Goner Message Board
 | Forums | Register | Reply | Search | Statistics | Manual |
Goner Message Board / Memphis / For Rachel...
Posted: Jun 5, 2006 8:33 pm
 
Hoobastank is playing this summer...
Posted: Jun 5, 2006 8:51 pm
 
Geez, Jack, you're hilarious.
Posted: Jun 5, 2006 8:52 pm
 
What? it's true! I heard it on the radio!
Posted: Jun 5, 2006 8:52 pm
 
You know, I think I might just take over this ipod night just so everyone on this board will have ample amunition!
Posted: Jun 5, 2006 8:54 pm
 
And Breaking Point is playing, too!
Posted: Jun 5, 2006 8:56 pm
 
Look, if it's any consolation, I played with Breaking Point for two months before getting kicked out for being a drunk.
Posted: Jun 5, 2006 8:58 pm
 
I have no idea who Breaking Point is...
Posted: Jun 5, 2006 8:58 pm
 
You're not serious.
Posted: Jun 5, 2006 9:02 pm | Edited by: Rachelandthecity
 
I am totally serious -

Where is all this coming from anyway, I don't recall pissing in your cheerios.

Is it because I like Jamie Randolph's new record?
Posted: Jun 5, 2006 9:10 pm
 
Fine, I'll let it go. I just heard on the radio they were playing, and you're always asking about music in town, and local musicians.
Posted: Jun 5, 2006 9:28 pm
 
well, you didn't tell me about Breaking Point - you said Hoobastank!

is Breaking Point good?

Are you serious that I should check out Breaking Point, cause I will if you're not pulling my leg!
Posted: Jun 5, 2006 9:33 pm
 
Rachel, Breaking Point is from Memphis, and they've been around since 2000, I believe. They have had some marginal success nationally, and received some airplay on commercial stations, a little moreso than Egypt Central, but of the same vein. The only important thing you need to know about Breaking Point is that Justin Reimer (all around cool dude) used to play for Faust.
Posted: Jun 5, 2006 9:34 pm
 
oh, so you are pulling my leg.
Posted: Jun 5, 2006 9:37 pm
 
They could definitely tour with that "Hey, Jealousy" band, as could Hoobastank.
Posted: Jun 5, 2006 9:57 pm
 
I can vouch for Justin's cool dude status.
Posted: Jun 5, 2006 9:59 pm
 
ok, once again, I will say - All I ever said was that a lot of people actually did want to see Gin Blossoms - as I proved when I found a ridiculous amount of long time fans in the crowd.

See, this is the ridiculous thing about the internets - it's really easy to make fun of a person or an idea when you're not face to face, just as I would have a hard time thinking any of you would make fun of Ipod night to Dan's face - cause you know, that is a Hitone sponsored event - especially considering how much he and the rest of the staff there have supported the people on this board - of course, a lot of people here may not even know that Dan reads this board - so yeah, continue to piss people off and eventually they will stop supporting you - but that's everyone's own perogative.
Posted: Jun 5, 2006 10:00 pm
 
Yep. Justin rules.
Posted: Jun 5, 2006 10:10 pm
 
Whoah, whoah, whoah, there, horsey!
If your going to bring up ipods...
A. I have absolutely no problem making fun of ipod DJs in front of Dan.
B. I think Dan is a great dude.
C. Do you really think no one here is aware that Dan and others from the Hi-Tone read this board?
D. The Hi-Tone has been a great sponsor for a lot of great events; not every event will be everyone's forte, and I think you are misjudging Dan or any of the Hi-Tone staff if you think they believe every event will be loved by all.
E. The statement that "continue to piss people off and eventually they will stop supporting you"; does this mean that I or any other person out there must pander to clubs and writers to get support?
F. I would let Dan speak for himself, as I think he would have some problems with some of the things yo are dragging his name into.
Posted: Jun 5, 2006 10:17 pm
 
Look, all I am saying is that it's the negative attitudes that people portray, for whatever reason, against anything new or different that does not do anything to help the so-called "scene" here. It has nothing to do with pandering, it;s called supporting. Unless someone fucked your girlfriend, there's no reason to diss someone else's event. It's just not cool.

There is already very little support in this city - why do people feel the need to divide that support?

