Vampire Weekend; Arctic Monkeys of 2008?

Okay, maybe that specific article was more stupid than jealousy, but a lot of the other complaints arise from the "they got too big too quick! undeserving! my band works harder!" camp.

er, the first VV column was positive.

It's like the Strokes ... those kids parents were NYC big shots, so in 2002 people in New York made a big to do about that. It's just how it is now.

so what!

xp

those kids parents were NYC big shots, so in 2002 people in New York made a big to do about that. It

like you?

http://www.northernsoul45s.co.uk/images/large/CHRIS%20CAMPBELL%20%20YOU%20GOTTA%20PAY%20DUES%20%20LARGE.jpg

You know, just because a band ironically needles all the signifiers of their upbringing, it doesn't mean they're still not using them to their advantage.

yah totally - brilliant marketing - well played rich kids!

I don't care that much, the music's not for me, but ... remember a time ... when four scumbags from Queens could make it big in New York, or a nerdy working class art school drop out ... those were the days maN!! when rent cost $4 on the -real- Lower West Side

i mean all these burt stnadonds being all waah we wouldnt even be talking abt them if they werent so privileged - dont u see youve fallen right into their trap

and no burt i dont remember that i was 4 and living in california so there

Anthony, you bring a lot of vigor to your arguments up there, but not a lot of consistency!

(a) Part of what is meant by "ordinary" is my belief that nobody is really listening to this for "Afropop-jacking"; people are listening to this for well-made happy eighth-note indie. If the problem you are having with this album is that it's not good compared to Afropop, then you are looking for the wrong thing

(b) CLEARLY "ordinary" means ordinary within its indie context; you start saying the Strokes are still ordinary subculture music (no duh), but not ordinary in a broader context (no duh); these dudes, similarly, are manna for fans not of Afropop or Afropop-jacking but of a kind of naturalistic laid-back indie; but all you've made there is an argument that they're non-ordinary in a broader context, too (haha which would make anyone who's ever said "OMG this indie band is so routine and uninteresting" fully blinkered)

But fuck's sake, the accusation of "my world is the world" blinkers is just plain bizarro and context-missing, unless you seriously want every post on ILX to say "oh yeah, this Spoon song is pretty ordinary (in the specific context of Spoon's position in modern-day indie blah blah blah, not the geological sense)"

P.S. I would kinda like the list of who provides same-thing-better, but what we come down to either way is that some people find an album well-made and some people aren't feeling it; what's interesting is that pre-internet this was considered normal, not divisive, whereas now everyone who doesn't much care about a record enters into a sighing match in a comments box somewhere. Point being we got at this a little upthread: some songs here do it for me, right now, as much as "Love Plus One" might -- they don't for you. It'd be fascinating if we could get at why, but I don't know that it's possible, especially with these guys: there's something about the tidiness of their music that makes it hard to latch onto specific elements and have good/bad debates about them. So yeah, I would totally like to hear who you think provides the same thing better (to which my response will inevitably be "no, you've got it wrong, that's not what people are getting out of this").

http://rws-blog.rhapsody.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/01/29/africaindiethumbnail.jpg

P.P.S. Boo-hoo indeed -- yet I was just saying elsewhere that I can think back to listening to the Ocean Blue in high school or whatever and being fully aware that someone somewhere would find them boring and wimpy, but of course you could still listen to and talk about it without a Stanton sitting in the corner telling you so

This isn't "boo hoo why can't people listen to one pleasant indie record in peace," it's more a question about expectations, about: (a) criticizing records for what they aren't, rather than what they are, and the gap between the critic and the consumer/chatterer, and (b) the manufacture of "controversy" and polarization and argument over what is essentially the most normal situation imaginable -- a clump of people really enjoys a record, but OF COURSE lots of people just aren't feeling whatever they saw in it, something true of everything in the universe ever

im thinking the effortless vibe is exacerbating the class war complaint here

(Ha, J, I was saying that about their sense of unconcerned happiness, earlier -- and wondering whether, if they seemed miserable, it would be different. As it is, they get the "smug" and "privileged" lines in part because they sound pleased and joyous.)

lol rich kids everythings so easy for them (including but not limited to writing and recording songs)

This thread has been stunningly consistent in its arguments. I keep reading the same three reasons why VW is OK and the same three reasons why they are not OK (though Burt is not helping on that front). Which means exactly what Nabisco is saying--some people like a record and some people do not.

