― miccio (miccio), Friday, 3 June 2005 21:58 (eighteen years ago) link
― don weiner (don weiner), Friday, 3 June 2005 21:58 (eighteen years ago) link
"Why is this site perpetually fascinated by such a mediocre writer?"
no idea. dont think hes terrible, i just have a hard time figuring out if he ever has anything he really wants to say, or if hes really saying anything that exciting at all. it all just seems desperately middlebrow, inoffensive, mild and MOR.
or "maybe its because he's 2) covering music that no one else is covering in the new york times in a comprehensive and intelligent way? Did you see how happy matt sonzala was with sanneh's houston rap scene piece?"
well scene-people/specialists usually love it when their scene or local artists or whatever get bigged up in a large newspaper, even if the coverage isnt that great or special. its like 'oh cool such and such big paper is covering it! thats coverage for the scene! thats great!' or theyre just so overcome that some bigwig is doing something on it, their pants get wet and they dont care about anything else (except drying their pants).
― studiowiz, Friday, 3 June 2005 22:37 (eighteen years ago) link
― miccio (miccio), Friday, 3 June 2005 22:42 (eighteen years ago) link
'My Doorbell' doesn't half sound like 'Let's Go Dancing (Ooh Reggae Dancing)' by Kool and the Gang.
― snotty moore, Friday, 3 June 2005 22:48 (eighteen years ago) link
If the Strokes are seen as being more in the garage rock vein (as opposed to the nu wave vein), then the trend dates back to the late seventies w/ bands like DMZ and such. There was the whole paisley underground thing concurrent w/ tons of garage rock revivalism in the '80s. Genre never really died, but started kicking again quite a bit in early '90s w/ Gories, Mummies, Cheater Slicks, Night Kings, Supercharger, etc.
― Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Friday, 3 June 2005 23:13 (eighteen years ago) link
I guess part of it is just having someone at someplace like the NYT who's at least listening to and aware of a broad range of music. I'm less hung up on his value as a stylist than as a sort of populist critic in the Roger Ebert mode who can make potentially obscure things seem accessible -- and who has pretty good taste, too.
― gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Friday, 3 June 2005 23:20 (eighteen years ago) link
i'd love to see some of this brit daily paper writing that's so much better than sanneh's times stuff (which is generally way, way better than this white stripes review by the way.) i'm not being sarcastic, though i guess i'm being skeptical. i never had any idea that the brit press had much to say about music at all in this day and age. i sure haven't seen it do so, but i'm willing to be convinced otherwise.
xp
― xhuxk, Friday, 3 June 2005 23:23 (eighteen years ago) link
― The Sensational Sulk (sexyDancer), Friday, 3 June 2005 23:38 (eighteen years ago) link
― xhuxk, Friday, 3 June 2005 23:43 (eighteen years ago) link
― The Sensational Sulk (sexyDancer), Friday, 3 June 2005 23:45 (eighteen years ago) link
― Brooker Buckingham (Brooker B), Friday, 3 June 2005 23:51 (eighteen years ago) link
― Brooker Buckingham (Brooker B), Friday, 3 June 2005 23:53 (eighteen years ago) link
― walter kranz (walterkranz), Friday, 3 June 2005 23:56 (eighteen years ago) link
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 3 June 2005 23:58 (eighteen years ago) link
― Hurting (Hurting), Friday, 3 June 2005 23:59 (eighteen years ago) link
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 4 June 2005 00:01 (eighteen years ago) link
aren't the strokes supposed to sound like television and other 70's dudes? i actually never thought they were that retro to begin with.
― scott seward (scott seward), Saturday, 4 June 2005 00:02 (eighteen years ago) link
― scott seward (scott seward), Saturday, 4 June 2005 00:04 (eighteen years ago) link
gypsy mothra said it better.
