Why would anyone want to be a music journalist RATHER than a musician?

musician: that sounds great! can i do that?
critic: that sounds great! can attach my name to it?

okay okay now I'm being unnecessarily cynical.

?!?!
How does this explain Kid Rock?

Why would anyone want to be a racing driver RATHER than a motorsport journalist?

Why would anyone want to be a movie director RATHER than a film critic?

If you're having orgasms playing music, I'd say stick with that.

The overlap between the two vocations is that both musicians and critics put forth a value judgment about music. By playing the music that they play in a certain way, the musician makes a statement about what makes music worthwhile and valuable. In a more direct way, the critic makes these statements through their criticism. In this arena, the arena of value judgments, the critic and the musician clash as equal combatants. However, there is something inherently sterile about the critic - because they can only describe how music should be - they can never create it.

pod people vs ipod people. fite!

Explain yourself, Sterling. You speak in paradox.

what's funny about this statement is that it's unproveable by definition

haha maybe fishbone could verify?

if it were possible to absolutely freeze the circulation of cultural information globally, i doubt the music that would result from would be anything worth listening to. this is the question, right: what would happen if we all stopped reading and participating and just ignored everything but what was right in front of us, what records were already in our collections. actually records wouldn't even exist, or they'd be extremely limited-run pressings, because no press = no advertising = no sales = no investment in music / no radio play. you'd have a music-listening public constituted heirarchically, much like the world was for thousands of years before the democratization of letters and media: two main groups: elite interlocking circles of music-heds with access to the limited-run stuff and money to seek it out, and then everybody else who essentially has to live on a diet of this guy:

http://ws64.com/cabin/2002/Street%20Music.jpg

although i bet even this guy has a couple of contacts at listings pages and summer festivals

Music crit can make do with the body of already produced music (and largely does -- Uncut could survive for years on the product of the 70s alone)

Furthermore, you guys are really stretching the definition of music criticism in order to include any social discourse about music. Music criticism is more specific than that.

tho with my track record i might be cannon fodder soon!!

and what's worse is that people tell him that his awful reed-whine sounds "just lovely", as they cringe and go back to their wattle lean-tos

without music criticism we'd be playing Mozart's Requiem on those fucking sticks

you act as if music were a lock and music criticism is its key: destroy the lock and the key is useless

i have a difft analogy in mind, following on, but i'm genuinely appalled by its lewdness

Well, in a sense, I think that's true. But it's a very abstract point, because of course both are always going to be around. The truth is that I think it would be a blast to be able to make a living as either a musician or a music critic.

This thread has too many bizarre dichotomies to go into (my writing is no more "reactive" or less "proactive", and no more "attaching my name to something" or less "doing something" than most music is, believe me), but this line above bothers me the most. Look -- I do the same thing with music I've heard that musicians do with music that they've heard. I USE IT IN MY WORK. If that makes me parasitic of music I listen to, then MUSICIANS ARE PARASITIC OF MUSIC THEY LISTEN TO, TOO. And we're both parasitic of all the other stuff in life that we use in our work, too. (I mean, songs are often *about* something right? So how are songwriters not parasitic of THAT??)

Everything is essentially a "parasitic" activity, since it could not exist without everything else. Writing, art, music... everything. If this bothers you, you may have to kill yourself.

[email protected] Free Newsletters | MSN Featured Offers | Find Message


Save Address(es) Block Previous Next | Close

From :
"Chris"

To :


Subject :
The Money Machine

Date :
Mon, 9 Jun 2003 02:26:43 -0500

Reply Reply All Forward Delete Put in Folder...InboxSent MessagesDraftsTrash Can Printer Friendly Version

Dear Friend,

This is the most amazing program I have seen yet on the net. I understand the Big Dogs are all joining this one--so I did too!
There is no sponsoring needed. All the advertising is done FOR YOU. EZ money--deposited directly into your PayPal account! This program was just launched. The company will blast your ad until you have 25 people under you. The site is full of useful tools and lists to make your personal promotions a success if you CHOOSE to do so--it is not necessary. You WILL earn $4500 with this program. The only requirement is you must be motivated to earn money. For goodness sake, check it out. Get your paypal account overflowing!

I just got the same email! Yay Money Machine!

Anyway, you're cheating: you define us in ways that make us parasitic, and then when we tell you that in fact we're doing something different from how you define us, you tell us that it's not criticism.

"Indigenous music" is pretty much any music that isn't played in a classical concert hall. In many circumstances (e.g., discos, African celebrations of an infant's first tooth, etc.) music is part of a social ritual that includes everyone who's there. In some languages there is no word for music, since it is not seen as an activity separate from its circumstances. If you ask which came first, the music or the ritual, you're asking a nonsense question. That a song now exists on the wide-world stage rather than in just a village doesn't change the interdependence of all the characters.

Here's a thought experiment: Ask yourself why you come to ILx. Is it to contemplate some third thing, external to us - music! - or is it to converse with your fellows? If your answer in any way takes on the latter role ("conversing with your fellows"), then you are not merely "commenting" on music, you are using music, just as dancers use music, village chiefs use music, preachers use music, congregations use music.

My Meltzer review.

Speak for your own fucking self, loser.

Dumb people = musicians (and racing car drivers)

But not as much as all those fucking mediocre retards copying other fucking mediocre retards playing it.

why would anyone want to be a psychiatrist rather than a loony?

Your word for mathematics is probably Llangffyrrddillgggbbbhhhhhttthhhdddddddddyyyyyyyyyyyllllddddd or something!