And I'm speaking in general terms here as an example, not necessarily just accusing you.
Posted: Jun 5, 2006 10:29 pm
 
why do people feel the need to divide that support?
Sometimes, frankly, it has to be divided. Friday night was a perfect example. At the Hi-Tone, Buccaneer, and Murphy's, and a few other places, events were going on with very different types of music at each place. No club or band dissed the other, but there is a limited amount of folks who actually go out to see the bands.
I'm not writing for a publication or anything, and perhaps I'm being some kind of armchair quarterback here. But getting back to the original post, I heard Hoobastank was coming, I thought of you. As for Breaking Point, you don't have to like them, but if I were a local music writer, I would certainly try to be aware of anything native that is getting play outside of here.
Posted: Jun 5, 2006 10:34 pm
 
Is this what you were talking about, Jack Stands?

**********************************************

Hoobastank, Breaking Point, Jimi Jamison of Survivor, Papa Top's West Coast Turnaround and Aurora To Perform a Free Concert at Shelby Farms

CBS Radio, Memphis (WMC FM100, Country Legends WMC 79, WMFS 93X) will present the 27th Annual Star Spangled Celebration, a free concert featuring Island recording artists Hoobastank with Breaking Point, Jimi Jamison of Survivor, Papa Top's West Coast Turnaround and Aurora at Shelby Farms on Saturday, July 1.

The event also includes children's activities in the Family Zone and one of the largest firework displays in the Mid-South set to music on FM 100 and 93X.

A variety of food and beverage vendors will be on-site. Picnic baskets, blankets, lawn chairs and radios are welcome. Flashlights are encouraged. Pets on a leash will be permitted.

The event begins at 2pm.

No personal fireworks, weapons, glass, tents, umbrellas, alcoholic beverages, illegal drugs and offensive apparel are allowed.

Shelby Farms offers family activities including rollerblading, biking and fishing in designated areas and features play areas throughout the park.

The Park Rangers and Sheriff's Reserve will arrange parking areas with multiple entrances from Mullins Station and one from Walnut Grove. Parking is $5.

The Star Spangled Celebration is produced locally by Memphis' FM100, Country Legends WMC 79 and 93X.

The stations are owned and operated by CBS Radio, one of the largest major-market radio operators in the United States. A division of CBS Corporation, CBS Radio operates 179 radio stations, the majority of which are in the nation's top 50 markets.

The event is sponsored in part by Kroger, Miller, Parrot Bay and Danvers.
Posted: Jun 5, 2006 10:35 pm
 
Indeed it is. I see that Papa Top's West Coast Turnaround is playing as well.
Posted: Jun 5, 2006 10:37 pm
 
Note: DANVERS IS A SPONSOR!!!!
Posted: Jun 5, 2006 11:00 pm
 
uh, from now on we're just gonna call it i-pod jukebox night. does that make everyone slightly less queasy?
Posted: Jun 5, 2006 11:04 pm
 
hey, I applaud your forward thinking - larger cities have been doing these ipod themed nights for a while now - I think it's cool - there is actually good music made after 1974. And since a lot of bands do not come through Memphis because of our lack of a college radio station, and because of our lack of a college radio station - the general public stays in the dark about a lot of great music that isn't on MTV.
Posted: Jun 5, 2006 11:05 pm
 
Danvers is great eats....they should serve beer though.
Posted: Jun 5, 2006 11:18 pm
 
i-pod jukebox night
Very sensible. I love you, Dan.

there is actually good music made after 1974
You don't actually read anything on this board, do you?

the general public stays in the dark about a lot of great music that isn't on MTV
I was trying to tell you, HOOBASTANK IS COMING!!!

