Perfect Sound Forever - Simon Reynolds on post-punkhttp://www.furious.com/perfect/simonreynolds3.html
― DJ Martian (djmartian), Thursday, 2 February 2006 13:46 (twenty years ago)
All the debate about rockism over the years on ILM has made me realise that I haven't got a clue what it's all about anymore now the whole things has had several lifecycles. All I can conclude is that any notion of the pop/rock or popist/rockist divide is kind of redundant now and has been for years. I think it had a purpose back in 81/82 when people were trying to set up a context for nu-pop. Even then I think it was the punkist idea of having to be 'against' something that spawned rockism. Of course all the writers and nu-pop class of 81/82 were all punks in in 1977, so that's natural.
― Dr.C (Dr.C), Thursday, 2 February 2006 13:52 (twenty years ago)
― The Man Without Shadow (Enrique), Thursday, 2 February 2006 13:53 (twenty years ago)
― Tim (Tim), Thursday, 2 February 2006 13:57 (twenty years ago)
the blog screeds... I dunno, seems more like the urge to document ("here I am comin' atcha straight from the grime trenches at their realest") takes over from rational thought. complaining about the presence of "long-form Works that take effort and perseverance and time to unlock their depth and detail" on a BEST ALBUMS list, good god.
― rez one-bagger (haitch), Thursday, 2 February 2006 13:57 (twenty years ago)
― The Man Without Shadow (Enrique), Thursday, 2 February 2006 14:03 (twenty years ago)
I quite like the use of imperatives! and exclamation marks! in fanzines!
It is sweet that you kept them, Tim.
― PJ Miller (PJ Miller 68), Thursday, 2 February 2006 14:04 (twenty years ago)
― Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Thursday, 2 February 2006 14:28 (twenty years ago)
― Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Thursday, 2 February 2006 14:32 (twenty years ago)
― Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Thursday, 2 February 2006 14:35 (twenty years ago)
Who did "KoA" mean stuff to? As Matos says, clearly it meant a lot to a whole lot more people than just music critics and whatever the 1980s equivalent of blogosphere fluffers was (zineosphere?). It seems fairly clear to me that "crit-bubbleworld" here must mean the kind of people who would scour the NME and take what it said seriously. I was one of those, too. I should give up completely, really.
The answer to original question is, I think, classic. That's even though I disagree wth SR much of the time and our tastes barely coincide.
― Tim (Tim), Thursday, 2 February 2006 14:43 (twenty years ago)
― Eppy (Eppy), Thursday, 2 February 2006 14:45 (twenty years ago)
― Tim (Tim), Thursday, 2 February 2006 14:47 (twenty years ago)
― Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Thursday, 2 February 2006 14:54 (twenty years ago)
I think college radio figures in here pretty heavily, as much or more than print media, at least in the U.S.
― Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Thursday, 2 February 2006 14:57 (twenty years ago)
― Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Thursday, 2 February 2006 14:58 (twenty years ago)
and yes, christ, everyone please stop talking in incoherent generalizations about 'rockism' and 'popism' and hyphenated variants thereof
speaking of which
― justsaying, Thursday, 2 February 2006 15:19 (twenty years ago)
― The Man Without Shadow (Enrique), Thursday, 2 February 2006 15:36 (twenty years ago)
― Rockist_Scientist (RSLaRue), Thursday, 2 February 2006 15:38 (twenty years ago)
― Ronan (Ronan), Thursday, 2 February 2006 15:38 (twenty years ago)
― The Man Without Shadow (Enrique), Thursday, 2 February 2006 15:41 (twenty years ago)
*That's why they get to be near the end of Dewey decimal divisions.)
― Rockist_Scientist (RSLaRue), Thursday, 2 February 2006 15:43 (twenty years ago)
― Ronan (Ronan), Thursday, 2 February 2006 15:45 (twenty years ago)
― deej.. (deej..), Thursday, 2 February 2006 15:46 (twenty years ago)
King of America is quite good, I think.
It's funny - maybe even reassuring! - to see Reynolds ranting in a strangely standard vein about rockism. What year is this ... 2002?
It's funny how he talks about Ewing though I don't know that web site that Ewing was on, or what it was all about.
When SR says music is mostly seen as a background to words, I don't really think I agree; it's not like everyone is voting for or buying Lloyd Cole records. Mind you, they have fun music on, too.
I like some of the last 37 posts. People say sensible things.
xpost: make that 44 posts or whatever.
― the bellefox, Thursday, 2 February 2006 15:47 (twenty years ago)
haha, no, not so much.
― The Man Without Shadow (Enrique), Thursday, 2 February 2006 15:51 (twenty years ago)
That's how I understand it too ... nu-rockism is the same as old rockism, but with a different canon, i.e. after you boot Joni Mitchell from your music collection and replace her with Fiona Apple, it's back to business as usual.