― scott seward (scott seward), Saturday, 4 June 2005 00:06 (eighteen years ago) link
― walter kranz (walterkranz), Saturday, 4 June 2005 00:07 (eighteen years ago) link
― gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Saturday, 4 June 2005 00:08 (eighteen years ago) link
― bugged out, Saturday, 4 June 2005 00:14 (eighteen years ago) link
― Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Saturday, 4 June 2005 00:15 (eighteen years ago) link
― The Sensational Sulk (sexyDancer), Saturday, 4 June 2005 00:16 (eighteen years ago) link
― Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Saturday, 4 June 2005 00:16 (eighteen years ago) link
― scott seward (scott seward), Saturday, 4 June 2005 00:18 (eighteen years ago) link
― miccio (miccio), Saturday, 4 June 2005 00:20 (eighteen years ago) link
Only a few years ago, it was a mild shock to hear so many young bands sounding so old-fashioned. In 2001, when the Strokes released their galvanizing debut album, the garage-rock boom seemed like a sharp (and sometimes shrill) reaction to a mutating musical world. The Strokes' retro juggernaut was a strike against turntables and keyboards, rap-rock and electronica. And if the band sounded a bit like their favorite late-1970's punk forebears, that was part of the point: they were digging in their heels.
I see little deflation here, or distinction of the difference between hype and reality.
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 4 June 2005 00:21 (eighteen years ago) link
― scott seward (scott seward), Saturday, 4 June 2005 00:23 (eighteen years ago) link
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 4 June 2005 00:23 (eighteen years ago) link
― bugged out, Saturday, 4 June 2005 00:24 (eighteen years ago) link
KS in failure to reflect sum total of musical reality in half a sentence shocker!
― bugged out, Saturday, 4 June 2005 00:27 (eighteen years ago) link
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 4 June 2005 00:29 (eighteen years ago) link
The stuff I have problems with is about the White Stripes relationship to rock history. Forget about agreeing with it or not, I'm not even sure what it means.
― bugged out, Saturday, 4 June 2005 00:32 (eighteen years ago) link
― bugged out, Saturday, 4 June 2005 00:33 (eighteen years ago) link
― MindInRewind (Barry Bruner), Saturday, 4 June 2005 00:33 (eighteen years ago) link
― Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Saturday, 4 June 2005 00:35 (eighteen years ago) link
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 4 June 2005 00:37 (eighteen years ago) link
Specifically, a Digitech Whammy pedal, for those that are interested. He's used one for years, especially to do odd, impossible things during slide solos.
I just realized that no-one probably does care. I CARE! somewhat.
― John Justen (johnjusten), Saturday, 4 June 2005 00:39 (eighteen years ago) link
fwiw, one thing I like about Kelefa in general is that I think he manages to write about things that, in most cases, the majority of his potential audience knows nothing about, but he manages to do it conversationally and make it seem accessible (as opposed to, say, some of the high-art critics, opera and painting and whatnot, who seem to kind of pride themselves on writing for specialized audiences).
― gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Saturday, 4 June 2005 00:41 (eighteen years ago) link
It's a perfectly well-written piece, and i can't understand all the criticism (well wait, as this is ILM I can but all the hyper-analysis is still silly) - esp from whoever that said Kelefah doesnt have an opinion. He's practically salivating over the album, wth do you mean? I have yet to be disappointed by the way he explains things, and I dig his excited, yet still low-key style. I'd like to see any of you write better in The New York Times, which demands a particular tone and presumes a specific audience....and see if you succeed as well in such well-defined parameters.
― Vichitravirya XI, Saturday, 4 June 2005 00:43 (eighteen years ago) link
― Vichitravirya XI, Saturday, 4 June 2005 00:44 (eighteen years ago) link
So presumably Ned disagrees with KS' take on recent musical history. How would you sum up the last few years differently in two paragraphs? ie, without having the luxury of pointing out all the exceptions to the rule.
― bugged out, Saturday, 4 June 2005 00:44 (eighteen years ago) link
― Vichitravirya XI, Saturday, 4 June 2005 00:45 (eighteen years ago) link
― Vichitravirya XI, Saturday, 4 June 2005 00:46 (eighteen years ago) link
The downside of this is turning into Klosterman -- which, happily, KS doesn't seem to be in any immediate danger of doing (and thank fuck for that).
I also personally find it very amsuing that in the same breath people are saying, "Isn't it great that KS can talk to so many people" they are also saying, "Aren't *we* great for sensing what he's *really* talking about." The two are not necessarily contradictory, but you're making it sound like that the conscious-history-of-hype subtext which is magically apparent to many here is only allowed to be understood by those who know him, not the general audience he's supposed to be informing. Talk about having your cake and eating it too!
