, and the Politics of Rock ‘n’ Roll (Simon Frith) – Aka The Sociology of Rock. One of the first books of rock criticism I tried to read, ”tried” being the operative word in this case. Frith’s prose just never grabbed me here, never led me into thinking (or caring) about his ideas . That said, I’m uncomfortable with the assumption in Christgau’s headline for his review of this book: ”It’s Barely Rock and Roll, But I Like It.” Uncomfortable, that is, with the idea that a book about rock and roll has to read like rock and roll, uncomfortable with the underlying assumptions about what such a formulation even means (it must be loud? forceful? in-your-face?). Weird thought coming from Christgau, given that he probably has a wider definition of “rock and roll” than just about anyone. (He nails my disinterest with the book much better when he says it “isn’t romantic enough.” Maybe that’s what his headline means??) As I mentioned in a previous entry, I do like Performing Rites quite a bit, and I’m guessing that stylistically the books aren’t really that different. Maybe the slyness –the Drifters, if not the Stooges — in Frith’s voice just comes through a little better in the later book?
Posted in Bookshelf | 1 Comment »
Bonus Q. of the Week: Does ‘Gimme Shelter’ Still Deliver?
Posted by A.C. Rhodes on February 11, 2008
Since we’re on somewhat of a Stones jag this month, and I coincidentally spotted the movie on cable the other day, the question occurred. All members seem nonplussed while reviewing the stabbing footage – disaffected, really. The rest views like a template for This Is Spinal Tap.
Does it stand up as well as, let’s say, Woodstock, Monterey Pop or even Rock and Roll Circus and Let It Be?
Posted in Question of the Week | 2 Comments »
Question of the Week: Sister Morphine, Please?
Posted by A.C. Rhodes on February 10, 2008
From the pot calling the kettle department: All right, how fucked was Mick Jagger remarking rather judgmentally, not about Ms. Here-for-Now Winehouse, but as to why young people don’t avoid drugs all together these days?
His explanation being that back in the days of tripping down Carnaby it was all about experimentation whereas now there is knowledge of negative effects. Given his own friends’ post-Betty Ford track record, how justified or qualified is he to make these statements?
Posted in Question of the Week | 2 Comments »
Early Thoughts on the Packaging of ‘Rolling Stone Cover to Cover’
Posted by s woods on February 8, 2008
So, a couple days ago I went into BMV books in Toronto on my lunch hour and treated myself to a marked-down copy of this: every issue of Rolling Stone, front to back, on DVD, from 1967 to May 2007. I’m slowly making my way through it all — I certainly have no intention of reading every issue, though I do intend to at least browse through every page of the first ten years or so — and it’s fascinating stuff. I love all the old ads, the letters, the pics, and yeah, sure, what the hell, there’s even an article or two I’ve come across that’s okay.
I was hesitant about buying it, not because I don’t think it’s a good deal (it is), not because I don’t think it’s pretty cool to have at-your-fingertips access to all this stuff, but because I hadn’t read anything about the package itself, i.e., how well-designed it is, how easy it is to navigate through it, etc. As someone who spends an inordinate amount of time computing (both at work and at home), I pretty much have zero patience for non-intuitive PC gadgetry, and the last thing I wanted was some behemoth of a document that would be a pain to sift through.
With that in mind, a few early thoughts on the package. (There’s no point me discussing the contents; everything is scanned directly from the magazine.)
Posted in Tech Stuff, Zines | 1 Comment »
Old Letters #8
Posted by s woods on February 8, 2008
[CREEM, November 1975]
Posted in Creem, Dear Ed. | Leave a Comment »
Old Letters #7
Posted by s woods on February 7, 2008
[Rolling Stone, June 14/79)
(“Perspicacious” = Elvis Costello’s dad was clearly brushed up on his Christgau!)
Posted in Dear Ed. | 4 Comments »
Bonus Q. of the Week: Best of the Rest?
Posted by A.C. Rhodes on February 1, 2008
Forget the others. What were your favorite five records from last year, and the one you would take on a car or overnight trip?
Posted in Question of the Week | 6 Comments »
