Simon Reynolds is a gobshite

it reminds me of in blissout when he talks about how 'smart' 'high' art takes its ideas from popular art, the idea that populist art rarely takes its concepts from the art school artistes ... & his only example of the 'exception that proves the rule' is when he mentions the bomb squad getting ideas from 'my life in the bush of ghosts' ... because naturally, the bomb squad, being black & playing for rap fans, couldnt possibly be 'high art'

im sorry but fans of gucci & soulja boy see this stuff as being fresh in its context. i know lots of them! they exist, & they have reasons for liking it, & those reasons arent any less-justifiable than the cultural critics of the new yorker & the guardian.

musically a bunch of the rappers hes talking about are doing new & interesting creative shit but because its going in a different direction than his pet narrative about the early part of the decade hes got to shit on it for the narrowest reasons, reasons that also perfectly apply to the rap music he's celebrating -- hypocritical garbage

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Carpenter

The original beardo?

Deej I agree with you about this article, but I think that it's not controversial to contrast The Bomb Squad and My Life in The Bush Of Ghosts on popular/high art terms.

I think there are a bunch of problems with this piece obv:

- the self-interested copy of any aging rap artist/producer who's aiming for crossover appeal (Timbaland, Jay-Z etc.) on the limitations/boringness of rap has zero credibility in a discussion like this, any reference to Coldplay or Radiohead only compounds this.
- SR possibly thinks that simply dismissing new rappers with a "blah blah blah... all the same..." wave of the hand strengthens the effect he's trying to create, but it's strategically misguided; I think there is an argument to say that, e.g., Southern rap production has become quite comfortable with itself by and large, but by not addressing specifics at all he's unable to establish even a more limited claim of this sort (let alone the sort of argument he's actually making). More generally, I'd say "lol u old' is such a spot-on criticism with so many instances of this kind of argument that the fact that it's not definitively correct in each case doesn't mean it's not a rebuttable presumption - this kind of argument needs to be made in a much more nuanced manner; compare/contrast when he started complaining (correctly) about drum & bass stagnating in the late nineties, where he neatly skewered the production approach of each of the main sub-sets.
- I think underneath it all he's trying to say "if rap isn't on the bleeding edge anymore, that's not such an awful or shameful thing - nothing else is on the bleeding edge anymore" but he doesn't get it across clearly enough, such that he's leaving wide open the assumption that he thinks something else is still futuristic and exciting and etc (dubstep? hypnagogic pop? I sincerely hope he doesn't think so for either, and I'd be very surprised if he did actually).

btw tim i made a more reasoned & less off the cuff argument elsewhere lol

any sort of argument is way more than this piece deserves tbh

it's just so embarrassingly attention whorey. i don't see that there's any debate to be had about it

deej: any chance you could copy that over here?

I still haven't figured out wtf hypnagogic pop is

brian eno and david byrne are pretty dim.

Has anyone outside of ILM even used the phrase hypnagogic pop?

i think simon has some good points in there buried in his need to write something 'important' about rap music. Its kind of gratingly egotistical, in my opinion -- i guess he thinks this is the way he prefers his writing, that ppl take brave stands instead of worrying about nuance or whatever. I mean, there's no doubt Simon R has been a pretty big influence on the way I think about music (& related egotism). & I know this piece is designed to inspire, you know, actual passionate argument or whatever. & in that case its doing its job, because I find it pretty unbearable. Not that I've ever really enjoyed his meditations on rap music, pretty much ever --

but i think ultimately these piece is a huge failure in some ways, particularly his unwillingness to engage with current music -- and no, i dont think current rap requires any more engagement than it did a decade ago, in terms of how it sounds (that said theres an argument to be made about it working in less wide-ranging ways certainly), although in terms of channels & access -- the lack of TRL, or a monoculture, the increasing niche-ification of music listening, but also the increasing awareness we have of lots of boring rap music, the huge amount of chaff out there w/out the charts to at least give us some wheat to orient around -- it probably does require a little research. maybe a journalist concerned with these issues could ask people what they think, to rely on multiple sources instead of his own instincts about music & his need to be first on the block to declare the beginnings & ends of musical movements ....

The biggest thing is his inability to damn current rap in a meaningful way. Accusing its stars of rapping about "bling and booty" while talking about hip-hop's peak being three-six mafia, ruff ryders & cash money?? Does he lack that much self-awareness? Back when he saw himself enlightening people who were dismissing mainstream rap in favor of backpack shit -- self included here -- we were like "but ... this stuff is all about bling & booty." Hes one of the people who made me question that, albeit indirectly (scottpl was another! as were ... high school & college parties, haha). & I realized there was a lot more going on.

but now he's doing the same thing ... how is soulja boy so much worse than j-kwon?? "tipsy" is a great song, but "turn my swag on" was just as fresh & novel & different (although it didnt reference the rave songs of his post-youth so...). Gucci Mane is certainly as good/better a rapper than most of the dudes on ruff ryders or hypnotized minds ... and those are classic groups who've recorded some of my favorite music.