So all the non-music stuff is red herrings. Class signifiers or whatever, there is nothing so interesting in the VW backdrop/context that it requires a bunch of criticism and analysis to understand it. I think these guys are absolutely manipulating the hell out of the media but that doesn't mean that we need to care/play along.

there's something about the tidiness of their music

great comment, that does come somewhere towards setting a context in which discussion of their stuff could be usefully possible.

my 2p: it's tidiness and difference at the same time that makes something stand out (and that can mean to be adored and hated). something has to jump out as different sounding but also be believable in the sense that you believe the people doing it are completely on top of what they're doing. that's what draws (me at least) in. it's there in elvis's early recordings, it's also there in why me and my son can't work out why 'mansard roof' is catchy.

xxxxxxpost, jeez

then, music aside, there's the class thing, which seems to be riling everyone. not every band can be left wing and working class.

lol rich kids everythings so easy for them (including but not limited to writing and recording songs)

Not to drag it deeper, but they're like in the 2% of bands in New York who probably never complained about how expensive a fucking rehearsal space is.

I think these guys are absolutely manipulating the hell out of the media but that doesn't mean that we need to care/play along.

otm, but we also don't need to assume that because they are of a particular class they are inherently better at manipulating the media.

yah n theres definitely happiness and even generosity there - suggesting that this might be more than just breezy indie rock

not every band can be left wing and working class.

This is totally true, and, yes, it's really unfair to judge Vampire Weekend on their class alone.

BUT i think the disconnect is happening is because they're rich in INDIE ROCK. Underground rock (from the indie/punk/DIY tradition) traditionally rewards hard work and effort. Major labels are supposed to make the cinderella stories, indie labels traditionally signed bands that were in for the long haul, lots of touring, etc. I could be RONG, but Matador would have never signed such a green band 10 years ago, would they?

Blogs fucking up the game.

x-post yeah Whatever, I think they saw an easy path to publicity because they're "not like most bands" in their appearance/background (or the fact that they don't feel the need to bury their background) and went for it. Their "hanging out with" profile in the NYT on Sunday was hilariously bad.

But yeah, manipulating the media is certainly not a class-based skill.

So all the non-music stuff is red herrings. Class signifiers or whatever, there is nothing so interesting in the VW backdrop/context that it requires a bunch of criticism and analysis to understand it. I think these guys are absolutely manipulating the hell out of the media but that doesn't mean that we need to care/play along.

i think its totally valid to dislike a band for any reason you want. how do we separate out the non-music from the music?

Nobody should be allowed to record an album unless they are poor, their parents are poor, and they have only very limited access to recording studios. I'm kidding Burt.

I honestly have no opinion on this band, I just like arguing. But witnessing this whole thing from ground zero has been pretty interesting - they've been the media favorites for over a year now, even before they released their CD-R. I remember reading a lot of the little "alt"weeklie rags, and Vampire Weekend has been the unanimous favorite ("these guys are going to be huge, trust me"), even without actual music released.

Having friends in the media doesn't really hurt to get a thumbs up every now and then, and getting that first bit of attention is pretty crucial. It doesn't judge their musical merit, but I think people are understandable in resenting that kind-of easy, meteoric rise because of connections.

i think its totally valid to dislike a band for any reason you want. how do we separate out the non-music from the music?

Yeah I mean sure dislike a band for any reason you want but the whole VW discussion (not maybe in this thread but in the media in general) has been "I like VW 'cause their music is enjoyable" followed by "I don't like VW because their clothes/education make me uncomfortable" which is sort of retarded and will never go anywhere.

1) VW has toured a lot in the last year. i think at least two trips around the US. (sure they might have more $$ flexibility to make that happen, but they have put their feet to the concrete)

2) Other bands w/ Columbia grads. the Walkmen, Animal Collective, Aa. None of these bands get dumped on for getting critical NYC help like VW, is it just 'cuz they sail yahts and wear lacoste?

