From: Kevin J. Bonham, sleepycat@eudoramail.com
Subject: Re: Critics [waffle]
Date: 2/22/2002 7:28:57 PM
To: seance@lists.no-fi.com


I've been reading Christopher and John's debate on this with interest - as a digest subscriber I usually get only one bite of the cherry per day, so here goes.  As I said here a few weeks ago, I believe the standard of rock criticism generally is abysmally low and 85+% of those paid to write it are unworthy. I include some pretty big names, such as Christgau, in that 85%, because I'm tired of the view that having an enormous record collection and a nice turn of phrase alone is sufficient to make you a great rock critic.  

I think there is a place for purely appreciative writing in music criticism, but it's within the fanbase, where the aim of the writer is to help the listener find new dimensions in an artist they already like.  Dylanology is an example of this, and IMHO most of the most advanced rock writing that exists is Dylanology.  Of course, with this you get a lot of academic-sounding commentaries that are actually useless or likely to lead you down a wrong path.  In terms of reviews for the mass market, I like reviews that will help listeners to know what the music is like and how much they will like it if they are sympathetic to that kind of style.  

Despite this, I'm not into artistic relativism to the point of believing that Britney and the Church are equally worthy of praise.  Manufactured mainstream pop is an inherently shallow form that can only give us a certain portion of what we might want out of music.  I prefer the view of Andrew Eldritch that it is possible for a song to do everything you want in music at once - that it can work as a mindless dancefloor thumper or tearjerker or whatever, while also working as an artistic statement. Pop is therefore limited in its ambitions - it can be done well or badly but its capacity to influence and absorb the listener is more restricted.  As well as its limited ambition, pop suffers from interchangeability.  You can get much the same thing from Britney or Christina or Jessica or Dannii or ... whereas each of the more artistic bands is not quite like each of the others.  The fan's loyalty to a pop artist is more to do with image and marketing than any merit of their music.  To me, an

As for the short review that was posted, I get the feeling that two stars was out of either three or four, not five.  Am I right?

Cheers, Kevin.
---
Self-Appointed President, Oxydental Fan Club




Join 18 million Eudora users by signing up for a free Eudora Web-Mail account at http://www.eudoramail.com