My Husband's Stupid Record Collection

The Black Sabbath reviews were kind of beautiful iirc.

http://flavorwire.com/445998/the-uncomfortable-gender-politics-of-my-husbands-stupid-record-collection

I agree with this

xp sorry for misattributing that point to you, katherine

"I kinda liked this thing, sorta, maybe, but all these fucking men liked it for the wrong reasons, so I don't like it anymore. Pay me." Awesome critical thinking, there.

i get people feeling uncomfortable with how the dynamic of this blog reflects the patronizing, woody allen, men-explain-things-to-me thing. but i also feel like it's unfair to project that onto this blogger and her specific relationship, which isn't just a cultural trope but a thing that exists in reality. i feel two things.

no need to apologize, for all I remember maybe I did say that, I just feel a lot of the ire poured onto her tends to depart the realm of "I don't like the underlying reasons behind this blog getting so popular" and takes up residence in "lol look at this stupid woman and her stupid lack of musical knowledge, unlike ME."

i think it's just the pomplamoose-y nature of the gee whiz reviews and the pictures. she certainly looks like a lot of people around my way. that's for sure! maybe i live in a pomplamoose-y part of the world. and now i notice she reviewed a bunny's a swine record! they just played at my store. they live here. first new record she's reviewed, i think. so, not actually a part of her husband's stupid collection.

I don't think her looks have any bearing on anything

no, not her looks, just a specific look. that a lot of people have now. sassy indie librarian. it's a thing. especially where i live.

i don't think i've ever read a music-related blog where someone posted a picture of themselves with every post. so, her look is certainly noticeable and a part of her project. it's a representation. of herself. and it definitely stands out more than a jpeg of an album cover would, that's for sure.

i'm all for "the personal is political" up to an extent, but i'm also not entirely certain every popular blog reveals deep truths about gender relations or whatever. in terms of broader conclusions, all i can draw from it is that people like reading blogs where they feel like they have a personal relationship with the blogger, which means posting plenty of pictures, and people like blogs that are cute and funny. yeah, i'd prefer if more people liked reading 20,000 word essays about k-tel compilation albums liberally sprinkled with references to the 1960s cult television show "the prisoner", but i'm not sure that's necessarily what most people want out of the internet.

So, you guys can make it through an entire post?

Because I can't. And not because it makes me mad or anything.

It's just so... uneventful.

yeah, I like the idea of a typical music-geek record collection being worked through by someone who doesn't already 'know' where a particular act fits into the canonical rock music history or which of their albums are meant to be the good/disappointing ones etc, but I haven't really found the reality of the blog that engaging, not to say it's objectively 'bad' or anything

"it is that people like reading blogs where they feel like they have a personal relationship with the blogger, which means posting plenty of pictures, and people like blogs that are cute and funny"

yeah, i think the pictures were actually a stroke of genius. and the personal info. a lot of the later posts mention being pregnant and waiting for the baby. and the pictures are like a visual pregnancy diary of sorts. i think they keep people reading.

where was the original thread where this got discussed?

no, not her looks, just a specific look. that a lot of people have now. sassy indie librarian. it's a thing. especially where i live.

― scott seward, Sunday, April 26, 2015 12:00 PM (2 hours ago)

same here

Her writing is stylistically different from, but (speaking as a former editor frequently horrified by what gets published by putatively professional outlets in 2015) as good as, that found elsewhere. And honestly, I prefer her generally optimistic tone to the unearned snark and half-baked political bullshit found on most music sites now.

wait, are you zinging yourself?

TS: false "gee whiz" naïveté vs. false weary, scornful "knowingness"

i actually teach a class at the community college on how to write scornful gee whiz faux-naive music criticism.

gee whiz, really?

i wish, the vending machines at the community college are awesome!

The Uncomfortable Gender Politics of Making Assumptions About O'Holla's Tone

i think there is something to the critique of how this plays into tropes and how this is an explanation for the blog's popularity. however, i think critics run into trouble when they move from the realm of the descriptive to the prescriptive, assigning blame to people for not actively resisting dynamics they either 1.) aren't aware of or 2.) have a different perspective on.

sorry, I'm still stuck on how resembling a "sassy indie librarian" is a statement on the quality of one's writing

I mean shit, several dudes now do music criticism as actual VIDEOS of themselves and yet people still mostly manage to talk about the content and not what their face looks like. for some reason.

I've seen sassy indie librarians. Sassy indie librarians are friends of mine. And stupid record collection broad, you are no sassy indie librarian.

yeah otm her appearance is immaterial. and commenting on the gender dynamics/her relative lack of knowledge to her husband can come off as similarly belittling. she should be left to do her thing

looking back at the blog, i like how her accounts are sort of phenomenological/not bogged down by the weight of discourse. this is a boon not a weakness

Yeah that Flavorwire piece had as much going on in the unpleasant gender politics realm as it accused the Tumblr's fans of having, so

i don't think there's anything wrong with either the faux-naif or the withering scorn critical approach. i don't think the validity of a writer's work is determined by the framework they set for themselves or by their writing style. there's good faux-naif and bad faux-naif (which is to say, pomplamoose), just as there's good withering scorn and bad withering scorn.