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 4 June 2005 00:48 (eighteen years ago) link
― bugged out, Saturday, 4 June 2005 00:49 (eighteen years ago) link
I don't know; maybe he genuinely thinks the White Stripes are this significant. I certainly don't.
― Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Saturday, 4 June 2005 00:50 (eighteen years ago) link
not sure i agree with this (there are *lots* of models for this kinda {bowel} movement), but i think it's an interesting thought, since didn't the strokes actually hit first (and perhaps bigger) in england? they definitely seemed to be on tour there a lot, when they just had EPs out. (in fact, i think their first EP may have showed up on american shores as a UK import.) and the same thing has happened with some american post-strokes new-new-wave hypes since -- definitely the bravery and the scissors sisters (if they count); not sure who else.(do interpol have brit hits? in the states, near as i can tell, they've never gotten much beyond college radio, though anthony can check the charts and correct me i'm wrong.) so maybe the reason i don' t notice the movement as much as some other people here is that i don't read the british music papers, who may well have invented the movement in the first place...
― xhuxk, Sunday, 5 June 2005 15:01 (eighteen years ago) link
― miccio (miccio), Sunday, 5 June 2005 15:07 (eighteen years ago) link
― gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Sunday, 5 June 2005 15:12 (eighteen years ago) link
― Alfred Soto (Alfred Soto), Sunday, 5 June 2005 15:41 (eighteen years ago) link
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Sunday, 5 June 2005 16:48 (eighteen years ago) link
― walter kranz (walterkranz), Sunday, 5 June 2005 17:08 (eighteen years ago) link
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Sunday, 5 June 2005 17:49 (eighteen years ago) link
― Cool Hand Luuke (ex machina), Sunday, 5 June 2005 18:01 (eighteen years ago) link
The LA Sunday Times today turned the subject of this thread into a grease spot with a story so big, the pictures alone take up more space than the column inches of Sanneh. The photos, of which there are four of Jack and Meg White, are all bigger than your head! Get the print version, cut them out and use them as masks!
Robert Hilburn travelled to Pine Grove, Pennsylvania, strike that, Detroit, MI, to interview Jack and a silent Meg White.
Excerpts, you'll swoon:
..."Get Behind Me Floyd" is a daring creative advance..."
"The White Stripes' Jack White is ready for a break as he slips behind the wheel of his vintage four-seat..."
"A new sound of independence..." (in 50-point pika, or whatever the designation is for lettering that's really big)
"The fifth album proves they've earned their stripes..."
"...the recording sessions left even the normally workaholic White drained..."
"Everything about Jack White's car, from the upholstery to the tinny radio -- is original - except for the supercharged engine features that make the car roar loud as a jet..."
"White makes his way back to the living room and sits in a chair by a picture of Rita Hayworth..."
"She was a metaphor for everything I could think of...the red hair, the innocence, the fact that she lost her memory to Alzheimer's..."
"I hate the celebrity stuff," [said White]. It trivializes everything..."
"Meg's so shy it's probably a relief Jack does all the talking..."
"Whatever his musical path, White is unlikely to temper his musical vision..."
http://www.latimes.com -- ya can't miss it. Subscription site, useBugmenot.
― Harry Klam, Sunday, 5 June 2005 18:15 (eighteen years ago) link
I'll give 'em a pass on the car though: could be a Detroit thing (search, Woodward Dream Cruise)
http://www.woodwarddreamcruise.com/Photos.html
― rogermexico (rogermexico), Sunday, 5 June 2005 18:26 (eighteen years ago) link
― Harry Klam, Sunday, 5 June 2005 18:59 (eighteen years ago) link
I suspect that from a UK Press perspective, The Strokes weren't really a reaction against non-rock (though there were still a lot of "Rock is back!" taglines) so much as a reaction to not-so-rock rock that had had a lot of currency at that point in time - on the one hand US pansy-psych-pop like latter-day The Flaming Lips and Mercury Rev, and on the other hand the mournful MoR of Coldplay and Travis. The battlefield as such is more intra-rock (and only a small part of it) than rock vs [x].
― Tim Finney (Tim Finney), Sunday, 5 June 2005 21:21 (eighteen years ago) link
― Tim Finney (Tim Finney), Sunday, 5 June 2005 21:29 (eighteen years ago) link