Let's talk about Vice Magazine

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (1177 of them)
hi gareth!

geeta (geeta), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 21:33 (twenty-one years ago) link

geeta, i know, it's just that there are clever and (to me) funny ways of being flip as well, and i don't think the dis in that article even remotely qualified.

(thx jess)

ch. (synkro), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 21:35 (twenty-one years ago) link

what if we criticize them for not being funny?

jess (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 21:35 (twenty-one years ago) link

Denouncing them for not having in-depth, insightful, balanced music coverage is like criticizing The Onion for not being factual.

Apples vs. Oranges: FITE!

Jody Beth Rosen, Tuesday, 15 October 2002 21:37 (twenty-one years ago) link

Vice revels in style over substance.

I can criticize this editorial choice, though, can't I?

Jody Beth Rosen, Tuesday, 15 October 2002 21:40 (twenty-one years ago) link

Or - and this was Mike D and Jess' original criticism come to think of it - for their idea of 'style' being dated and lame?

Tom (Groke), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 21:43 (twenty-one years ago) link

Sure, I think that criticizing them for not being funny is a strong and valid criticism. Maybe, as I said way upthread, I just sympathize with people who try to write humor, because I used to do it, and it is probably the hardest stuff to write -- no matter what you do, some people will always love it and some will always hate it (the 'Aborted Nazi Fetus' (tm) comic strip that used to run in my old zine, which drew our biggest fans and our biggest haters, as one example).

I don't think Vice is always funny, and as I did say upthread, I don't think they try hard enough. I think quite a few of their jokes do fall flat; if I was their editor I would probably recommend to them to lay off the coke and head for the beer.

geeta (geeta), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 21:55 (twenty-one years ago) link

Jody: What I really liked was how that Vice list was so completley overshadowed by a similar, yet more boring list by Jaguaro.

Daniel_Rf, Tuesday, 15 October 2002 21:57 (twenty-one years ago) link

geeta, i think jess meant critize the onion for not being funny (actually i typed 'YOU MEAN "PINK FLOYD ARE SHORT" ISN'T FUNNY?!?!' till i belatedly realized this).

ch. (synkro), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 22:01 (twenty-one years ago) link

I don't get the whole "frat boy mag" thing. Nearly everyone I know who reads Vice is some way-left indie granola-eater. The guy who for all I know still distributes the mag in Ottawa is a total vegan sXe guy who puts on most of the indie and hardcore shows in the city. He used to be programme director at one of the campus stations. People were always talking about the magazine at punk rock shows. I'd always sort of seen Vice as a Canadian indie/hip-hop thing. I guess it got big when I wasn't looking. I also didn't realize it was so big in the US. Come to think of it, though, I don't think I've ever met a frat boy. Why are they bad?

I don't read it regularly or anything, BTW.

PS I've always found The Onion to be total shit.

sundar subramanian, Tuesday, 15 October 2002 22:04 (twenty-one years ago) link

I've now read three things from Vice. One of them struck me as just sort of dumb: the nerds thing, which reads like something someone wrote while drunk for a college weekly. One of them struck me as just uninteresting: the seminal albums thing, which I was hoping would be funny at some point but didn't really make me laugh. The third was the race-categorization thing that Ramosi posted into a random thread a long long time ago, which I actually did enjoy reading: the fact that it was actually about racial and cultural types and stereotypes made it interesting, and I chuckled at a few parts of it. (It could also, interestingly, have been described as "PC" in certain ways.)

The only tone I detect running through all of them is this phony transgression thing, where this big value is placed upon anything that stirs people up or gets them defensive or assaults their sensibilities -- apparently for the sole purpose of the text sort of lording it over you afterward and trying to make you feel like an uptight pussy for disapproving. I really don't like that whole thing, in that the underlying message is "You care about something? That's so fucking lame."

nabisco (nabisco), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 22:05 (twenty-one years ago) link

aka pigfuck.

jess (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 22:08 (twenty-one years ago) link

This is the same tone something like Maxim cops, which is why the frat-mag reference, Sundar: the core type being referred to here is this safe hearty mid-American white frat-boy at a state university who has no immediate reason to care about anything beyond his immediate lifestyle. Thus everything becomes a joke: race is funny, prejudice is funny, homosexuality is funny, religion is funny, death is funny, politics are funny, war is funny, and all because he has no reason to believe any of these things will ever affect him personally.

nabisco (nabisco), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 22:08 (twenty-one years ago) link

"You care about something? That's
so fucking lame."

