Vampire Weekend; Arctic Monkeys of 2008?

read that as "college has always in implicit in rock music"

No, only Steely Dan. And Vampire Weekend. (But you probably read it that way partly because I dumbly typed "has" instead of "have.")

okay, i've got it now. sublime + haircut 100 = vampire weekend

who knew people were needing such a thing?

hey scott haven't you been waiting for this?

http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/13905-talking-to-you-talking-to-me/

yes! i will read it! but first i'll post a picture of the VW dude from his blog:

http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/856/1336/1600/ezblog.jpg

i think he liked the album! review is kinda boring, but not bad. i like this line:

"In general, Talking to You sounds like an album that is gradually divorcing itself from history and geography, as the Twins learn to build on that West Coast sound to create something unique and personal. They're not there yet, but give them another tour."

well, i like it except for that last line. but last lines mostly suck.

Whoa - has anyone else noticed how gigantically dilated the chick's pupils are on the cover of this record? Methinks she rolleth balls.

Alzo: That Christgau piece was pretty good. I like the line "Koenig is smarter and wouldn't think of stifling it. Of course he threatens plodders and pretenders" which explains DeRogatis' reflexive aneurysm on Sound Opinions a few weeks back.

it's really good

it should be required reading for open-minded vampire weekend haters

I don't think I'm just saying this because I like VW but the reviews defending/praising them are so much better-argued than the ones attacking them, which just strike me as weak, snarky and reductive. I mean, I read an evisceration of Nick Cave recently that I completely disagreed with but loved as a powerful, persuasive piece of writing.

One mark of "weak, snarky and reductive" AND "weak, effusive and reductive" pieces is often that the writer's personal feelings about a given work interfere with her or his ability to produce a compelling close reading of that work. Yes, good writing can be motivated and shaped by an individual's emotional reaction to something, but that reaction has to be more about the writer's own perspective: it has to shed light on the work as it is.

That second "reaction" is referring to their critical reaction, not emotional reaction.

"that reaction has to be more about the writer's own perspective"

that reaction has to be about more than the writer's own perspective

Yes, good writing can be motivated and shaped by an individual's emotional reaction to something,

that reaction has to be more about the writer's own perspective:

emotional reaction and the writer's own perspective--it seems to me these are the same thing

oh i see you fixed it. so a writer should go outside his perspective? why?

It's not possible to come at anything from a completely "neutral," disinterested perspective. That's a given. But--and I think nabisco was getting at this in some of his Tumblr posts--sometimes a writer's point-of-view on something has little to do with that thing itself. It's more of a grafting-onto-that-thing of the writer's attitude than a close reading.

I'm more sympathetic towards writers who are interested in getting at what something's about than gazing at their own navel, basically.

So they should stare at everyone else's navel instead?

"The other day marked the appearance of a cultural product, enjoyed by people, not necessarily this writer."

eh, i want writers to come to things they write about with thoughts and feelings and stuff.

If I ever write a phrase like "grafting-onto-that-thing of the writer's attitude" again, sb me.

I'm more sympathetic towards writers who are interested in getting at what something's about

each individual person has or can have a differing perspective on what a piece of art is "about." it's not like we have writers and critics so they can unlock the secrets of the universe. we have them to interpret things through their own personal viewpoint

I want them to do the same, Que, but I don't want their writing to be more about them than the subject they're supposed to be writing on.

See: www.ripfork.com

None of the writing there is about the actual reviews he's criticizing, it's all about him him him and some absurd vendetta he has against rock criticism.

That was an xpost.

None of the writing there is about the actual reviews he's criticizing, it's all about him him him and some absurd vendetta he has against rock criticism.

so? so don't read the website--that website is not exactly what i have in mind when i think of the word criticism.

Yeah, people do interpret things "through their own personal viewpoint," but there's also still a piece of work there, and sometimes people are so interested in their own reactions to that work than saying anything interesting about the work itself. Sometimes, I think, their reactions can and do often obfuscate aspects of the work itself too.

yeah i know, that's why i don't read pitchfork anymore

I don't read Ripfork; I was citing a convenient, accurate example of the problem I see with a certain strain of criticism that's more interested in the writer than the subject.

And that's fine, Que. Pitchfork does that, for you. But it doesn't do that for me, while other examples of criticism does. And that's fine. But I think that, in saying that, you're agreeing with me that "sometimes people are so interested in their own reactions to that work than saying anything interesting about the work itself," which was kind of my point from the beginning.

"sometimes people are so interested in..."

so = more

no i just don't think a writer shouldn't go outside of his/her perspective--unless of course he/she wants to write under a pseudonym

;)

I sign all my checks kshighway btw.

i miss burt stanton

I'd rather read nabisco's considered, engaged-with-the-work Tumblr posts about Vampire Weekend than, say, YouTube comments where someone who stumbled across the "Horchata" video looking for information about drinks decided to scrawl "What the fuck, this is total shit!" Really, I'm not asking anyone to step outside of their perspective; I just want the focus of critical pieces to be more about the work itself, seen through that one person's perspective, than about that person's perspective itself. Too much bad criticism is more look-at-me than it is look-at-that-work.

Was burt stanton a better sockpuppet? If so, sorry to disappoint. I try.

you'd rather read nabisco than random youtube comments? that's crazy!

this is boring though and belongs on some dumb rock crit thread. this thread is about the mighty vampire weekend!

Scott, stop boring me. Dance. Dance!

ill save yall a lil time

can i just pop in to say that i missed out on tickets to see them on saturday by one point at a quiz tonight and i am really, really devastated. that is all.

dude brings out a little of their inner billy bragg here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YALJ0ZXG59

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YALJ0ZXG59o

lol

Giving Up the Gun video

Ezra rockin' the Roger Federer look in that video.

Anyone else feeling like this album - unlike the debut - doesn't hold up well with repeat listens? Cousins sounds like a sitcom theme and the rest of it as slight as an Owl City album track. I was very into it for like 3 days when it leaked and never want to go back to it ever again. Opposite effect of Los Campesinos and Magnetic Fields new ones.

I played this on the way to work today and was reminded that it's fucking awesome.

It's like the lightness of Owl City with a good chunk of the overbearing twee preciousness removed and a lot more interesting musical pastiches/influence-waving.

that video is fucking awesome

this album gets way better with repeated listens imo. now that it's really sunk in, i think it's just as good as the first one. at first i felt like they would probably never be as dear to me as on s/t, but if anything they've increased their staying power. 'too many slow songs' seemed like a valid criticism for a while, but they operate just as nicely in quirky fast pop mode as in textural ballad mode. "diplomat's son" is my favourite song on the album and i'm glad they're the kind of band who can write that sort of song now.