― NoTimeBeforeTime (Barry Bruner), Thursday, 2 February 2006 15:52 (twenty years ago)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 2 February 2006 16:00 (twenty years ago)
― The Man Without Shadow (Enrique), Thursday, 2 February 2006 16:05 (twenty years ago)
― Ronan (Ronan), Thursday, 2 February 2006 16:10 (twenty years ago)
xpost
― NoTimeBeforeTime (Barry Bruner), Thursday, 2 February 2006 16:10 (twenty years ago)
― Ronan (Ronan), Thursday, 2 February 2006 16:12 (twenty years ago)
― The Man Without Shadow (Enrique), Thursday, 2 February 2006 16:13 (twenty years ago)
― The Man Without Shadow (Enrique), Thursday, 2 February 2006 16:16 (twenty years ago)
― Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Thursday, 2 February 2006 16:18 (twenty years ago)
― Ronan (Ronan), Thursday, 2 February 2006 16:22 (twenty years ago)
― The Man Without Shadow (Enrique), Thursday, 2 February 2006 16:23 (twenty years ago)
theres a lot to be said for this, i agree. but i think in order to accept this kind of viewpoint, you have to divorce this from music entirely, and make it entirely sociocontextual. ok, i mean, all this really comes down to is "when i were a lad we had to entertain usself wi' matchsticks, an we were happy", and now there are a dizzying array of non-music 'options'. this is fairly standard though, and easily agreed with
perhaps he is really saying, 'pop music is less important now'. i can see this, but i dont see how it really makes any difference whether it is arctic monkeys or girls aloud. ie, arctic monkeys are neither sympton nor cause
― terry lennox. (gareth), Thursday, 2 February 2006 16:25 (twenty years ago)
Trad Rockists: NPR Rock [see recent ILM thread: look at WXPN Top 50 of 2005 for a good idea of what is meant] + NME Bands = media over exposed music reliant on traditional song structures. Music likely to be favoured on playlists on Xfm and 6 Music in the UK or NPR radio stations in the US.
Vs
Interesting soundscapes:
Art-Metal, Post-Punk, Progressive rock, ambient, Industrial, Shoegazer, Experimental Electronics, Avant Jazz, Psychedelic/ Space Rock, Post Rock, Dubstep, Black Metal, Avant-Prog, Techno, Microhouse, electro, synthpop, avant hip hop, techstep jungle etc
[music unlikely to heard on 6 music playlists, or marginalized at best]
― DJ Martian (djmartian), Thursday, 2 February 2006 16:26 (twenty years ago)
― terry lennox. (gareth), Thursday, 2 February 2006 16:27 (twenty years ago)
― terry lennox. (gareth), Thursday, 2 February 2006 16:28 (twenty years ago)
― Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Thursday, 2 February 2006 16:29 (twenty years ago)
― Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Thursday, 2 February 2006 16:30 (twenty years ago)
― Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Thursday, 2 February 2006 16:31 (twenty years ago)
second category is reliant on sounds and soundscapes NOT words and conventional songs that fit into radio playlist agendas
I meant radio stations like WXPN, look at their music charts.
― DJ Martian (djmartian), Thursday, 2 February 2006 16:36 (twenty years ago)
― The Man Without Shadow (Enrique), Thursday, 2 February 2006 16:38 (twenty years ago)
Looking at the grand decades-spanning scheme of American critical consensus, there’s a sense in which even art-rock is marginalized (the relatively low presence and this year and every year of instrumental or mostly-intrumental abstraction--prog, fusion, ambient, industrial and the more abstract forms of postpunk, post-rock, experimental electronics; the abiding suspicion of artifice in re. glam or New Pop). See, rather than art-rock, what the critically esteemed stuff really is, most of it, it's lit-rock: music as dramatic backdrop to words. Stuff that is purely, sheerly sonic is still felt to be de trop, suspect because self-indulgent, decadent, music for music's sake, mere ear candy with no "improving" aspect. And stuff where there are words but they're "inane" or incidental is completely marginalized (look at the almost-utter non-presence of functional dance music, the near-absence of non-auteurist, non-socially redeeming hip hop).
― DJ Martian (djmartian), Thursday, 2 February 2006 16:38 (twenty years ago)
― The Man Without Shadow (Enrique), Thursday, 2 February 2006 16:41 (twenty years ago)
"For most of the past decade, street Rap and R&B has been the engine of Pop culture, both in its pure form and various teenybop dilutions. Give or take a gem – Amerie’s ‘1 Thing’, Three Six Mafia’s ‘Stay Fly’, Kanye West’s ‘Addiction’ and ‘Crack Music’ – its remorseless rate of innovation stalled this year. And formal advance was always the compensation for its counter-revolutionary content of bling and booty-worship." Reynolds from Frieze
So if Reynolds doesn't like a supposed emphasis on lyrics, why does he in Frieze attack hiphop lyrics as counter-revolutionary, and on his blog he recently criticized them as well. But then in his latest posting he seem to be taking folks to task for not including such allegedly non-auteurist hiphop in their p & j ballots.
So what kind of hiphop is acceptable under nu-rockism? When can hiphop lyrics be discussed under nu-rockism? I mean if I am gonna get with his program and not endorse popism, and take the good but not the bad aspects of rockism, and call it nu-rockism, well then...I give up...
― curmudgeon (DC Steve), Thursday, 2 February 2006 16:42 (twenty years ago)