the problem as i see it is he's never really engaged with rap music AS RAP MUSIC. the idea that how people rap actually matters -- what personas they inhabit, how they use their lyrics, why millions of rap fans out there bother memorizing what rappers are saying, not just what they're saying but how they say it ... i've never once seen him write about that stuff. its always, "showing the influences of rave" & big picture shit. I've always found that 'forest for the trees' argument shortsighted when people's understanding of the forest is at tree-level. sometimes understanding music involves acknowledging that maybe your perspective just might be more of an issue than you realize.

i think at some level what pisses me off most about this is that i feel like i spent a lot of time defending ppl like SR's interpretations of rap music to rap fans i knew -- not literally like "you should check this guy Simon Reynolds" but in the sense that, like, I think outsider perspectives -- as in perspectives from ppl who dont consider themselves 'heads' -- can be hugely insightful & certainly powerfully impacted the way i listen to rap. & while i didnt read much simon wrote on rap himself -- like i said above, ive never really dug his actual writing on the form -- his ideas filtered down to me in other ways -- paying attention to ground level to signal a scene's movement, looking at the internal dynamics of a scene to understand whats going on, the dynamics of genres interacting w/ each other broadly, & through writers like tim & scott pl who obviously learned a lot from simon. its not so much that im annoyed by sr not giving a shit about rap any more -- im more annoyed by it being a signpost for a broader trend, signals to all the alt weekly editors & etc. that we can go back to just caring about wu tang & occasional cool kids type shit -- that i find kind of frustrating. maybe im being ridic cuz lots of that writing on rap was pretty awful anyway??

i dunno i still feel like this 'matters' but also like im wasting my time

btw lol @ this
http://freakytrigger.co.uk/share/HipHopBlogAlert-473x450.png

o some1 already posted

hey you've got it easy. a couple of years ago simon started listening to metal.

i mean if you want to talk "outsider" outlook and critique from above.

i think the reason simon can get my goat is the same reason xgau can get my goat. cuz he's smart and a good writer. the most dangerous combo of all! and i guess i can say the same thing for sasha. cuz i end up shouting "bbbbut you should know better!".

The level of debat is pitiful though. You just knew before the first comment went up that you'd get a mix of: (1) ho ho, don't you mean (c)rap music?, (2) De La Soul were great but then it was all about bitches and ho's and (3) It's still amazing, you just have to look for the good stuff (proceeds to recommend shit like Sage Francis and Aesop Rock). The third argument probably annoys me the most. Doom has become the MC equivalent to The Wire - I know he's good, but smug bores go on about him so much, as if he's the answer to everything, that it makes me hate him just a little bit.

Good comment by Greg Tate near the end of the list though, which suggests a positive cultural reason why hip hop as a radical force is dead. And Sage Francis ain't going to change that.

x-post

im more annoyed by it being a signpost for a broader trend, signals to all the alt weekly editors & etc. that we can go back to just caring about wu tang & occasional cool kids type shit -- that i find kind of frustrating. maybe im being ridic cuz lots of that writing on rap was pretty awful anyway??

I am afraid this and Sasha's piece works as a signpost to some alt -weekly editors I've dealt with, and to NPR All indie considered, to just go cover only indie rock.

hey! it's like the decade is starting all over again.

I think, if anything, hip-hop is in the place that indie was in c. 1998-2001 and dance music was right at the start of the 00s - lots of good records being made but a lack of a definable narrative and perceived sense of it being vital.

It happens to all types of music once in a while and is much of a lack of anything for journalists to latch onto as it is on the quality of the records. It's more likely we're in the period of relative coasting just before the massive paradigm shift comes in.

I think, if anything, hip-hop is in the place that indie was in c. 1998-2001 and dance music was right at the start of the 00s - lots of good records being made but a lack of a definable narrative and perceived sense of it being vital.

I think this is OTM

Let's just hope 2010's hip hop paradigm shift is better than the Strokes/Libertines eh.

isn't the end of the 00s all about there being no big paradigm shifts anymore, though? Only little shifts.

Simon you little shift.

Though in Simon's defense, 2009 maybe have been one of the worst years in hip-hop since the dawn of time.

isn't the end of the 00s all about there being no big paradigm shifts anymore, though? Only little shifts.

Exactly, it is THE END of the 00s.

I'm pitching a similar think piece to the V1ll4g3 V01c3 that works as a rebuttal, that awesome rap records still exist it's just the industry lacks a way to market them and rock critics refuse to cover them unless there's a news peg

Simon's such a big-narrative guy, though, that for him no narrative = nothing happening. Main problem with this piece is that sub-editors LOVE "the death of…" headlines, which are always inaccurate because no genre dies, it just becomes less relevant and exciting, and tends to inflame the faithful to no useful end. Most responses to the article have this blinkered, ground-level, defensive attitude. Instead of dealing with the main issue they just list a smattering of low-level releases they like. Well, great, I like Doom too, but it doesn't mean that hip hop isn't in the doldrums. There's still people going on about drum'n'bass, and I'm sure there are good tunes out there and if you're deep into the scene it probably feels like the most important music in the world, but nobody can claim that it's still important in the big scheme of things, so in that broader cultural sense it is "dead". I don't think hip hop's there yet because it's so much more versatile than d'n'b. I would like to see a hip hop equivalent to the Strokes in 2001 - someone who can trigger a new narrative.

a hip hop equivalent to the Strokes in 2001

Be careful what you wish for.