I mean shit, several dudes now do music criticism as actual VIDEOS of themselves and yet people still mostly manage to talk about the content and not what their face looks like. for some reason.

― katherine, Sunday, April 26, 2015 7:14 PM (35 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

True although IMO more ppl should def mention Anthony fantano's corny indie fuxx demeanor in discussions of his reviews

"sorry, I'm still stuck on how resembling a "sassy indie librarian" is a statement on the quality of one's writing"

it doesn't have anything to do with her writing. i never said it did. but the pictures of herself are a part of the presentation of her blog. they are what you see first. they are meant to be looked at. and although she is not holding a ukelele in any of the pictures i have seen, that's the vibe i get. from the pictures and actually, now that you mention it, the writing. so sue me. it's a uke vibe.

i think the whole thing is kinda twee and cutesy. which is fine for people who like twee and cutesy. i like some twee things. i am a big fan of the sarah records catalog. but her thing is not my thing. which i said on whatever thread this originally popped up on. i think it's AWESOME if she makes money from it! like, totally. i am all for that.

and i don't watch youtube rock reviews. so, i don't know about those. i was talking about print blogs. never seen anyone post a picture of themselves that much. on blogs that are devoted to writing about something.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3oEwTQYzk84

It's funny how some people start throwing things at whoever gets 'offered' a 'book deal', for whatever reason.

folks, i really hate to resurrect the dread spectre of "rockism" here, and i'm also not wanting to pick on scott, but all this complaining about how o'holla keeps putting pictures of herself on her blog reminds me of people who used to complain about mtv for ruining christopher cross's career.

when i look at the most respected critics, the ones who have really made a name for themselves, it strikes me that they all have a voice. guys like bangs weren't just writing about the music, they were writing about themselves. current models of music criticism are all beholden to the "new journalism" of the 1960s. so if a writer gets to have a voice, what's the problem with her having a face as well?

i'm not being faux-naif myself here. i get it. i'm an utterly non-photogenic middle-aged white guy. nobody is going to read a blog to look at pictures of me unless they're really into schadenfreude. i grew up in an environment (the internet of the 1990s) where what you looked like didn't matter, all that mattered was how you expressed yourself in writing. it was beautiful, but it was also clearly only a short-lived technological accident, not some ideal form of human expression.

if what people are looking for in music journalism is less along the lines of christgau's "old self-righteous white male liberal" and more along the lines of "cute white girl", i'm not going to be so disingenous as to claim that as an example of "uncomfortable gender politics", because by and large the people it seems to really make uncomfortable are people like me who will never pass for "cute".

I don't think her appearance is part of her success as in "she's cute i want to look at her." I think it's more the idea of this indie couple in a cozy house listening to records that is appealing to people, maybe lonely unmarried people

The fact that they're lps are part of it, like this dream of listening to music in a way that's not in headphones on the subway by yourself

You Ok Treeship

this thread is weird

i think the whole thing is kinda twee and cutesy. which is fine for people who like twee and cutesy. i like some twee things. i am a big fan of the sarah records catalog. but her thing is not my thing. which i said on whatever thread this originally popped up on. i think it's AWESOME if she makes money from it! like, totally. i am all for that.

― scott seward, Sunday, April 26, 2015 6:31 PM (Yesterday)

Sorry but this is so fricking condescending.

And who cares if it's "not your thing?" So are a million other things and that's true for everybody. You're not making a criticism with any substance whatsoever.

I wish I remembered what thread we originally discussed this on, because, like scott, I am probably just repeating myself ... the thing that bugs me about it is how it functions to reinforce gender stereotypes re weird music -- that women aren't knowledgeable about it, that they are only exposed to it because of their male partners, that women don't really like it.

And who cares if it's "not your thing?" So are a million other things and that's true for everybody.

This is ilx, not the Supreme Court. Why are you being so aggro about scott not liking this woman's blog?

adorkability.

that flavorwire article said adorkability.

http://www.remix-ibk.at/image/remix_logo.jpg

Had a look at this blog and the true horror of it isn't really this lady describing punk/new wave greats as "toe tappy" and "peppy" but the realization that 99% of the population would agree and rather read that than any of my late night heavily referenced wordpress posts on the same material

"And who cares if it's "not your thing?"

probably nobody.

"So are a million other things and that's true for everybody."

we are talking about one specific thing on this thread.