3) the VW cd is okay. but not Great.

This thread has been more like "I like VW 'cause their music is enjoyable" followed by "I don't like VW because there is other music like it that is better" followed by "NYC just ain't what it used to be," which is a step up, maybe.

maybe its bad timing for vamp week blowing up while the economy is falling apart

there are two americas

Well, yeah, 90% of NYC bands.. and writers... etc.etc... of note are in the Ivy League sphere of things (if you include Ivy League dropouts). A lot of it is really good, but it's definitely interesting. Who knows what it means???????

guys all but 2 of the songs on the album were recorded and circulated before they were signed so is it not possible that the ppl at xl said "hey this would make a really good album, and as luck wuold have it, they've already been written up in the new york times! we might make some money out of this!!"??

and tbh ppl bitching about them never having to slum it are either a. delusional b. jealous c. grasping at straws or d. all of the above, and most of all living in some crazy vacuum where this shit is supposed to matter

Matador would have never signed such a green band 10 years ago, would they

Well, they only distributed them, but the path here is not all that different from Belle & Sebastian's, no? Initial self-made recordings charm people with spare, natural sound, circulate through fans and critics, etc. Only in this case it's like remastering Tigermilk for your first wide release.

The idea that these guys are cleverly manipulating the media seems like an evil-genius fantasy that's probably better phrased as "they have good PR." And sure, money is involved in what was probably their wisest move, which was investing in the recording session this album came out of -- in the short term, at least, I suspect they'd have wound up with a worse record if they'd had to wait it out and record on a label's dime, rather than swinging it themselves and having their keyboard player as the producer. (Which is, ha, TOTALLY indie -- just possibly indie by way of having enough money to put into your project!)

Funny story, PR-wise: the first time I ever heard of these guys was while riding the subway home from work, and their singer was talking with an older woman about how his band was doing, and how they were starting to think about which publicity group they should go with; I couldn't resist asking someone else he was with what band it was. He did not sound like a canny evil genius, for what it's worth. Phrases like "we're exploring our options" may or may not have been involved. I dunno. He had a nice shirt, though.

you might like only musicians who have "paid their dues" because you identify w/ it but it's crazy to say that other people should do the same

the first time i heard of these guys was from j0hn d, i think: http://www.lastplanetojakarta.com/2007/06/great_new_band_alert.html

see guys all you need to do to get a good review on p4k is to befriend their writers in the subway

saw them open for somebody. i remember when my GF was asked who opened she said some boring guys

nabisco, do you think this is as good as tigermilk?

haha them is fighting words: I don't know these people at all, I just live in the neighborhood

her: "they're called vampire weekend, they're playing this weekend"
me: "yeah, i'll have to check that out (yeah right like I'm gonna go check out some random Columbia band)"

Re: Tigermilk -- that's hard; I never heard Tigermilk until after hearing the next two, and after that it didn't seem particularly revelatory, since I'd already soaked in B&S's thing; I'm not particularly into it! I'd usually rather listen to Vampire Weekend than Tigermilk, yeah, but if I were somehow first-exposed to both at the same time, who knows. My main point was just that both blow in in this casual way that kinda reminds you of root song-as-song pleasures and makes other things seem clenched and trying-too-hard

Nabsico, maybe "manipulated" would have been better phrased as "fucking with". I have to believe that's what they were doing in this piece: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/27/fashion/27nite.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

"Fucking with?" Maybe this makes me an Upper West Side prep, or something, but that sounds like normal four dudes goofing off over a meal.

Haha, they have yet to do any press more than two blocks from my apartment

So yeah, I would totally like to hear who you think provides the same thing better (to which my response will inevitably be "no, you've got it wrong, that's not what people are getting out of this").

How about the Homosexuals?

Cause Co-Motion?

a certain ratio?

but that sounds like normal four dudes goofing off over a meal

Exactly, except there's the NYT writer there who is going to drape their goofing off in all this gushy prose about how great they are. Just thinking of myself, if I leave the interview saying "Oh don't forget boys, we've got that big trip to Lacoste tomorrow," I know that that's getting printed.

Orange Juice ftw

RIYL: Sublime