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

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (767 of them)

What noun should come after 'back in the day'?

FLAVA!

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 17 February 2003 14:48 (twenty-one years ago) link

I'm still a bit confused too. Does "back in the day" just mean "old tracks"? Or does it suggest tracks with some allegiance to old-school hip-hop? Or does the Missy reference Matos pointed out waaaaaay upthread explain this?

― Amateurist (amateurist), Monday, 17 February 2003 16:08 (twenty-one years ago) link

It's tracks with some allegiance to old-school hip-hop with a rather pointed barb at Missy and Timbo saying "See, THIS is how it's done!" lambasting Missy's "Back In The Day" specifically but aimed at a good 60% of _Under Construction_.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 17 February 2003 16:13 (twenty-one years ago) link

I can't tell if Amarga's question is about "back in the day" in general usage or in the specific Christgau sentence. Excuse me if in talking about the former I'm wasting your time and telling you something you already know. I assumed that the expression was so common in English usage in the last several decades as to be generally unproblematic. In general usage, "back in the day" can be a noun, adverb, or adjective, depending on what it's doing in its particular sentence. Well, excuse my ignorance of grammatical terminology; "noun" might not be the correct word for a phrase that contains an adjective, a preposition, an article, and a noun. (Dan, help me.) Anyway, as a noun it means "back in the era referred to," e.g., "If I were a young person I think I'd be most interested in having old folk like me write about what things were like back in the day: what the Fillmore was like, what the crowd was like at a Dolls show in the early '70s, etc." This is no more a problem than "yesterday" in "What was she like yesterday" or "tomorrow" in "We will be happy tomorrow." (It's true; we will be.) The trouble with the Xgau sentence is that the word's location signals that it is an adjective or an adverb but not a noun, since as a noun it would be as bizarre as "Surrounding outtakes that are just outtakes is yesterday recommended to Paul McCartney (with cellos even) and four autobiographical pieces." So my question for the rest of you is whether in hip hop "back in the day" has wandered in its meaning from "back in the era referred to" (with the sentence clueing you in to what era that is) to "old school hip hop." Any particular instances? Sentences or sung phrases? And I don't mean sentences or phrases where the context signals that "back in the day" refers to old school hip hop ("Back in the day she would rap 'Jack and Jill went up the hill to have a little fun/Stupid Jill forgot the pill and now she has a son'") but something where there is no signal: "The DJ played some techno and some back in the day." (Btw, even if the latter were in common usage the Xgau sentence is still a problem, since (1) the verb form needs to be "are" and (2) the sentence can still lead you to think at first that you're getting an adjective; if Chuck and Bob had noticed this, they would have done a rewrite.)

― Frank Kogan (Frank Kogan), Tuesday, 18 February 2003 01:56 (twenty-one years ago) link

'back in the day' a more specific 'ol' skool' except Missy and Tim ain't got no song called 'ol' skool'

― James Blount (James Blount), Tuesday, 18 February 2003 02:49 (twenty-one years ago) link

Thanks for the help with 'back-in-the-day'. If it's equivalent to 'ol' skool' then I think that makes it an adjectival phrase or some such category - not a noun anyway. Maybe Christgau's missing his subject from the beginning of the sentence. I'm rather prone to this writing error myself. Maybe it should start: [The style of ]Surrounding outtakes that were just outtakes is back-in-the-day ... That would explain the use of 'is' rather than 'are' but then there should be a comma before 'recommended' so this theory doesn't explain the rest of the sentence.

I'm not sure why I'm persisting with this but I'd truly like to know what Christgau thinks his sentence means. I'm more interested in the other elements of the discussion in this thread, particularly the differences in reviewing practices and media culture between the US and the UK.

― Amarga (Amarga), Tuesday, 18 February 2003 05:46 (twenty-one years ago) link

Amarga, it can't work as an adjective since that would unmoor the "four autobiographical pieces" at the end from the rest of the sentence. Anthony got the meaning right back on the second post. Surrounding outtakes that should have stayed outtakes are (1) old-school tracks that Tim & Missy should listen to and (2) four autobiographical pieces.

― Frank Kogan (Frank Kogan), Tuesday, 18 February 2003 23:52 (twenty-one years ago) link

Oh, a point for way back in the thread: Meltzer places the end of rock in late '67 not in '66. That's a huge difference. Like placing the death of punk in late '77 rather than '76. He has interesting reasons, too. But that's a subject for a different thread (there's a Meltzer thread, if you want to look for it).

― Frank Kogan (Frank Kogan), Tuesday, 18 February 2003 23:57 (twenty-one years ago) link

"back-in-the-day" can't be a noun, it's too hyphenated!

i think it's an indication of what the results of the recommendation will yield.

ambiguity about whether he's urging Tim and Missy to surround outtakes with some unspecified thing, or whether "surrounding" is an adjective. The latter at least has some fixity to it, but the verb "is" doesn't agree so we have to go with the former - "surrounding outtakes that were just outtakes" becomes one unified action, a noun—like "jousting" as a sport.

"I'm recommending - in an old-school way - that Tim and Missy engulf and outflank outtakes that are worthy of the name (they could also both stand to speak up a little more clearly like our man Nas); four autobiographical pieces are also on the album."

I feel weird.

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Wednesday, 19 February 2003 00:30 (twenty-one years ago) link

You guys are soo hopinng that X-Man comes to thread.

― Mary (Mary), Wednesday, 19 February 2003 01:05 (twenty-one years ago) link

You guys are soo hoping that X-Man comes to thread.

― Mary (Mary), Wednesday, 19 February 2003 01:05 (twenty-one years ago) link

they must really hope otherwise you wouldn't have posted it twice.

― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Wednesday, 19 February 2003 09:58 (twenty-one years ago) link

*snikt*

You called, bub?

― Wolverine (Dan Perry), Wednesday, 19 February 2003 14:19 (twenty-one years ago) link

*pokes head in.

This thread is still going? Jesus.

― die9o (dhadis), Wednesday, 19 February 2003 18:52 (twenty-one years ago) link

This thread is like the craven remnants of a mighty civilization feeding off of gutter rats after the fall.

― Amateurist (amateurist), Wednesday, 19 February 2003 19:38 (twenty-one years ago) link

* drool *

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Wednesday, 19 February 2003 21:00 (twenty-one years ago) link

Mmmmm. Tasty rats.

― Lord Custos Epsilon (Lord Custos Epsilon), Wednesday, 19 February 2003 22:15 (twenty-one years ago) link

[PBS Pledge Break]...this is only post #744. We need your support if we're going to reach our goal of #1,000 posts! Please post early and often![/PBS Pledge Break]

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.

― Lord Custos Epsilon (Lord Custos Epsilon), Wednesday, 19 February 2003 22:22 (twenty-one years ago) link

three weeks pass...

I wasn't sure if I should put this in the P&J thread or here, but anyway: David Segal, the Washington Post's rock critic, has written a diatribe against Christgau and his P&J essay in particular. Check it here:

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

― Yanc3y (ystrickler), Wednesday, 12 March 2003 16:24 (twenty-one years ago) link

Oh my. I do believe this needs to be a separate thread. ;-)

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 12 March 2003 16:32 (twenty-one years ago) link

Yes, it does need to be separate.

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

I must find some of that rebop.

― Jess Hill (jesshill), Wednesday, 12 March 2003 16:47 (twenty-one years ago) link

Yes, is Norah really on antidpressants or was that just a JOKE? (It was funny.)

― Mary (Mary), Tuesday, 18 March 2003 06:44 (twenty-one years ago) link

"Pop writing should be distracting and illuminating and a little provocative and if possible it should make you laugh and maybe run out and buy an album. That’s about it." - Mr. Ambition^2, this fukkers got his eye's on the mantle and he's taken no prisoners! Watch out English language - this motherfucker's rock n roll! David Segal ain't about writing up the new Norah Jones for all the housewives in northern Virginia - oh no, and he ain't about to be trifling discourse on the new Bonnie Prince Billie for all the comp. lit majors at G-town (HOYAS IN DA HAUS!), no way, this cowboy's out to fukkkk shit up, rip your eyes outcha head, check your prostate (verbally), love you, leave you, FUCK SHIT UP! How'd this rebel getta job at the Washington Post? Does Tony Kornheiser know about this guy?!!!

― James Blount (James Blount), Tuesday, 18 March 2003 07:49 (twenty-one years ago) link

HE'S BACK!!! YES!!!

― M Matos (M Matos), Tuesday, 18 March 2003 08:19 (twenty-one years ago) link

That rebel got to the Post through less-than-admirable means, I hear.

― Yanc3y (ystrickler), Tuesday, 18 March 2003 16:29 (twenty-one years ago) link

Why, he is! Heya Mr. Blount. :-)

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 18 March 2003 16:29 (twenty-one years ago) link

Christgau cites Jody Beth as having "got it just right" good on you JBR!

― J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Tuesday, 18 March 2003 17:00 (twenty-one years ago) link

twas another jody rosen, john.

― Yanc3y (ystrickler), Tuesday, 18 March 2003 17:02 (twenty-one years ago) link

Does nobody read the FAQ anymore??!!? ;)

― Tom (Groke), Tuesday, 18 March 2003 17:03 (twenty-one years ago) link

OK this is getting annoying.

― Jody Beth Rosen (Jody Beth Rosen), Tuesday, 18 March 2003 17:04 (twenty-one years ago) link

― Amateurist (amateurist), Tuesday, 18 March 2003 17:09 (twenty-one years ago) link

Say what???

― Billy Joel Rosen (ystrickler), Tuesday, 18 March 2003 17:11 (twenty-one years ago) link

Say what???

― Billie Joe Armstrong (Jody Beth Rosen), Tuesday, 18 March 2003 17:32 (twenty-one years ago) link

another cheer for the return of Blount from me, says I.

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Tuesday, 18 March 2003 20:52 (twenty-one years ago) link

I love how Segal's bio sez that a Dead Kennedys show changed his life. yeah, so much so he became a legal writer who was moved to the rock-writing job because the Post decided its 53-year-old rock critic was too old for the job. Segal isn't rock, he isn't roll, my god he's both.

― M Matos (M Matos), Tuesday, 18 March 2003 21:08 (twenty-one years ago) link

all said, I still think Christgau writes in code too often these days. I'm not against looking something up in the dictionary but come ON...

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Tuesday, 18 March 2003 21:23 (twenty-one years ago) link

So who's gonna send Segal the link?

― Yanc3y (ystrickler), Tuesday, 18 March 2003 21:28 (twenty-one years ago) link

I can't get Troy McClure saying "I hear he plays the banjo!" out of my head everytime somebody writes the word Segal on this thread.

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Tuesday, 18 March 2003 21:30 (twenty-one years ago) link

two years pass...

if xgau wrote about baseball:
http://baseballtonight.blogspot.com/2005/06/viewer-guide.html

― patita (patita), Wednesday, 8 June 2005 15:19 (eighteen years ago) link

two years pass...

this one's better

― Stormy Davis, Friday, 13 July 2007 17:50 (sixteen years ago) link

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