33 1/3 Series of books

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (1602 of them)

(Which is in part why I'm assuming the 'same form letter' response -- Continuum sent out a batch one to everyone whose proposals were turned down, and I didn't ask any further about it, where maybe Dominique did and got something more specific.)

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 16 September 2006 16:22 (6 years ago) Permalink

In re: Abba/Can thing above:

I felt sure there was one about Tago Mago. No?

― RoxyMuzak© (roxymuzak), Saturday, 16 September 2006 16:30 (6 years ago) Permalink

xpost

Not to say that Continuum decided to pick either NIN *or* DM, but I can certainly see the rationale for choosing PHM over Violator. There's a lot of mileage to be had from arguing that NIN came out of nowhere and sold a couple million records and "took the mainstream by surprise" or whatever, all of it happening before grunge got credit for doing the exact same thing (and with 100000X more press and airplay). I'm not sure you can argue that with DM, since they were a well-established band at that point. Plus, the same people who would buy a DM book are also likely to be interested in an NIN book.

― NoTimeBeforeTime (Barry Bruner), Saturday, 16 September 2006 16:41 (6 years ago) Permalink

violator doesn't have that obvious rockcrit cachet (bar ilm of course)

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Saturday, 16 September 2006 16:46 (6 years ago) Permalink

btw the armed forces one was pretty good, matos' was ok, and all the other ones i looked at were awful

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Saturday, 16 September 2006 16:47 (6 years ago) Permalink

violator doesn't have that obvious rockcrit cachet (bar ilm of course)

It's never had an obvious one but it's had a sometimes-grudging one. But even Rolling Stone did a positive main (but not cover) story on the band when that came out, a couple of years after they reviewed 101 in a way that could be described as 'cavemen meet aliens and try to tell fellow cavemen about the sparkly lights in the sky.'

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 16 September 2006 17:04 (6 years ago) Permalink

OBVIOUS ROCKCRIT CACHE

LIKE ABBA GOLD

― the dow nut industrial average dead joe mama besser (donut), Saturday, 16 September 2006 17:30 (6 years ago) Permalink

HI DERE IN WAHT WORLD IS ABBA NOT MADE ROCKCRIT CACHE?

― Daniel_Rf (Daniel_Rf), Saturday, 16 September 2006 18:00 (6 years ago) Permalink

Clear cache now?

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 16 September 2006 18:01 (6 years ago) Permalink

Did you guys query them with possibilities before you sent in your proposal? I was told someone else already had Rid of Me and the other one I proposed was too recent, so I went with one with almost no rock-crit cred whatsoever.

― Eppy (Eppy), Saturday, 16 September 2006 18:23 (6 years ago) Permalink

Danielrf, it's not OBVIOUSROCKCRITCACHE

Big Difference.

― the dow nut industrial average dead joe mama besser (donut), Saturday, 16 September 2006 18:27 (6 years ago) Permalink

― Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Saturday, 16 September 2006 18:28 (6 years ago) Permalink

snap

― RoxyMuzak© (roxymuzak), Saturday, 16 September 2006 18:30 (6 years ago) Permalink

ooh sexy.

Anyway, this may be crazy talk, but maybe many books got turned down because of reasons other than the albums' popularities and seminal statuses.

Maybe they were't impressed the writers' work?

Maybe they felt too uncomfortable because they didn't know someone who knew someone who knew that writer?

Maybe someone in the committee had "this bands is the sucks" veto power?

These decisions were not made by science. I'm not claiming they're just arbitrary, reactionary, or dumb opinions either. But they boil down to opinions.

Unless 33 1/3rd has a patent on album review books (which I don't think they do, although surely they have it on the name), if there's such a demand for more album review books, and the series is selling well, is there not a possibility of an alternative publishing source?

― the dow nut industrial average dead joe mama besser (donut), Saturday, 16 September 2006 18:33 (6 years ago) Permalink

are they really "album review boks" tho?