Heh. I'm aware that out of context it sounds like a horrible prospect.

It sounds like The Beastie Boys.

Just to clarify - they don't have to be white guys from the Upper East Side.

Good!

so they could be white guys from anywhere in NYC, right?

I'm sure there are good tunes out there and if you're deep into the scene it probably feels like the most important music in the world, but nobody can claim that it's still important in the big scheme of things, so in that broader cultural sense it is "dead".

There is no "big scheme of things." There is no "broader culture" to have a "sense" about. Start over.

My take on the article, btw: I don't think hip-hop is "dead" because I never thought it was "alive" in some sort of huge society-defining way. I don't believe in mass popcult consensus, only in a zillion simultaneous microscenes that occasionally fire mortar shells into each other's trenches. These days I only hear new hip-hop when I click past MTV or MTV2. So maybe there are good records out there but I'm not hearing them...and I don't care.

but mattdc, i think "a lack of a definable narrative and perceived sense of it being vital" is as much an issue of perspective as it ever has been. i knew plenty of people in 01 who felt exactly the same about it that he does now

in other words, less vital to whom?

& dont say "timbaland & jay-z listen to coldplay" lol

things i think are diff about hip hop & disappointing about it in 2009 -- to me it seems a lot less interested in taking risks w/ novelty in order to cross over to a larger stage, many of its key artists content to record for established fan bases rather than feel like pop audience is at stake for them

& of course lil wayne, t.i., gucci, lil boosie all going to jail is like if biggie and pac both went to jail for 2 years in 96

There is no "big scheme of things." There is no "broader culture" to have a "sense" about. Start over.

― neither good nor bad, just a kid like you (unperson), Friday, November 27, 2009 5:48 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

My take on the article, btw: I don't think hip-hop is "dead" because I never thought it was "alive" in some sort of huge society-defining way. I don't believe in mass popcult consensus, only in a zillion simultaneous microscenes that occasionally fire mortar shells into each other's trenches. These days I only hear new hip-hop when I click past MTV or MTV2. So maybe there are good records out there but I'm not hearing them...and I don't care.

― neither good nor bad, just a kid like you (unperson), Friday, November 27, 2009 5:52 PM (56 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

^^^so so so otm

Simon's such a big-narrative guy, though, that for him no narrative = nothing happening

this is why i think he's such a terrible journalist tbh, and why he keeps misrepresenting so many scenes and artists. big narrative to whom? who gets to define those narratives? why is a narrative only existent to people who don't really care about a genre? there are tons of big and small narratives, both within hip-hop and w/r/t how it engages with non-hip-hop, happening at the moment. artist-specific, locale-specific, trend-specific...just because you aren't aware of them, which in most cases is because you're not interested in finding out, doesn't mean they're not important.

also i hate the false binary set up between the hip-hop faithful scouring blogs for the latest no-mark mixtape and the rest of the world - it enables fuckwits like reynolds to effectively dismiss and sweep away anyone with an actual rebuttal to him. you're a hip-hop fan, your opinion doesn't matter!

i think the problem is more that hes expecting the 'big narrative' to move a certain way & instead its moving left or right or sideways -- like, if you're looking for a 'massive change' why not consider that gucci released more material in one month this year than tribe called quest released in their entire careers (credit to noz on that observation) -- & the fact that much of it was still novel & creative & adventurous (it was mostly not filler, anyway) implies that we're in a new recording era -- he's come up w/ a way of releasing tons of material that feels kind of like a living body of work, adopted for the economic realities of our times -- how does that not qualify as a big & new direction for popular music? his entire style of prolific recording, of creating interest thru tons of variations on a narrow niche of themes, is pretty novel in the grand scheme imo

i mean isnt this the same thing hes done with uk funky ... "wheres the obvious signs of progress?? house again??" meanwhile the genre follows a kind of less-is-more strategy to 'progress'

I think the problem is that Simon's not pomo enough to get over narratives in the first place.

i am so not a big picture guy. or a prediction guy. so its hard for me to relate sometimes to people who are. or people who are always looking ahead to the new new thing. i think its a personality thing. i can take one record or even one song from another era and make a universe out of it. or for it. but i CAN dig a musical outlook/worldview that is more sociologically inclined or anthro-inclined. but broad sweeping statements and predictions and generalizations about what is happening/what is going to happen rarely do anyone any favors unless they are rigorously researched and thought out over a long period of time.

*applause*