Support |
A few more thoughts y'all. 1) People who are publicly performing or releasing work should certainly be prepared to face negative criticism. Whether or not it's informed or reasonable criticism is another matter entirely, of course, but that's the way it goes. You can't go through life worrying about whether or not a bad comment is going to adversely affect someone's career. All of the important and enduring musicians I can think of shouldered plenty of criticism and opposition in their time. As an old school teacher of mine used to say, "If you go through life without offending anyone, you probably aren't a very dynamic or interesting person." In Steuart's case, the guy is basically an institution in the LA new music scene, and it's going to take a lot more than one irate post on an email list for him to start worrying about his professional future. 2) I once had an exchange with a critic who gave a bad review of my album. I had a very civil exchange with the reviewer, and we both handled it well. But he did say one thing which I found extremely odd, when he was explaining his approach and his position, which was: "In other words, the artist's musical objectives don't enter into my opinion as to whether or not the CD is a good listen." I personally think this is a truly bizarre thing to hear coming from a critic, and it sort of sums up my reaction to the whole "responses" thread. If you're not going to judge something on the basis of the intentions behind its having been made, and the context in which it was done, then what on earth are you going to contribute by making a criticism in the first place? That for me is the crux of the whole issue here. Sure, voice your opinion if you want, and if you need to vent then go ahead and do so. But it's a lot more useful to EVERYONE if you can actually give some meaning and context to your comments. Finally, it sure is refreshing to see how civil people are treating the whole thing. Anyway. --Andre LaFosse http://www.altruistmusic.com