"You're not making a criticism with any substance whatsoever."

yeah, you'd have to pay me money or something if you want substance. the word twee is all you're gonna get for free. i'll throw in cutesy too.

also i hate how her husband chimes in at the end of some of the reviews. but i guess that makes it more loveable to some people.

what makes you think i didn't

fortunately, you can fit "toe-tappy" on a license plate if you spell it toe-tapi

my wife has clarified that her enthusiasm for my proposed project had less to do with viral public spectacle hoo-ha than her wishing i'd become an indigo girls fan, knowing that if i listen to an act long enough i usually find something i like about it

the more you listen, the closer you are to fine amirite

indigo girls are good, if we're going to get real

okay i finally googled the woman and found this: http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/books/2014/07/amanda_petrusich_s_do_not_sell_at_any_price_reviewed_by_sarah_o_holla.html
i still don't really think people should get ragged on for their lame tumblrs, but man, slate did amanda petrusich dirty with this piece.

"Petrusich’s writing is elegant and witty; I laughed out loud several times and felt like Petrusich and I could be friends."

cool

Petrusich’s writing is elegant and witty; I laughed out loud several times and felt like Petrusich and I could be friends. And the next time I’m at a big rambling flea market or antique store, I’m going to know just where to look for an old 78; after reading this book, I might even know if it’s valuable or not. I’m not going to tell you how to do it, though. Pick up this book to find out, and maybe we’ll bump into each other wearing scuba gear at the bottom of the Milwaukee River.

this is a specific, contemporary writing style that is more specific than the word "disingenuous" (xp) allows although it is sort of disingenuous. there is a lot to be said about this style, how it narrows context in an age of infinite access to information, creates a sense of intimacy with both the product at hand and the reader, and finally seems designed to be at least at some level annoying and obstinate

there is a lot to be said about this style

that's the style used in newspapers for the past fifty years bub

too bad "the palmer method" is already something else

waterface please use "bub" more often i like pretending you're wolverine

can do two live croup

*snikt*

"Petrusich’s writing is elegant and witty; I laughed out loud several times and felt like Petrusich and I could be friends."

cool

― Leonard Pine, Wednesday, April 29, 2015 12:28 PM (36 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

you laugh but this is how most people judge writing (often in the "I like this dude's writing, I feel like I could get a beer with him"), the only difference is this piece actually cops to it

* in the _context_

that's definitely true, though the sentences that immediately shift from "i think the writer would be my friend" to "maybe you the reader, are also my friend"

that immediately follow

i don't laugh i think it sucks

it's just a different approach. instead of indulging the fiction of a bland, universal reader, she creates a different fiction that the reader is her friend and that they'll meet someday in a flea market or at the bottom of a river.

She also creates a fiction where I'm interested in hearing about her tumblr in a review of somebody else's book. Not cricket imo

i don't think the original review mentions cricket at all

i guess you're joking but http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=its+just+not+cricket

sorry if you can't appreciate my singular, australian-naif style

i appreciate you Mr. Pine

thanks friend

subjectively? i hate her writing style. it's nails on a chalkboard to me, and it fills me with a deep sense of personal animosity against anybody who would willfully commit to paper such banalities.

objectively? there's absolutely nothing wrong with the way she writes. it's just not the kind of writing i prefer to spend my time reading.

I'm sorry for defending this blog and more generally for being a contrarian on threads where it wasn't needed

she should combine this with those new vinyl collector scams, like "I'll send you one record from my husband's stupid record collection each month. He doesn't know!"

So did she never get past the Cs?

must have stopped being profitable.

Did she stop when online started giving her shit? If so, that's pretty sad.

Maybe they broke up!

"Want to feel old? The creator of 'My Husband's Stupid Record Collection' is 70 years old today!"

xp: They were still together as of 2018 https://offspring.lifehacker.com/how-i-parent-alex-goldman-1825426314

Did she stop when online started giving her shit? If so, that's pretty sad.

Had the same thought. I enjoyed her reviews! They were predictable: she liked anything that was mainstream rock or pop and couldn't get her head around noise-rock or free jazz. (A couple surprises, e.g. she liked Alice Coltrane.) That was part of what made the project interesting, though: it would have been interesting to see how her perceptions shifted as she exposed herself to hundreds and hundreds of those records.

Never really got the gender politics issue w her doing this, esp since I could spend all day on Youtube watching reaction videos where men do m/l the same thing. (Lost in Vegas guys are p much prog/metal experts by now.)

the gender politics issue was with the reception (positive & negative) more than the actual blog

actually there were interesting things about the gendering of certain types of music & fandom implied if not actively explored by the blog but it got nasty quick when the internet got hold of it

(Lost in Vegas guys are p much prog/metal experts by now.)

I feel like I'd enjoy their videos if I watched a few but the whole reaction video concept is just totally alienating to me.

actually there were interesting things about the gendering of certain types of music & fandom implied if not actively explored by the blog but it got nasty quick when the internet got hold of it

I think she did explicitly address these things at times with e.g. the review of the SST comp with the rape image on the cover.

lost in vegas is m/l real-time music criticism by non-music journalists. 95% of what they "react" to I have no interest in tho.

I think she did explicitly address these things at times with e.g. the review of the SST comp with the rape image on the cover.

Remember that she actually spoke to and quoted a gender studies professor in this one.

in stick-to-itiveness, she did better than Sufjan Stevens but quite a bit worse than Sue Grafton.