Danvers is great eats....they should serve beer though.
Precisely.
Posted: Jun 5, 2006 11:19 pm
 
the general public just likes shit handed to them. if you want good music, you can dig for it yourself. that's what i do.

as far as ipod dj night, i have nothing against it really. i just am afraid of what other people will play. that's all. heh. next week, i'll probably even take my ipod up there. 15 minutes is kinda short though. 20 would probably be a little better, and that's pretty much what i've seen standard on ipod dj nights in other cities. (i've been to a couple and it's kinda fun as long as you don't get a bunch of people playing yawn inducing shit.)

and as far as good music made after 1974, you can rip ANY record to mp3. it's not that hard. i do it all the time.
Posted: Jun 5, 2006 11:26 pm
 
Alright Robin, you win.

whatever.
Posted: Jun 5, 2006 11:38 pm
 
Win. Whatever. I made a joke, and you flipped the fuck out with some pent-up, defensive craziness. Crazy ass woman.
Posted: Jun 5, 2006 11:46 pm
 
I'm about to reach my you-know-what with this thread......
Posted: Jun 5, 2006 11:52 pm
 
yes, lots of good music after 1974...and no not all of it is available in a digital format...unless you digitize the LP/45 yourself as elle said...believe it or not, not everything in the world has been reissued on CD, or uploaded to itunes or soulseek. And another thing about ipods and the MP3 format...the bigger sound system you attempt to play them on, the shittier they sound, unless you are listening on headphones or have one of those fancy ass apple subwoofer/speaker thingys, they sound like poo...low res digital sound amplified through a high-end analog amplifcation system sounds like ass.
MP3s sound so crappy to these ears...can you put .WAV files on an Ipod?

I have purchased a dozen, count 'em 12 records/CDs recorded in the 21st century....although over half of them sound like they were recorded 30 to 40 years ago. It has ALL been done before people. There is no NEW sound.
That Futureheads, TV on the Radio stuff is the closest I have heard to a new and unique sound and even it smacks of musics recorded 40 years ago...
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 12:00 am
 
on this whole thread about the new music not being NEW...if you like a genre, does it necessarily have to be the originators of the sound that you listen to only? that reeks of snobbery and a half.

i'm sorry, but seriously - when you listen to rock and roll, does every band in the entire world have to utliize something entirely different than everyone else? i mean, yeah they have to have their own sound, but can they not be in a genre that's been used before? do you have to create a new genre of music entirely to be a good band?
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 12:08 am
 
do you have to create a new genre of music entirely to be a good band?

It helps.

Lots of "new stuff" that sounds like "old stuff" is awesome...The Dap Kings, Dungen, High On Fire, Om, Joint Chiefs, Budos Band, Marked Men, etc...I am not saying that you have to be 100% original to be good to my ears. But A LOT of new music/bands take a little bit of lots of different kinds of old musics, but dont create anything as good or better than the original IMO. Why listen to Interpol when you can listen to Joy Divison and Gorgio Moroder? It just seems SO many bands dont have anything to offer except a pale imitation of what came before them IMO.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 12:11 am
 
You don't have to create a new genre to be good, you only have to create a new genre (or mixture of genres) to be original. For example, The Dynamites were amazing, and they're not doing anything that hasn't been done thousands of times. Sure, there's been good music recorded since 1974, but some of us just prefer older stuff. I blame modern production techniques, mostly. And the fact that commerical music seems to get worse and worse as time goes by.

I do agree, this town could use a good college radio station, like a KEXP. Then we might get to hear some better modern music than Hoobastank.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 12:15 am
 
Win. Whatever. I made a joke, and you flipped the fuck out with some pent-up, defensive craziness. Crazy ass woman.

I'm tired of being the butt of your jokes.

there's room for everyone and everything.

Why listen to Interpol when you can listen to Joy Divison

Because, I never liked Joy Division. and I don't really like Interpol - but if someone is able to take the influences of what they have listened to and twist into something pleasing to my ears, then I don't see why I have to go back and listen to whoever someone tells me thay sound like. There is a lot of stuff out there that I haven't heard, I have many blocks of time in my life where I was way to busy living it than to pay attention to every record that camne out that year.

It's not always about just the sound anyway, music also has to so with sentiment and approach - so yeah, as I have said a million times, you should like what you like, anyone who is going to spend any time telling you why you shouldn't like something has too much time on their hands.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 12:23 am
 
Like I've said before when the discussion seemsto get a little heated, everybody needs to take a break from the computer and go put on some Enya and "Sail Away".
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 12:26 am
 
Well, I listened to a lot of crappy music in my late teens...stuff on sub pop for example...luckily I discovered Blue Cheer, the Stooges, MC5 and the like..and relaized I didnt need to own a Fluid, Tad or Blood Circus LP, or get every fucking Mudhoney record....I realized this when I heard "Outside Inside" and "Funhouse"...I wish someone was there to tell me.."dude, put that down, check this out" I could have saved lotsa $$$, and not wasted my time with a lot of crap.
Also, you may have noticed the acronym IMO and the phrase "to these ears" in my response.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 12:31 am
 
I'm tired of being the butt of your jokes.
Oh, please.

anyone who is going to spend any time telling you why you shouldn't like something has too much time on their hands.
Isn't this the very nature of being a music writer, though? Cheerleader or critic....
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 12:32 am
 
Well, have fun listening to the same records for the rest of your life.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 12:34 am
 
Well, have fun listening to the same records for the rest of your life.



whatever. I think I can bide my time with 3500 or so in my room and the 1000s more I am sure to buy before i kick the bucket.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 12:40 am
 
whatever. I think I can bide my time with 3500 or so in my room and the 1000s more I am sure to buy before i kick the bucket

ok, but does that also mean that no one else should make new music, since you know, it's all been done?
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 12:43 am
 
My head is about to fucking explode. I'm going to take a walk, halfway through which I will stop biting my tongue and figure out something productive to work on for the rest of the evening.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 12:43 am
 
anyone who is going to spend any time telling you why you shouldn't like something has too much time on their hands.
Isn't this the very nature of being a music writer, though? Cheerleader or critic....



yes.
I have had this discussion with Rachel before. I mentioned there wasnt any "hating" or derogatory reviews anymore of bands or records and she told me that you shouldnt do that, if you dont like something, dont say anything at all.
If that was the case, rock criticism wouldnt even exsist. Just telling people "why you SHOULD like something" without the SHOULDNT doesnt make any sense to me. Just ignoring something and pretending it doesnt exsist is a disservice(sp?) to people who read reviews.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 12:46 am
 
Rachel, he was just pulling your pigtails.

Different strokes, for different folks...and so on and so on and....
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 12:47 am
 
whatever. I think I can bide my time with 3500 or so in my room and the 1000s more I am sure to buy before i kick the bucket

ok, but does that also mean that no one else should make new music, since you know, it's all been done?


No, not at all...I go to shows of bands I like, I buy their newly recorded offerings. There is a lot of new music out there that is good, but there is a lot that sucks IMO. But you will never ever read a critic in this town(or any other nowadays) telling you a band or their CD is awful....the publication might lose future advertsing revenue, or piss off someone with influence, or burn a bridge to a potential future job...there is no such thing as un biased opinions in any media outlet, be it hardcopy, blog, etc....
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 12:48 am
 
My head is about to fucking explode.
Get it out there, Earles. I'd like to hear what you have to say about what's been said here, good or bad.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 12:50 am | Edited by: Rachelandthecity
 
I stick by the notion, if something sucks - why the hell do you need someone to tell you? Can't you figure that out on your own?

not to mention, what service does it serve? other than taking away valuable space from someone that you might actually like. What a waste of time.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 12:52 am
 
But that's just it, not everything someone thinks is new and golden really is.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 12:53 am
 
NO! Evidence popular music today and 500 million people!
Though, it doesn't suck to them, I guess. So, it doesn't suck.
But, as a critic, it's your job to offer YOUR opinion...suck or no.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 12:54 am | Edited by: Vinyl Ritchie
 
stick by the notion, if something sucks - why the hell do you need someone to tell you? Can't you figure that out on your own?



after you have spent the $17.99 on the shitty CD, or blew the $7 cover and a 4 hours in a smoky, sweaty club not enjoying yourself? You can figure out if you like it on your own as well. If you are writing a review in a newspaper, blog anything, you are writing it with the hopes another person is going to read it and perhaps be influenced by what you wrote, right? what would be the reason otherwise?
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 12:54 am
 
But that's just it, not everything someone thinks is new and golden really is.


so what?

if someone loves the new Interpol record, what good does it do to ruin it fo them by telling them that Joy Division is better? Sounds like old man disease to me.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 12:56 am
 
I don't know about that. I've financially been burned by hype more than thoughtful critique.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 12:56 am
 
after you have spent the $17.99 on the shitty CD, or blew the $7 cover and a 4 hours in a smoky, sweaty club not enjoying yourself?

