Looper's Delight Archive Top (Search)
Date Index
Thread Index
Author Index
Looper's Delight Home
Mailing List Info

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

RE: Why I'm starting to loath news paper music critics



Good point, Tim.  We all sometimes want others' subjective responses to 
our music to be in alignment with our subjective feelings. It's an "I'm 
okay, you're okay" situation.  

I bet you would have been really irked if I had said):

"The backdrop in the beginning of the song is decent, but somewhat watered 
down as if the artist is attempting to emulate Robert Fripp's Soundscapes, 
but unsuccessfully so...and the bass groove that eventually comes in is 
tasteful, but too low in the mix.  Not too bad. The song has too much 
inside melodic work for this particular genre."

Note the cute snootiness injected within the half-assed positive remarks 
and the matter of fact claim about the song having too much melodic work, 
as if this were some universal truth. 

But back to the communication issue Joe pointed out, or the lack thereof, 
even I fall guilty of making a subjective claim sound matter of fact, but 
in this case it was a positive claim - " The backdrop in the beginning of 
the song is beautiful" vs. "The backdrop of this song fills me with a 
sense of beauty."  Of course, it is much less awkward to speak as if 
stating external facts, eh? As if a piece of a song has the inherent 
property of beauty, like I can analyze the song, find notes, pitch, 
etc...and then POOF, there appears beauty, as if digging it up in an 
archeological dig. :)

Your juxtaposition point below validates that those claims which 
contradict each other are likely subjective claims about one's emotive 
response to your work, rather than a factual claim about the work itself.

Kris


-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Nelson [mailto:psychle62@yahoo.com] 
Sent: Sunday, June 19, 2005 7:16 PM
To: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com
Subject: RE: Why I'm starting to loath news paper music critics

It's funny how our response to a critique of our own
work often has more to do with how we'd *like* the
piece to be interpreted/understood than with whether
or not the reviewer is actually panning or praising
it.

For example (and of particular relevance to this
thread when you see who the reviewer was!), last
October Krispen Hartung wrote the following brief
review of a piece I recorded several years ago:

"The backdrop in the beginning of the song is
beautiful....and the bass groove that eventually comes
in is very tasteful and catchy, almost old Terje
Rypdal sound in nature. Nice! Give me more of this and
some "outside" melodic work on the top and I'll be in
ecstasy. Nice job."

Now, eight months later, when I re-read that I see it
as a decidedly positive review, much better than the
tune deserved. All the adjectives are glowing:
'beautiful', 'tasteful', 'catchy' and not one, but TWO
instances of 'nice'. The Rypdal mention is right on
target, for I enjoy and respect his music very much.
Moreover (and most importantly) the listener enjoyed
listening; mission accomplished. I guess...

Then why was I somewhat irked when I first read
Krispen's review? Context.

You see, prior to recording the tune to which Krispen
was referring, the majority of my press reviews had
resulted from a period when I'd been the lead
guitarist for a much more commercially-oriented group,
a band in which I was usually seen by critics to be
the 'outside' one. While there was a fair amount of
praise for the originality of my approach and the
off-kilter edge my parts gave to what in their eyes
would have been just another early 90's 'alternative
power pop' act, there were just as many critics who
slammed me for coloring outside the lines, using such
nice words as 'gratuitous' and 'pretentious'.

When I recorded the piece that Krispen heard, my head
was miles away from wanting to put on a lot of guitar
solos; at the time I was more interested in texture
and atmosphere, doing things that I wasn't already
known for. So when I read his review, replete with the
conditions to which I should comply in order that he
"be in ecstasy", it was easy for me to overlook all
the nice things he'd written and feel that he hadn't
"gotten it" because he would have preferred more "
'outside' melodic work on the top'... At the time, I
felt "Well, gee, if I'd wanted to do that, I WOULD
have!", feeling that I was certainly capable of doing
so had I chosen to, and that I was a misunderstood
artíste. It reminded me of some comments Brian Eno had
made re: critics and the influence of his well-meaning
audience on his music's content which may be found at
<http://music.hyperreal.org/artists/brian_eno/index.center.html>

As far as good/bad critical response, I used to get a
kick out of juxtaposing completely contradictory
reviews in my press kit. :P

-t-


                
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. 
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail