That's it! The only ism I want to come out of your mouths is jism. Overacademic Bullshit Must Die.

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (396 of them)

stop encouraging him

― jess (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 22:03 (twenty-three years ago)

forgive me. What concept is over my head?

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 22:03 (twenty-three years ago)

Please feel free to discuss why so many people here feel the need to dress up their thoughts in elitist, impenetrable prose in my absence.

"Impenetrable" to whom? To YOU! You're saying you can't understand it, therefore NO ONE can!

"Impenetrable" belongs on the "use other" pile, along with "unlistenable" (which I was guilty of using when I first got here).

― Jody Beth Rosen (Jody Beth Rosen), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 22:03 (twenty-three years ago)

Jody, please see post to John re: artforum.

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 22:10 (twenty-three years ago)

Can we please have some examples of this bad showoffy writing? Go on, name names and use quotes.

― Jody Beth Rosen (Jody Beth Rosen), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 22:15 (twenty-three years ago)

the dumbification of ilm continues unabaited

― jess (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 22:16 (twenty-three years ago)

Jess has a point. What was meant as a firework thrown in the middle of a boring study hall TWO DAYS ago is now being treated like a serious stance that must be dealt with humorlessly. Fuck it. Lesson learned. Though I'm disappointed more people didn't defend their use of academic tropes, which was kinda my point in starting this.

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 22:34 (twenty-three years ago)

maybe if you'd point out some specific uses of academic tropes, or had an argument that went beyond 'book words is bullshit' they would.

― James Blount (James Blount), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 22:37 (twenty-three years ago)

it's definitely abaited, jess

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 22:38 (twenty-three years ago)

Jess, that's fucking hilarious.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 22:38 (twenty-three years ago)

The question also arises as to who doles out the positions within a centralized society. Plato argues in Republic the city-state could not reach perfection "until either philosophers become kings or those now kings and regents become genuine philosophers." His belief was that the philosopher class, as the most enlightened and educated class within the society, was the only one that understood the true nature of justice and as such would be best suited to decide that which is just for the rest of the polis. Hayek, in contrast, uses a quote from Lord Acton to most succinctly refute the idea of giving total power in such a fashion: Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. In other words, while Hayek would never argue that the proponents of a collectivist system are necessarily those who wish to abuse their power, the gulf between individual politics and socialist politics is too large, and in order for a leader to succeed under a totalitarian regime, he would have to be willing to set aside ordinary morals. After making that leap, the regime as a whole would have to agree sufficiently to propel unified affairs forward. Hayek argues that the "lowest common denominator […] unites the largest number of people," and following that group unification, it becomes easy to then "obtain the support of all the docile and gullible, who have no strong convictions of their own but are prepared to accept a ready-made system of values if it is drummed into their ears sufficiently loudly." This is the nature of selection, and as such it becomes easy for those with unscrupulous intentions to come into power. Even a well-meaning dictator—which surely must exist—can fall prey to the corruption of power, the fear of which makes it difficult to support any type of totalitarian collectivist regime.

― Ally (mlescaut), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 22:39 (twenty-three years ago)

well, duh.

― jess (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 22:41 (twenty-three years ago)

May I interject?

I personally don't mind high vocabulary words in any type of writing; it forces me to get out my old and worn dictionary (the copyright's from 1954!) and look up the word, thus enabling me to learn a whole new word (as opposed to "Whole New World", which is a great example of a POS Disney song). However, when it comes to music criticism, I really can't stand the usage of a highly obscure musical artist or film director as a crutch when it comes to the description of said critic's opinion of the album/song/concert and assuming all of the reading audience will get said reference. Robert Christgau landed forever on my "I curse you forever!" list because of similar actions; I mean, what 13-year-old in 1993 Middle America was going to know some of the artists he referenced in his reviews? (Besides, he was one of those music critics who was there at the "it must've happened!" music journalism convention that obviously decided Duran Duran would forever get treated like shit by all "well respected" music journalists no matter what the band did, thus making people such as myself bristle at the mere mention of Q, Rolling Stone, Spin, NME, etc.)

*ahem* But anyway, college-level vocabulary doesn't bother me in the slightest. In fact, sometimes I welcome it in greedily. I like learning new words, new ways of describing things and putting words together, etc.