Weird thing is that I've always sensed that they do care, though in a specifically delineated way. Fashion? Definitely. Music? More than I think is being given credit for (the music review section at the back often has some sharp, scabrous and celebratory entries). Perhaps they're like the Onion in trying to have their cake and eat it too, except that their own version of the AV Club isn't specifically set apart from the main text.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 22:09 (twenty-one years ago) link

Well, what Nabisco said, we must have posted at the same time.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 22:11 (twenty-one years ago) link

Arts and leisure sure, Ned. What I'm less convinced by is Gavin's bluster on that board link, about how his saying "nigger" is somehow saving black people from the great "smoke screen" of white people arguing about whether you can say "nigger" or not (which he says is all a way for liberals and academics to patronize "working class people of color") -- I don't see how his saying "nigger" does anything but thicken the smoke, and it strikes me that if he actually cared so much about working people of color he would be writing articles about bank lending practices and criminal reform and city government.

nabisco (nabisco), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 22:13 (twenty-one years ago) link

I just read the nerds article. It was terrible.

sundar, who sometimes reads my housemate's Maxim when no one is looking, Tuesday, 15 October 2002 22:14 (twenty-one years ago) link

Nabisco -- what makes a frat boy so different from an indie boy?

The Onion has been really lacking these days, sadly.

geeta (geeta), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 22:14 (twenty-one years ago) link

I found an old issue of Maxim on the ground once! I was psyched. The cover was "What Liz Phair Wants in Bed." It was kind of like an indie magazine, except with sex.

geeta (geeta), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 22:17 (twenty-one years ago) link

I really don't like that whole thing, in that the underlying message is "You care about something? That's so fucking lame."

There was an article about Colombian art students that was sort of interesting, but then they had to go and fuck it up and spell the nationality "Columbian" in the title. Talk about not caring.

Jody Beth Rosen, Tuesday, 15 October 2002 22:17 (twenty-one years ago) link

Nabisco, those last topics you mention are on the face of them boring and unfunny topics (probably because they are serious and not 'arts and leisure,' though they too can be serious). So your core type isn't going to care, and as you've already noted, said type wouldn't see a reason to care in the first place.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 22:18 (twenty-one years ago) link

Or - and this was Mike D and Jess' original criticism come to think of it - for their idea of 'style' being dated and lame?

Dated, lame and deeply pretentious. (Putting it that way makes me see why Momus is so keen on it: you could say, without being mean, that rehabilating the pretentious in all its facets is one of his goals as a public figure.)

Michael Daddino (epicharmus), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 22:21 (twenty-one years ago) link

Weird thing is that I've always sensed that they do care, though in a specifically delineated way. Fashion? Definitely.

Well FUCK THAT SHIT. Getting 'tude for broadly "caring about things" from a magazine with fashion spreads is like being criticized by a doll collector for taking music "too seriously."

Michael Daddino (epicharmus), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 22:39 (twenty-one years ago) link

mike will you have art-fag sex with me?

jess (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 22:41 (twenty-one years ago) link

Fritz Wollner is making sense here. The hataz remind me of a film I saw at the NY TV Museum this summer, a BBC Nationwide feature on David Bowie in 1972. The editorial line -- astonishingly hostile, determined to see actual violence where there was in fact only a revolution in style -- was one of appalled scorn at some kind of New Brutalism. As the camera panned along a queue of glittering Clockwork Orange-styled Ziggalikes, the narrative went: 'If these people look like Sodom and Gomorrah to you now, just wait -- the next thing may well be worse.'

Vice is a 'boundary-pusher' and a trend-setter. Its New Brutalism is a pastiche, a well-captured adolescent voice designed to alienate one generation and consequently attract a new, younger one and pass it on to the advertisers. We should save the derision we're currently pouring on Vice for the much less intelligent imitators coming even now in its wake. For if Vice is Ziggy, watch out, here comes Alvin Stardust!

Momus (Momus), Wednesday, 16 October 2002 01:48 (twenty-one years ago) link

(Did the ILM "indie guilt" thread ever get this big? And most of that thread was trying for high numbers. I'm... ur, impressed... kinda)

donut bitch (donut), Wednesday, 16 October 2002 01:50 (twenty-one years ago) link

i finally understand. momus is so far up his own arse that he's on the verge of giving birth to himself.

he is four years old = "faggot" is transgressive (and funny!)

mark p (Mark P), Wednesday, 16 October 2002 02:25 (twenty-one years ago) link

btw, people who hate on big threads for being too long/verbose/impassioned = unfuckingquestionably dud

mark p (Mark P), Wednesday, 16 October 2002 02:28 (twenty-one years ago) link

Mark P. You need to get out more. Are you in NYC? Check this out:

DJ the Girl (Amy Kellner), DJ Soccer Star (Meredith Danluck), Boney M (Michal Jurewicz)

Is the Art Fag crew.

ART FAGs TUESDAYs is this Tuesday Night at Passerby, 436 W 15th (btw 9/10) (no cover). Every Tuesday except the first Tuesday of the month (which is Nico Mazet "Undertone")

Hear the music!

*********************

Momus (Momus), Wednesday, 16 October 2002 03:25 (twenty-one years ago) link

"Vice is a 'boundary-pusher' and a trend-setter." - from someone's desk in marketing to the lips of Momus. You left out "a Rolling Stone for the 21st century" though. It's a frat mag - not worth reading but not worth arguing over either.

James Blount (James Blount), Wednesday, 16 October 2002 03:42 (twenty-one years ago) link

Well, as Jody's hero (marketed) Bob Dylan said of (marketed) Eminem "I almost feel like if anything is controversial, the guy's gotta be doing something right."

Momus (Momus), Wednesday, 16 October 2002 04:08 (twenty-one years ago) link

Pushing boundaries ? Sure, it's pushing a lotta boundaries. And Le Tigre is converting the masses to radical feminism too.

As far as I could tell the whole Vice scene is really interesting if you wanna join the club, if you wanna have a club (which is a really juvenile thing already) based on swearing and fashion. Oooh, middle school. Take me back, Vice. Hence the nicely crafted piece on getting through that era, I don't think they've left it. Furthermore, it wasn't my impression that the US was really suffering from a lack of tasteless humor before these guys decided to fill the void..

daria gray (daria gray), Wednesday, 16 October 2002 04:09 (twenty-one years ago) link

(Nabisco to thread now, please, to ask 'Bob Dylan, can you explain why exactly you see inherent value in people's doing things society disapproves of?')

Momus (Momus), Wednesday, 16 October 2002 04:10 (twenty-one years ago) link

Yeah momus. that's what dylan was all about. mhm.

Anyway I really wanted to post to note that I actually think Maxim and Vice are a different kettle of fish in a certain way. For one thing, Maxim can be pretty consistantly funny and veers from the "transgressive" aesthetit of vice for a more pc-backlash "we think sex an beer are cool so whatever you wanna think, fine" sorta way which can lead to scary places but hey -- I like sex and beer and cars and gadgets. They're not ALL I like, but I don't mind something which focuses on them since actually I don't tend to encounter much on them elsewhere, at least not like maxim does and in a way i can tolerate and maybe this is my limited subset of existance more than anything else but...

Also, I think some of the only smart pop-cult crit. Camille Pagillia has done in a long time has been her praise of the Maxim aesthetic in photography of hot chiXor.

Sterling Clover (s_clover), Wednesday, 16 October 2002 05:01 (twenty-one years ago) link

(1) this is not a godawful thread, it's excellent (aside from Maura not getting my joke earlier)--and Jess, you're the one who's posted the most answers on here, so if it IS godawful it's your fault!

(2) Jody writes, re the question "don't you guys have any sense that...that they are satirizing themselves and their readers and the conventions of music mags?": "Nah, I think they're just picking at their own scabs, and by doing so, they make themselves look even uglier." I think there's a degree to which it is satirical, but the more overt stupidity of it makes it untenable as such for a lot of people, including me a lot of the time: the joke that fell into itself, in a way. I also think people who compare Vice and Maxim have pretty obviously never read either.

M Matos (M Matos), Wednesday, 16 October 2002 05:13 (twenty-one years ago) link

jess has posted 69 times in this thread lolz

boxcubed (boxcubed), Wednesday, 16 October 2002 05:29 (twenty-one years ago) link

Marge, change the channel.

electric sound of jim (electricsound), Wednesday, 16 October 2002 05:33 (twenty-one years ago) link

haha yeah, i'll try to keep in mind that i'm what made this thread godawful.

jess (dubplatestyle), Wednesday, 16 October 2002 05:36 (twenty-one years ago) link

They sentenced me to twenty years of boredom
For trying to change the system from within
I'm coming now, I'm coming to reward them
First we take Manhattan, then we take... Maxim!

Momus (Momus), Wednesday, 16 October 2002 05:39 (twenty-one years ago) link

Intelligence is cool, 'intellectuals' suck ass

dave q, Wednesday, 16 October 2002 05:47 (twenty-one years ago) link

Its New Brutalism is a pastiche, a well-captured adolescent voice designed to alienate one generation and consequently attract a new, younger one and pass it on to the advertisers.

So even though we're offended by Vice's content, we should just stop complaining because we'll sound silly in thirty years when we're all saying 'pass the salt, nigga' at the dinner table?

Also, please answer my previous question, Momus. In that 'nerds' article, how did you interpret what the writer was saying (assuming that he or she really wasn't advocating beating the shit out of nerds once again)?

