Why in the name of all that is holy do people like Guided by Voices?

"Just sacked my band! I love the WHO." *NOW A HIGH KICK*

"GEE BEE VEE" X Way too many goddamn times

Insert "How many hipsters does it take to screw in a light bulb joke" here.

I don't think anyone really needs to hear ALL of Pollard's work to 'get' him, I just think they need to get an impression of a) his best pop songs and b) the differences between his many records. Actually, I think that if Michaelangelo isn't going to be impressed by that Best Of (which isn't perfect but does give a good sampling of great songs from several eras of GBV), he probably never will be.

p.s. please quietly disregard all of the above comments if you are a fan of yes, queen, king crimson, emerson-lake-palmer, and/or rush. it is obvious why you don't understand.

"long live rock",

the OX

http://www.johnentwistle.com/

I've heard enough from all over his career to get a sense of his progress and breadth of what he's done, but I still feel uncomfortable talking about his career in a broad sense because I feel like I'm missing too much to have a fully informed opinion. When I read what some people have to say about Pollard's work, it really grates on me when it is clear that he's being dismissed or misunderstood because the writer hasn't had a lot of exposure to the work. It's maybe unrealistic for me to expect every writer to be an expert in what they are writing about, but I surely prefer it if the person at least knows what they are talking about.

This is just one of my hang-ups, I suppose.

next day...

C: "Hey, A, what's up"
A: "alright, talked to your friend B. I thought he was a real asshole, which made me sad because you told me such great things about him"
C: "Oh, you just have to get used to him, but seriously, trust me.. he really is a GREAT GUY! You just have to give him a chance"

And Ned, are you trying to say that you've never come around to liking a record that didn't move you right away?

The irony here being that Pollard is a HUGE and VOCAL prog fan. (Though maybe not fan of all of those particular bands...)

Yes, they are. *sigh*

the newest pollard is prog-ascendant, but the old pollard is mired firmly in the beatles and, my own band, the who. it is the fact the music is so derivative that makes it hard to understand why it presents a barrier to people.

"long live rock"

the OX

He keeps threatening to make full on GBV prog records made up of really long songs, but so far he hasn't gotten around to it. I'm not exactly thrilled with the idea, but we'll see. He always says that "The Enemy" is a prog song, and I like that one a lot.

*cries*

That is the whole purpose of this thread anyway. The sport of getting GBV loyalists in a tizzy by making sweeping claims of Bob's suckitude. It doesn't matter what you really think about the music, what's important here is that you're in on the joke. I like GBV regardless, and I think Earthquake Glue is their best album since Under the Bushes. I probably won't get the best of or box set, but I'm definately looking forward to the Watch Me Jumpstart DVD. The documentary is the best way to convert naysayers to the band in my opinion. Unfortunately, it's totally outdated. But it definately shows the band's appeal if you don't understand it.

x-post - gygax! OTM again.

Yeah, I get that. It's the same as how I'd really prefer to never hear Bright Eyes again rather than buy all of Oberst's records and try to figure him out.

Yes, interests be damned, i am a friend of Michaelangelo, but it's not as if anyone else doing this would make me so incredibly defensive and start making cracks at Matos's credibility of his career as a music critic or anything. THAT's what fucking pissed me off. So, gyg, if you're going to claim what I say as "the worst ILM gets" you better be fucking specific if i'm going to take your comment as anything but yet another of your stream of cryptic clever smarmy one-liners (something i'm certainly guilty of, no doubt)

that derivativeness is exactly the barrier for me! When I first heard about 'em in my early teenage years, a guy I knew who loved them was like "they're just like the Beatles, except low-fi!" and I was all like "who needs another Beatles?" I've come around to liking a couple of their songs here and there, but otherwise I'm not interested.

sounds like a prog attitude to me. i bet youd like the most recent gbv stuff since it has all the presumptions and elitism of prog-classicism, and prog-modernism, where the dual mythos of complexity and innovation carry the day.

"long live rock"

the OX

Jung's dead, man.

Shame about the coke, btw.

Jung's dead, man. "

as is prog.

the beatles and the who (of course) were great bands. i salute bob for his (early) taste and his ability to craft great and catchy tunes that are admittedly derivative, but also very tasty. people like him because they like how he sounds not because they like how he DOESNT sound. the worst is when a band is 'innovating' but has decided that the only way to do that is to reject anything that has come before. naturally it sounds like shit. people like to hear familiar stuff. why is that so wrong?

"long live rock"

the OX

haha - because familiarity breeds contempt. So sayeth someone more famouser than me...

the OX

Ahhh that wouldn't fly either, I don't think that's a fair argument. Then you end up with bands being accused of ripping off obscure artists and getting unfairly praised/compensated for it (cf. Wire vs. Elastica).

the OX

they were to all those schmucks who bought Elastica records! (Also see: The Fall vs. Pavement circa "Slanted and Enchanted")

keith, pass the pills and booze. pollard wants them.

the OX