― RoxyMuzak© (roxymuzak), Saturday, 16 September 2006 18:34 (6 years ago) Permalink

books obv

― RoxyMuzak© (roxymuzak), Saturday, 16 September 2006 18:35 (6 years ago) Permalink

Of course not, but they're pitched and packaged like that, which is the crux of the basis in which they're selected. Someone may have the greatest things to say about Aerosmith, but if the writer chose Rock In A Hard Place, then that's going to lessen the chances had the writer not chose Toys In The Attic or Rocks, for example.

― the dow nut industrial average dead joe mama besser (donut), Saturday, 16 September 2006 18:53 (6 years ago) Permalink

(I mean "of course not" in the "they often talk about peripheral things besides the album itself or things related to it", not "they never talk about the album".)

― the dow nut industrial average dead joe mama besser (donut), Saturday, 16 September 2006 18:54 (6 years ago) Permalink

some of my favorite books in the series barely talk about their albums!

― Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Saturday, 16 September 2006 19:06 (6 years ago) Permalink

I don't get that. Not that you would like something "creative" Michaelangelo that's cool but why the author would tie it to an album in the first place? Why not write a freestanding novella or memoir or whatever? What about readers who want something linear?

― m coleman (lovebug starski), Saturday, 16 September 2006 19:13 (6 years ago) Permalink

at some point, the editor(s) taste is reflected in album selection, determining writers, etc. so it's all pretty subjective in terms of why x instead of y or I suppose why one album is dealt w/factually and starightforwardly while another isn't.

― m coleman (lovebug starski), Saturday, 16 September 2006 19:25 (6 years ago) Permalink

I haven't read these but it does seem like there's a bit of a slacker aesthetic to the series in general - you know, that it's not about sort of writing *real books* but instead just these little things. Curious how much the slacker context infects the content.

― Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Saturday, 16 September 2006 19:44 (6 years ago) Permalink

Re. slacker context: rock criticism stuck in the nineties.

― Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Saturday, 16 September 2006 19:49 (6 years ago) Permalink

haha, the best is dom's review of some record where he talks about almost picking up a middle aged floozy in a pub instead of the music. can't top that 33 1/3!

― timmy tannin (pompous), Saturday, 16 September 2006 20:08 (6 years ago) Permalink

There's hardly a shortage of linear writing about albums available, and anyway I'm talking about maybe two books out of 34. (Dusty in Memphis primarily.)

"Slacker aesthetic"--huh?

― Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Saturday, 16 September 2006 20:27 (6 years ago) Permalink

If 33 1/3 want a full length version of that "Meds" review, they need to hit me up ASAP.

― Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Saturday, 16 September 2006 20:31 (6 years ago) Permalink

I just do not see the cultural heft to these albums such that entire books need to be devoted to them. The series strikes me as having an unambitious context in general.

― Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Saturday, 16 September 2006 20:37 (6 years ago) Permalink

Tim's proposal to write up Living in the Material World was sadly rejected.

― Alfred, Lord Sotosyn (Alfred Soto), Saturday, 16 September 2006 20:41 (6 years ago) Permalink

You know that's my least favorite George Harrison album. (I did not propose a book for this series.)

― Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Saturday, 16 September 2006 20:42 (6 years ago) Permalink

hahahahaha "cultural heft"

― Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Saturday, 16 September 2006 21:35 (6 years ago) Permalink

rosie o'donnell really has taken the view hostage.

― scott seward (scott seward), Saturday, 16 September 2006 21:39 (6 years ago) Permalink

the Armed Forces, Live at the Apollo, and OK Computer ones (to leave it at the ones published so far) are very ambitious. maybe you should actually look at a couple of them sometime, Tim.

― Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Saturday, 16 September 2006 21:45 (6 years ago) Permalink

haha, the best is dom's review of some record where he talks about almost picking up a middle aged floozy in a pub instead of the music. can't top that 33 1/3!

John COUGAR mellencamp

― Haikunym (Haikunym), Saturday, 16 September 2006 21:45 (6 years ago) Permalink

I mean, all these albums are kinda garbagey, really - that's part of the appeal of rock and roll, pop music, etc. in its glory. Collapses distinctions between the trivial and the awesome and all that. But here's this series as another example of yet more stodgy canonizing goin' on. I don't mean any of this as a reflection on any of the books in particular - I ain't read 'em - but, yes, I find the idea for the series to be dull and unambitious - a step above a desert island disc thang where it's supposed to be like Greil Marcus with less intellectual rigor or something.

xposts - I've seen a few in stores and again reiterating: not meant as a reflection on anyone's work in particular. just about the idea for the series in general.

― Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Saturday, 16 September 2006 21:57 (6 years ago) Permalink

how do you know there is less intellectual rigor if you haven't read any!!

― scott seward (scott seward), Saturday, 16 September 2006 22:00 (6 years ago) Permalink

i think it's a good idea for a series. i like rekkerds.

― scott seward (scott seward), Saturday, 16 September 2006 22:01 (6 years ago) Permalink

how many great-movies books do people make these (bullshit) complaints about, I wonder?

― Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Saturday, 16 September 2006 22:02 (6 years ago) Permalink

Any essay praising Wes Anderson, actually.

― Alfred, Lord Sotosyn (Alfred Soto), Saturday, 16 September 2006 22:02 (6 years ago) Permalink

and I'm sorry, Tim, but whether you're talking about anyone's work in particular or not, the point is, here you are, a guy who talks about music all day long on the internet, sneering at a series of books that do the same as "dull and unambitious." kinda pot-meets-kettle, isn't it? (this would be true of any ILM regular doing the same thing, obv.)

― Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Saturday, 16 September 2006 22:03 (6 years ago) Permalink

"I'll sit and talk about crappy psych-rock with people I've never met for hours, but someone publishing a books series based on the same impulse? Dude, that is beyond the pale."

― Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Saturday, 16 September 2006 22:06 (6 years ago) Permalink

dude, the only crappy psych-rock album theyve published a 33 1/3 about so far is entroducing

― katie quirk (dubplatestyle), Saturday, 16 September 2006 22:07 (6 years ago) Permalink

hahahahaha

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 16 September 2006 22:11 (6 years ago) Permalink

(And I've always argued it's goth -- your least favorite genre!)

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 16 September 2006 22:12 (6 years ago) Permalink

oof. yeah.

― katie quirk (dubplatestyle), Saturday, 16 September 2006 22:13 (6 years ago) Permalink

hey are there any METAL 33 1/3's yet?

― katie quirk (dubplatestyle), Saturday, 16 September 2006 22:13 (6 years ago) Permalink

Metal Box?

― Alfred, Lord Sotosyn (Alfred Soto), Saturday, 16 September 2006 22:14 (6 years ago) Permalink

Leather Boys hits the streets sometime in the future.

I guarantee 100% hyperballed-to-the-wall reading akshun.

― the dow nut industrial average dead joe mama besser (donut), Saturday, 16 September 2006 22:24 (6 years ago) Permalink

"Chapter 1: The Part I Played in the Mascara Masquerade"

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 16 September 2006 22:27 (6 years ago) Permalink

how do you know there is less intellectual rigor if you haven't read any!!

for about the fourth time, talking about the general impression of what the idea for the series was. haven't been inspired to read any of 'em yet but i'll be sure to let you guys know.

here you are, a guy who talks about music all day long on the internet, sneering at a series of books that do the same as "dull and unambitious." kinda pot-meets-kettle, isn't it?

no actually spent four years recently working just about every single night while in grad school then working taking care of young child etc. on m.a. thesis on the aesthetics of late '60s psych - about a year and a half of just listening and taking notes, seven months of organizing 400+ pages of notes producing roughly 180 page document actually discussing content of about 400 songs from the period all organized around central theme (psychedelic music as late manifestation of aesthetics associated with surrealism) but whatevs, dude.

― Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Saturday, 16 September 2006 22:27 (6 years ago) Permalink

Warning: no cultural heft.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 16 September 2006 22:31 (6 years ago) Permalink

Skipping 1502 messages at this point... Click here if you want to load them all.

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.