― Dee the Semi-Lurker (Dee the Lurker), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 22:44 (twenty-three years ago)

maybe culture shouldn't be geared toward what the average 13 yr. old middle-American could be expected to know.

― James Blount (James Blount), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 22:46 (twenty-three years ago)

somehow i don't think xgau is writing for 13 yr olds, but i may be wrong

ha crosspost

― jess (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 22:46 (twenty-three years ago)

To play devil's advocate: why shouldn't a magazine for public consumption have some catering to the public as opposed to purely catering to OTHER ROCK CRITICS? Who are we trying to impress or compell? Each other? Anyone? Why not just have blogs and message boards then?

― Ally (mlescaut), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 22:51 (twenty-three years ago)

Who are these "other rock critic" strawmen I'm always hearing about? Not everyone who enjoys academic music writing is (or wants to be) a rock critic.

― Jody Beth Rosen (Jody Beth Rosen), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 22:53 (twenty-three years ago)

this has yet to be proven.

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 22:55 (twenty-three years ago)

you never see people whine 'sports journalists just write for other sports journalists', and the average sports column assumes alot more of its readers intelligence and interest in sports than the average music column does of its readers interest in music

― James Blount (James Blount), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 23:00 (twenty-three years ago)

and again, could someone name names, point out the publications supposedly 'writing for other rock critics'.

― James Blount (James Blount), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 23:01 (twenty-three years ago)

And anyway, when I was a kid (younger than 13, even) and first getting into reading music books and rockcrit, I really appreciated having names flung at me that I wasn't familiar with -- I didn't let that intimidate me, it just made me wanna go and find out who all these guys were.

To paraphrase what I said before -- if you're not familiar with it, that doesn't necessarily make it "obscure."

― Jody Beth Rosen (Jody Beth Rosen), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 23:03 (twenty-three years ago)

but about indie sports or the majors? it would seem the different leagues provide a lot more structure than the music world has. and I haven't seen what your talking about in "average" sports columns. I know shit about sports history and always know what they're talking about in the B section.

Goddang, Blount look higher up in the thread for your precious names. You really can't think up any yourself?

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 23:03 (twenty-three years ago)

Blount, you got an example and you sneered at it. I was playing devil's advocate to defend Dee's point. I have no problem with Chuck or Frank; I think they're both excellent writers.

http://www.orsiitaliani.com/durstdc3.jpg

― Ally (mlescaut), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 23:05 (twenty-three years ago)

blount doesn't need to; it's not his argument.

the idea that english speaking music magazines are writing for some intellectual elite is hilarious to me.

― jess (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 23:07 (twenty-three years ago)

AAAAAAAARGH MY EYES

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 23:07 (twenty-three years ago)

What about the Russians? I don't trust them.

― Ally (mlescaut), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 23:08 (twenty-three years ago)

― jess (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 23:09 (twenty-three years ago)

oh fuck I had a big long paragraph but GODDAMN THAT PIC! *vomits*

(hey! Ironically "Rollin'" just came up on my mixtape THIS VERY SECOND!)

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 23:10 (twenty-three years ago)

Greil Marcus and Sterling Clover? This is the army you're fighting? Again, any pervasive critical atmosphere that isn't represented in the pages of Rolling Stone, Spin, Vibe, etc. (ie. literally EVERY American pop culture glossy) is hardly pervasive at all. Show me the Rolling Stone article that assumes as much of it's audience as any ESPN column. Christ, ESPN's columns assume more of it's readers POP knowledge than most pop mags. (ie. Peter Gammons doesn't feel the need to explain his Smiths references on the off chance some 13 yr. old won't know what he's talking about).

― James Blount (James Blount), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 23:10 (twenty-three years ago)

if i knew sports writers put in smiths references my high school years would have been so much easier.

― jess (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 23:11 (twenty-three years ago)

"One of the major mistakes people make is that they think manners are only the expression of happy ideas. There is a whole range of behavior that can be expressed in a mannerly way. That's what civilization is all about […] In civilization there have to be some restraints. If we followed every impulse, we'd be killing one another."

― Ally (mlescaut), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 23:12 (twenty-three years ago)

Are on the verge of having a well-thought-out, intellectual argument about the value of well-thought-out, intellectual arguments?

― oops (Oops), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 23:12 (twenty-three years ago)

THE HORROR!

