Are you guys at Seattle Weekly really that bad?

honest in the sense that it's more true to the fact that not everyone can afford everything. I think I explained it upthread.

Also, I think I'd be the first to admit that my own curmudgeonly tendencies color a lot of this bias, too.

DON'T LISTEN DON'T LISTEN DON'T LISTEN vs. LISTEN LISTEN LISTEN

both are inferior to someone whose enthusiasm (or lack thereof) isn't so predictable.

I'm definitely more likely to read a Meltzer review (unless it's one of those Dada bullshits) than a CMJ review because cynicism leads to better jokes. But a CMJ review never makes me assume talent is being wasted, becuz there's no implication of talent in the first place.

also: i'm uneasy with the idea that sherburne's worth as a critic (a 'dance critic', a 'rock critic' etc) is somehow suspect (the bit abt 'innate curiousity') if he doesn't feel the need to engage with meltzer/the melzer-continuum (or engage with him as a 'before you begin you need to read...' grandfather of rock crit anyway). even if you disapprove of a 'dance/pop' quasi-ahistoricism in music criticism, enough's happened between meltzer and whatever more immediate music crit lineage you'd feel more comfortable slotting philip into that his (sherburne's) writing can stand on two (valid) legs, both as 'music criticism' and criticism of music criticism.

i would direct philip to that epic Eno thing by Lester Bangs that I was reading last night and that can be found at perfect sound forever, i believe. I enjoyed the hell out of that. a lot of it is just Eno talking though. which I enjoyed. maybe not everybody would. It's very funny, and personal, and informative and lucid. and memorable actually.

what Mitch said is what I was trying to get across to Diamond above; I apologize for my tone. given the circumstances (not Diamond so much as the stuff this thread is discussing generally) I was a lot more snipish than I needed to be. but two days in the Bumbershoot sun has evened me out something nice.