OK, is this the worst piece of music writing ever?

But I have never in my whole career made a real pass at one of my colleagues or, I think, been flirtatious to the point of making someone seriously worried about my attention. Even when I was single.

Why has this guy not been arrested already?

What is wrong with songs? Absolutely nothing. Songs are great. I love songs. I sing them in the shower sometimes. They can be poignant or cheery or angry and they can have catchy and satisfying melodies. There’s nothing wrong with songs.

Very long new board description

All songs – all of them, every single one, that is to say 100 per cent – must have a four-four time signature.

That's Burt Bacharach put in his place then.

Songs are great. I love songs. I sing them in the shower sometimes. They can be poignant or cheery or angry and they can have catchy and satisfying melodies.

RUSSELL @ KFC.EDU

Oh, jeez, Russell Smith. He was a promising novelist that never lived up to the promise, then became Canada's most cringeworthy columnist. He's also a jerk and a snob, but that's getting ad-hominem.

thu/fri

Who In the World Is Camero...
Albums That Time Forgot
Block & Tackle
Expert Witness

forgot i screencapped this

https://31.media.tumblr.com/0d40d8336fd30bab7c6f86f685b0ae43/tumblr_mwsquzE5kM1qzb8z0o1_400.png

dig that up for the woody allen thread?

just a coincidence but i sincerely await the avc column title about it

Are these the 500 worst pieces of music writing ever?

http://rateyourmusic.com/list/schmidtt/rolling_stones_500_worst_reviews_of_all_time__work_in_progress_/1/

unfortunately some of them are still seared into my brain

One would assume that anyone wanting to criticise old music criticism, ripped out of its original time and context, should be able to tell the difference between verbs transitive and intransitive.

The writing about "the 500 worst pieces of music writing ever" is one of the worst pieces of music writing ever. Another lazy, entitled parasite who only wants writing that agrees with them.

http://corpus.byu.edu/coca/x3.asp?xx=1&w11=seared&w12=into&r=

What this guy really hates isn't the general standard of Rolling Stone reviews. He hates himself because if he was any good as a writer, Rolling Stone would have given him a job, and THAT'S what's rankling him.

That may be true but the notion that professional music writing functions as a meritocracy is laughable.

Even if it did, he wouldn't have got in. Does Christian Hoard owe him some money, or something?

True, it's a lousy enterprise but boy, that review of Curtis gets everything wrong. I always get a kick out of seeing clueless contemporary reviews of future classics.

This is true, but if you want bad and wrongheaded music writing, then read this.

Great on American music, clueless about European music is how I approach Bangs.

I read this book over the weekend and I see how good a job Greil Marcus did of getting LB’s genuinely great writing into the first anthology. “Great on American music”? Have a look at his article about Wet Willie.

Greil "when I said 'what is this shit' I actually meant..." Marcus.

lol @ their argument against my weeknd review. SORRY YOUR CRYBABY DRUGGO SEXIST MAKES AWFUL MUSIC THAT CAN BE DEMOLISHED SUCCINCTLY. editing: maybe abel should try it sometime

Yeah, well no one is forcing you to listen to this thing in one sitting.

Hardly think that makes a difference. A lot of his songs don't justify their length.

This guy really hates xhuxk

This guy hates everybody. You have to worry about anyone who can write 500+ angry entries without any jokes.

The writing about "the 500 worst pieces of music writing ever" is one of the worst pieces of music writing ever. Another lazy, entitled parasite who only wants writing that agrees with them.

― Here he is with the classic "Poème Électronique." Good track (Marcello Carlin), Thursday, 20 February 2014 09:18 (9 hours ago) Permalink

OTM. I actually kind of enjoy what another poster upthread called "clueless" reviews of "future classics. It's refreshing to see that someone listening to a "classic" record with fresh ears, at the time, might have come to a different conclusion about it, even if I don't agree with that conclusion. And sometimes there are nuggets of honest truth in them that get kind of buried in all the worshipfulness that comes later, e.g. the bit about Hendrix's lyrics being pretty banal. That's often true.

It IS fun to have an archive of notable initial reactions from RS to scroll back through.

Yeah, well no one is forcing you to listen to this thing in one sitting.

― Inside Lewellyn Sinclair (cryptosicko), Thursday, February 20, 2014 10:26 AM (4 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Hardly think that makes a difference. A lot of his songs don't justify their length.

― tsrobodo, Thursday, February 20, 2014 12:22 PM (2 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Nah, was just quoting the writer's witty retort to Maura's review.

― tsrobodo, Thursday, February 20, 2014 12:22 PM (2 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Nah, was just quoting the writer's witty retort to Maura's review.

Aah I see, my bad. Didn't actually read past the first 3 or 4. The idea of 500 petty and vindictive reviews of other people's reviews depresses me in ways that I don't understand.

there's the new board description

The idea of 500 petty and vindictive reviews of other people's reviews depresses me in ways that I don't understand

depresses me in ways i understand completely. it's fucking depressing, for one thing. might be worth a glance if the takedowns were funny, but they're not - just reams of whiney bullshit about nothing.

i don't know why you gotta drag whiney into this.

contenderizer otm

Speaking of Rolling Stone, this seemed to get a lot of people into a tizzy: http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/berghain-the-secretive-sex-fueled-world-of-technos-coolest-club-20140206

using the descriptor "emo" as a test case I think we still have at least five years before the kind of ppl who comment just to go DON'T CALL IT EDM accept that they're fighting a losing battle

I think that RS article is great, taught me a lot about Berlin I didn't know.

HERE'S a new candidate. And it's from the editor, even.

http://www.nme.com/blogs/nme-blogs/alex-turners-brits-speech-was-everything-rocknroll-is-meant-to-be

lock thread

As I said on the Brits thread, it's a bit inelegantly put, but I do think the writer has a point.

best thing is that it never explains who the hell Alex Turner is

that is good because 99.9% of people reading would know

best thing is that it never explains who the hell Alex Turner is

except... it does?

(or were you looking for more than "front man of Arctic Monkeys who won the biggest music award given out by Great Britain"?)

I don't see that sentence in the piece.

I see this: "For the frontman of the UK's biggest band"

I got that from the title of the Youtube embed.

I mean, I'm not arguing that this is an amazing piece of writing or anything, just that that particular criticism seems off when the entire thesis of the piece seems to be "this dude who won an award gave a speech"

whowhatwhenwherewhyhow

Which is not what any of the thesis of the piece is (xp).

New Yorker style required: "Recently, Alex Turner, the frontman of Arctic Monkeys, an alternative rock band from Sheffield, England, accepted an award at a ceremony held annually by the British Phonographic Industry, colloquially known as the Brits."

Turner hereafter referred to as Mr Turner.

just the words "Arctic" and "Monkeys" appearing somewhere in the piece would have been just fine.