(Dan - you and Sterl are right, my argument was reductionist. I was really just trying to make the point that I hated the way they said whatever they were saying in that article, and that I couldn't imagine a reading of it that would redeem the style they used)

Dave M. (rotten03), Wednesday, 16 October 2002 06:01 (twenty-one years ago) link

So even though we're offended by Vice's content, we should just stop complaining because we'll sound silly in thirty years when we're all saying 'pass the salt, nigga' at the dinner table?

Ken Tynan was the first man who said 'fuck' on the BBC. It was in 1963. Now it's pretty much a daily occurrence. King Canute was the man who tried to order the tide to stop coming in. Brian Eno said that he had learned to curb his instinct to hate hyped new bands because he knew his hatred was a waste of energy. If these bands succeeded, they would redefine the context in which everyone worked. So he skipped hate and went on to the next phase, working with the new context.

In that 'nerds' article, how did you interpret what the writer was saying (assuming that he or she really wasn't advocating beating the shit out of nerds once again)?

The article says 'In the old days, being on the side of nerds was subversive. Now, when Bill Gates rules the world, it isn't. So to be subversive, we need to do something else. Reset your watch, pay attention to the changed context!'

Momus (Momus), Wednesday, 16 October 2002 06:15 (twenty-one years ago) link

the article is sort of "on the side" of nerds too, Momus; the threats come because the nerds weren't true to themselves, they forgot how to be shy and curious (all the things that made them easy targets in junior high) and tried to get tuff with video game supervixens and cut-throat marketing tactics - obviously lame attempts to shovel their vulnerable past under a barrage of bravado - the wedgies were supposed to toughen them up, not turn them around - the writer feels betrayed

Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Wednesday, 16 October 2002 06:28 (twenty-one years ago) link

oh, I'm sorry, people daring to disagree with you made it godawful. isn't this what you made fun of Patrin for?

M Matos (M Matos), Wednesday, 16 October 2002 06:28 (twenty-one years ago) link

You're right, Tracer. That's there too.

Momus (Momus), Wednesday, 16 October 2002 06:31 (twenty-one years ago) link

michaelangelo if i had any idea what you've been on about for the last few posts i'd be able to respond with anything other than confused bemusement.

in any event, if you didn't notice the incredible amount of ill will and tension dredged up by this thread (and i'm not even including conversations i've had with people about it outside) that might tilt it towards "godawful" then, well, damn.

i can't shut my personal feelings off when i'm arguing with my friends, i suppose.

jess (dubplatestyle), Wednesday, 16 October 2002 06:46 (twenty-one years ago) link

Aw, Jess, I didn't know you cared!

Momus (Momus), Wednesday, 16 October 2002 06:52 (twenty-one years ago) link

considering the amount of posting you've done here, I think it's disinegenuous to call the thread "godawful," that's all--and overdefensive to get miffed at my pointing this out, as you did or seemed to do above. also, you and I may have crossed wires on the meaning of that word (now where have we heard about this before?): I meant that it's interesting/stimulating as an argument, you seem to have meant something else. problem, hopefully, resolved.

M Matos (M Matos), Wednesday, 16 October 2002 06:54 (twenty-one years ago) link

momus: haha nice try sucker.

matos: apparently so.

jess (dubplatestyle), Wednesday, 16 October 2002 06:57 (twenty-one years ago) link

Interesting that Nick brings up Ken Tynan, his evil dead twin ;-p. Also a few years before that, you had the Lady Chatterley's Lover obscenity trial, which brought 'fuck' into most nice middle-class homes once Lawrence's publishers won their case. So I'd argue that 'fuck' was germinating for a couple of years before Ken mouthed off on the telly. And I'd also argue that good old-fashioned anglo-saxon terms like that don't have connotations of racism or sexism that need thinking about, and don't actually have any associations with people oppressing others.

I'm not a fogey for finding Vice tactics kind of suspect in a boring lowest-common-denominator sort of way (and yeah, they are Albiniesque - yucch - and in the parlance, Albini = weenie).Someone upthread mentioned the whole 'clothes + swearing = junior high' vibe of Vice. I'm of the opinion that ALL of the current celebrity culture is just way too much like junior/high school - which is exactly why I loathe it. In that context Vice is just in compliance with stuff like:

People who are considered 'popular' (insert your fave TV presenter here) but nobody you ask actually likes them, or knows why they're popular.

Having to have the hot new label before everyone else, but not being seen to be imitating someone 'popular'.

Really mainstreamed approach to what's cool.

Getting the smart/artistic kids to do all your work for you, then passing it off as your own, and then calling names in a just-joshing way.

Bleurggh.

suzy (suzy), Wednesday, 16 October 2002 07:06 (twenty-one years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.