― James Blount (James Blount), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 23:12 (twenty-three years ago)

Not if I can do anything about it.

― Ally (mlescaut), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 23:13 (twenty-three years ago)

you pieces of shit

― jess (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 23:13 (twenty-three years ago)

There comes a time when you realize that Beavis and Butthead were the most economical and perceptive critics ever.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 23:14 (twenty-three years ago)

Ned is OTM.

― Ally (mlescaut), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 23:15 (twenty-three years ago)

hmmm...perhaps I am just Fred Durst ripping apart a cardboard cutout of Janeane Garofalo. But I thought you were allowed to do that on ILM (home of the "damn! I hate that song and its fans!" threads) without the unusual suspects getting so riled. Touchy!

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 23:15 (twenty-three years ago)

*gets out the violin*

― Ally (mlescaut), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 23:16 (twenty-three years ago)

it IS horrible. you shouldn't have to justify yr dislike of academia by using its tools.

― oops (Oops), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 23:16 (twenty-three years ago)

it's tools: language, reason, computers

― James Blount (James Blount), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 23:17 (twenty-three years ago)

Maybe, maybe not. But why would a book of his criticisms be located in a grade school library (under the 6th - 8th grade section), in that case? And I know he reviewed quite a few obscure-ish artists, but I wouldn't have read those, obviously, so they were in the popular albums' reviews as well.

Of course, with the invasion of the Internet and the fact that almost anything can be Googled into understanding, this point may be at present moot. There was no such thing as the Internet for the average Jane/Joe back then, however. There weren't even computers at the grade school I went to back then. So it wasn't as if I could look up "Robyn Hitchcock" as easily as I could look up "redoubtable" back then, just to name an example.

I just think that when it comes to criticism that would've been read by a wide audience back in the Dark Ages Before the Internet Was Available in Any Public Library, people should've worked hard to not include elements in the opinion piece that would've been damned impossible to look up. Words are one thing -- I mean, everyone in here has had a dictionary in their possession for all eternity, right? Even slightly obscure historical events could've been found out through a quick interrogation of one's favorite history teacher. But trying to figure out who the hell "G.G. Allin" is/was back then -- I think I would've had much better luck finding out through my teachers what happened during the Second Peloponnesian War.

p.s.: I knew who The Smiths were back when I was 13. I should've -- I was a fan of theirs back then. (Still am, in fact. Ever loyal me.)

― Dee the Semi-Lurker (Dee the Lurker), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 23:18 (twenty-three years ago)

I'm sorry, the "average sports column" is total dreck! What are you thinking of here?

― Kris (aqueduct), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 23:19 (twenty-three years ago)

I think I would've had much better luck finding out through my teachers what happened during the Second Peloponnesian War.

These days even the teachers would have to google for that.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 23:20 (twenty-three years ago)

I first heard about G.G. Allin through an article in my local paper about Squirrel Bait.

― hstencil, Tuesday, 20 May 2003 23:21 (twenty-three years ago)

James, why are you so upset about this thread? Good lord. Don't worry, posting stills from the "Heartbreaker" video doesn't count as ludicrious psuedo-intellectualism. The whole thing about the sports column is bizarre, by the way, Kris is OTM.

― Ally (mlescaut), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 23:21 (twenty-three years ago)

I think that article ran when I was like 11-12 or something.

― hstencil, Tuesday, 20 May 2003 23:22 (twenty-three years ago)

So it wasn't as if I could look up "Robyn Hitchcock" as easily as I could look up "redoubtable" back then, just to name an example.

Hey, me neither, but that was part of the fun/mystique! You found out stuff however you could, bit by bit, maybe going through the microfiche Rolling Stone collection at the library, or reading a 100-word review in a Trouser Press guide.

― Jody Beth Rosen (Jody Beth Rosen), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 23:22 (twenty-three years ago)

"The only possible starting point: the strange fact of one's own invincible apathy—that if the proofs were proved and God presented himself, nothing would be changed. Here is the strangest fact of all.

Abraham saw signs of God and believed. Now the only sign is that all the signs in the world make no difference. Is this God's ironic revenge? But I am onto him."

― Walker Percy (tracerhand), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 23:24 (twenty-three years ago)

Math is hard!

― Miccio Barbie, Tuesday, 20 May 2003 23:25 (twenty-three years ago)

Skipping 296 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.