'Deconstructionist' Music

the closest billy childish got to deconstruction was schtupping trace emin

never been sure, tbh. they sure sound drunk.

xp i like us maple btw i just don't think its special esp in a clever "deconstructive" sense, they're basically just doing sparse "free rock" because they followed up on some byron coley albert ayler recommendations or something

― the late great, Tuesday, September 4, 2012 3:56 PM (18 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

see that's the crux, is it sounds like "free rock" but it was played just like the records

did you guys ever see them live?

they did not deconstruct me but they awed me. also he was drunk man, i could smell him (close enough that his sweat was drenching me and it felt like the kick pedal was hitting my chest)

only show i think actually deconstructed me was a ruins show

xp to contendo - the mummies are part of a process of ongoing engagement w/ 'deconstructionist' music which is not codifying punk tradition any more than indie rock dudes imitating wire music is breaking down any codes

see that's the crux, is it sounds like "free rock" but it was played just like the records

crux of what though, i don't get what that signifies to you

the crux that you are talking out of your ass

me?

are you just saying they didn't "play shitty"?

but seriously i think contenderizer said it pretty well....

i mean "free rock" in the sense that it sounds like that music not that it's free improv

xpost no i don't think they played shitty at all, i saw them probably like 5 times i think?

the closest billy childish got to deconstruction was schtupping trace emin

― Einstürzende Joebarton (Nilmar Honorato da Silva)

yeah, he's a roots. wants it to be like it's supposed to be, the pursuit of bygone purity.

i don't think us maple played shitty either, they were skilled which is why i compared them to don cab

but i think the mummies are skilled too, and not just at what they do but also at what they choose not to

i think it's definitely missing the point to listen to surfin bird and listen to mummies and say "oh sure deconstruction exists as a thread everywhere in rock" but then try to claim the mummies are just trying to do surfin bird and us maple is trying to *push further* than something else

next you're going to tell us spacemen 3 were just copying the sonics

i have no opinion about the mummies other than that they are p fun

the monks seems like a pretty good one, just because in that documentary they talked about how they worked with those weirdo german ad agency dudes to break everything down etc

xp to contendo - the mummies are part of a process of ongoing engagement w/ 'deconstructionist' music which is not codifying punk tradition any more than indie rock dudes imitating wire music is breaking down any codes

― the late great, Tuesday, September 4, 2012 2:15 PM (2 minutes ago)

i'm not sure that we're at odds. i'm boxing the mummies in w/ b. child as revivalists, keeprs of the sacred flame. like the cramps, they define what they enshrine, but that's only because they're enshrining the defilement. this seems v different to me from the attempt to make deliberately alienating and "difficult" music that denies its apparent genre. like, you can enjoy the cramps, the milkshakes and the mummies in exactly the same way that you enjoy the trashmen and the novas. that's the whole point. the streams cross at pussy galore, who i'd argue were really just the new york mummies, forced to pass off their budget rock as an art prank by the tenor of the times.

anyway who cares US MAPLE RULES
HATERS S THE D
BEER BONG

^machine of life

us maple are not alienating to their audience at all though, and i think both would polarize joe bloggs

or difficult. the average us maple guy rolls with nels cline and royal trux in his closet, so keepers of sacred flames whatevs

and probably albert ayler and anthony braxton and other stuff that sounds like us maple w/ jazz instruments

or at least the tricks that make it scan as difficult and alienating to yr mom

i don't think US maple were pushing further than the mummies. i think they were being obtuse for the sake of it. the mummies were giving it to the people, moving asses, wrecking parties. i respect that far more.

spacemen 3 were copying the stooges. then street hassle, then suicide. or something. i mostly liked the stooges, so i stuck with "o.d. catastrophe".

i am my mom, so...

spacemen 3 were copying terry riley

and mc5

and suicide and red krayola for sure so they knew their drone

US Maple are constructionist

The correct answer is Beach Boys 2012

otm

since negativland got a mention, i suppose the residents figure in here somewhere. resemble and seem to comment on rock music, but produce something that doesn't work properly. devo too. i can't get no.

does this impulse/approach exist much in pop genres outside rock & punk?

xp seems like you just did there

according to some critics it exists everywhere and at the core of all music

http://www.domesticviolenceseries.com/images/awareness.jpg

mel gibson?

listening to US maple

post back when they *surprise* you

beautiful picture

still not redeeming the fanciful rhetoric

it does, i agree! that's sort of the point. it sounds like rock music, but like rock music that's been undone at a basic level. it resembles, but does not function as. if you approach it with the idea that it's going to scratch the zz top itch, you'll likely be frustrated. alienation from apparent genre identity seem like a big part of the point. sure, it scratches the US maple itch for fans, and the dislocation itch for those interested in such things, but that doesn't reduce the extent to which they seem to be frustrating rock's basic impulses. same thing, really.

you could say this about pretty much all death metal - and black metal - and most rock bands on Atavistic or Skin Graft. I think what you mean is "rock that doesn't strictly adhere to permanent blues-based progressions in 4, yet is not prog."

i liked the skin graft ac/dc covers. they didn't sound 'deconstructed' as much as 'essentialized'?

i feel like wire is in the same category. no extraneous notes.

i insist that i'm talking about music that seems to establish a kind of love/hate relationship with a specific genre. music that is in some sense of that genre, yet remains openly hostile to or critical of it. deliberately sounding ruined, broken or wrong - not in a general sense, but with regard to contemporary in-genre expectations - is a big part of it, too. at this point i want to position devo's "satisfaction" cover as the exemplar.

though maybe the resident's "satisfaction" cover would be better

devo's 'head like a hole' cover seems more of a hostile commentary on the original than does 'satisfaction' though, even while sounding less altered.

i insist that i'm talking about music that seems to establish a kind of love/hate relationship with a specific genre. music that is in some sense of that genre, yet remains openly hostile to or critical of it. deliberately sounding ruined, broken or wrong - not in a general sense, but with regard to contemporary in-genre expectations - is a big part of it, too. at this point i want to position devo's "satisfaction" cover as the exemplar.

presumably Coltrane's "My Favorite Things" would work here too - this has been going on in music for a very long time, it's musical conversation, not deconstruction.

oh oh oh you know what fits your description dog latin is Harvey Milk, esp first two albums.

residents must be right! c'mon deconstructionists throw me a bone over heah

fuck yeah the residents for sure, was just looking for examples with less "this is for satire's sake"

devo

c90: (i can't get no) satisfaction