July 11, 2002

 
PM

Fitting in rather well with my ranting about professional music critics, Glenn McDonald sums up exactly why personal blogs (and I would think some message boards, as well) are a far better source for music criticism and commentary than most any commercial publication in this interview:

I think if I had my way everybody who writes about music would run their own little sites, and we'd leave the commercial publications to report gossip and tour dates. You have to learn a lot about a reviewer to have any idea how their tastes correlate with yours, and the usual magazine setup is no good for that.

AM

All I can say is that I'm stunned that this woman is a published critic, but I'm not at all shocked that she's being published by the likes of the Village Voice.

Yes, I am aware of the fact that Ms. Phillips' review of the Sonic Youth record has more than a passing resemblence to my brief review of the new Oasis record yesterday. The difference: I just put it up on my blog. I would never try to sell something like that. Also, I'm not clinging romantically to my youthful memories of Oasis fandom, if there even were any. This woman is clearly dealing with how she relates to the music and the band, it has nothing to do with critically assessing the music on the record. She's clinging to what she admits are flawed ideas about what it is to age as an artist. She's simply far too immature to have her opinions taken seriously, and I think it is offensive that she is being published by a (well, to most people) respectable newspaper.

Let's be realistic : the Village Voice music editor has an agenda. They could have printed any number of reviews by any number of reviewers who would have written about Murray Street in a positive way, but a) they wanted to be 'different' and 'daring', so they printed the reactionary review, the review that would stir up the mail sack or b) the editors have a problem with Sonic Youth and commissioned a negative review. Most every other magazine, fanzine and newspaper is printing positive reviews of Murray Street. They wanted to be different, cos they're the VILLAGE VOICE! They're rebels!

It bothers me that some people can't separate their idealized notions of who Sonic Youth (and other bands) are from the actual music, that they refuse to understand the ebb and flow of an artist's output. I hate that to so many people, growing older as an artist is some kind of crime, and that having a large discography is somehow a drawback. Having a large discography means that you have to think about more things, consider more factors when evaluating an artist. It makes talking about an artist more complicated, so most people just cop out. They automatically sink into the 'well, most of it is just for the obsessives' mode of thinking. They simply refuse to examine the big picture of what an artist has created.

How many record reviews have you read with the phrase "a return to form"? Isn't it funny how every Sonic Youth record, every Pavement/Malkmus record, every GBV/Bob Pollard record, etc almost always contain those words? What is it about record reviewers that makes everyone want to assume that all the records since the big popular canonized album are automatically lousy?