This is the thread where you ask for help in parsing one of Robert Christgau's sentences.

This thread is really interesting. I'm curious to know what people make of any of the other 324,786 un-parseable Christgau sentences.

Because it's not easily comprehensible?

(Xgau to VV intern: "excuse me, can you get me a cup of coffee -- er, and while you're downstairs, can you pick up some random science?")

Thanks o. nate, your explanation makes more sense.

I'm not knocking him Amateurist by the way--just so you know--I'm actually a fan. My point, never expressed, is that I'll take the un-aprseable, confusing Christgau over the excessively lingo-ized one (whether of the academy or of the "street") anyday.

I wouldn't mind describing *myself* that way

Welll...la-de-da, I keep forgetting that being "good, caring New Deal Democrats, good Boy Scouts, and far more telling, good boys" (Meltzer's "condescending" words to two writers who certainly deserve nothing but good, caring New Deal Democrat careful words, right?) means not having a sense of humor.

"Like most culture wags laureate, what they are...is pious outsiders..." as R.M. says...how about you two laying off being so pious yourselves, what personal connection do you guys have to the two writers anyway? I mean, he writes that way because he is a B.S. and N.D.D. in the worst possible senses of those terms--we're not talking three-day hikes or helping little old ladies across the street, or the WPA, here, we're talking about a pompous old man who thinks that rationalizing and explaining Rock and Roll is gonna keep him young--that's Meltzer's point and I happen to agree with it.

Was does this have to do with the New Deal, or the Democrats?

Um, they're *metaphors*...for a "public-service" critical mindset, as opposed to, by implication, a truly fuck-shit-up rock and roll mindset. Maybe a bogus argument, but pretending not to recognize a metaphor when you see it doesn't help you prove it to be bogus.

I wasn't playing naive, my grandparents were actual New Deal Democrats so I thought perhaps Meltzer was speaking literally, at least in part.

Tom, when you're talking about the media venues that Christgau and Marcus write for, then P.C. and establishment become more or less identical.

Probably, Edd, something close to the relationship you have to Meltzer--as readers, as fans, as critics of...whatever. What kind of relationship do you propose readers have to writers?

I still think "they ain't rock and roll" is kind of a bogus argument. But he's not saying "they're P.C." P.C. is one of those overused terms like pretentious and ironic that shouldn't be used unless definitely appropriate.

wait, so WHY do people think the "is" should be "are" again?? sorry, but "back-in-the-day" is a SINGULAR noun. makes perfect sense to me. and anybody who thinks "even has some pronunciation in it" should be "he even enunciates" is clearly a useless literalist born without a fucking sense of humor, and should stick to *entertainment weekly*.

also. re meltzer. at least christgau and marcus don't think that music died in 1970 (when meltzer got too lazy for it), you know?

well, yeah, i can see now how the singular form of "to be" is wrong. thanks, mr. perry. but i still don't understand why people have trouble understand what the sentence MEANS. i mean, do people really think christgau is less comprehensible, than, say, most people reviewing records on the web? or posting on ILM, for that matter? i mean, isn't the fact that he doesn't write exactly like everybody else out there, and maybe that it takes a little work on the part of the reader to get his point sometimes, a GOOD thing? it seems like people complaining about him just wanna be SPOONFED, or something...i mean, he's a WRITER. so you have to learn his LANGUAGE, you know? how does that make him any different than, say, Meltzer in The Aesthetics of Rock??? Or Sterling Clover? Or Mark Sinker? Or [fill in the blank]?

oops, I meant "understanding", not that second "understand". (and i meant "you fucking nitpickers," not "people". okay, maybe i didn't.)

What does this mean?

they signed to atlantic, made a more metal record, don't say anything deep, and don't belt out the lyrics, but he likes it more than if they were belting shallow lyrics or whispering deep ones. like, duh.

Bjork, Vespertine
I liked this a lot better once I heard how it was entirely about sex, which since it often buries its pulse took a while. Sex, not fucking. I'm nervous so you'd better pet me awhile sex. Lick the backs of my knees sex. OK, where my buttcheeks join my thighs sex. I'm still a little jumpy so you'd better pet me some more sex. How many different ways can we open our mouths together sex. We came 20 minutes ago and have Sunday morning ahead of us sex. Or, if fucking, tantric--the one where you don't move and let vaginal peristalsis do the work (yeah sure). The atmospherics, glitch techno, harps, glockenspiels, and shades of Hilmar Om Hilmarsson float free sometimes, and when she gets all soprano on your ass you could accuse her of spirituality. But with somebody this freaky you could get used to that. English lyrics provided, most of them dirty if you want. A-

You called, bub?

This thread is still going? Jesus.

C'mon, Momus...we know you still have a kooky comment to make (involving the phrases "Aguilera", "social classes", "sheepshagger", "Adolph Hitler" and "new Butterscotch flavor toothpaste") that you need to make.

Don't force me to post some demented "madcap theory" in order to get everyone yelling at me again just to keep this thread going.

http://discuss.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/zforum/03/r_entertainment_segal031203.htm

(Anyone read the Dean's piece on Norah this week?)

I must find some of that rebop.

this one's better