This is not really a good argument - there are tons of ways to check out music before you buy it, and there have been very few times that i have gone to see a band without having any idea what I was getting into.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 12:59 am | Edited by: Vinyl Ritchie
 
But that's just it, not everything someone thinks is new and golden really is.


so what?

if someone loves the new Interpol record, what good does it do to ruin it fo them by telling them that Joy Division is better? Sounds like old man disease to me.



Well, you can tell them what the music sounds like...you douldnt do that with an Interpol CD without mentioning Joy Division...that lets the reader know what he/she is in for if they decide to buy the CD. Someone who isnt into Joy Divison, would probably be swayed not to blow the 17.99 on it as they might not like the CD. But dont mention the Joy Division influence, the person buys the CD and then says to themselves, "shit, this sounds like that sad ass droning Joy Division stuff i dont like, I wish i would have saved my money." or person is a huge joy divison fan and is excited by the review and buys a CD they really like....it does have a point
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 1:00 am
 
or blew the $7 cover and a 4 hours in a smoky, sweaty club not enjoying yourself
Perfect example, Saturday night. I spent $10 at the Scruffs. Then went and spent $5 at Adios Gringo and had a better time. People will say all manner of positive things about both bands.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 1:01 am
 
after you have spent the $17.99 on the shitty CD, or blew the $7 cover and a 4 hours in a smoky, sweaty club not enjoying yourself?

This is not really a good argument - there are tons of ways to check out music before you buy it, and there have been very few times that i have gone to see a band without having any idea what I was getting into.



So there is really no reason for critics or entertainment writers anymore, huh?
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 1:01 am | Edited by: Jack Stands
 
To wit, I will also say, Vinyl Ritchie and I probably disagree about the Joint Chiefs, but that's for another thread.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 1:05 am
 
Come on!!!

that's ridiculous - and it doesn't even follow the line of logic I set out. I don't know a lot of people that blindly buy records, most people know at least a couple of songs that they like. Those might be the only songs they end up liking and therefore, they could possibly decide that buying the entire album wasn't necessarily the best financial choice, but whatever.

that wasn't really the point I was making anyway. If you have an Interpol album, and you like it, the pleasure it brings you had little to do with who they may or may not be ripping off, because most people don't care!
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 1:06 am
 
Perfect example, Saturday night. I spent $10 at the Scruffs. Then went and spent $5 at Adios Gringo and had a better time


Actually, the perfect example is, if someone had written a shitty review of Adios Gringos, would you have not gone?
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 1:09 am
 
don't know a lot of people that blindly buy records, most people know at least a couple of songs that they like.
Welcome to the fucking Goner Board! There is a lot of new music out there that you almost have to order and hope for the best, unless they come to town and play (which a lot do, in response to "nobody comes here"). Yes, there are ways to get to it (i.e. myspace, soulseek, websites, streaming radio), but not every band uses that technology.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 1:11 am
 
Actually, the perfect example is, if someone had written a shitty review of Adios Gringos, would you have not gone?

No, because I knew what they were like, and nobody reviews Adios Gringo. Probably because of your logic.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 1:16 am
 
Probably because of your logic

what? they suck?
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 1:17 am
 
This is my take on negative reviewing. I am not pointing fingers or claiming that anyone involved here is guilty of what I'm about to describe.

Negative reviewing is essential to the progress of anything. I'm certainly not saying that any critic should be 100% negative. I'm saying that without negative commentary, or highly critical commentary, the world becomes saturated with mediocrity. Mediocrity should be destroyed. If you primarily write positive music reviews, you are not a critic, and IMO, you are not really a music writer. You are what they call a publicist. A publicist that's paid far less than a real publicist. A consistent writer of fluff. Somebody's puppet. And while I've certainly written my share of fluff, and I've whored myself out for writing work, I've also had plenty of highly critical reviews/features published that I feel strongly about. And I usually try to be funny when I'm nasty. I have yet to achieve a level of consistent writing work that can be lived off of, but I want to get there, and will play the game to a certain degree, but if I can help it, I will refuse to be a yes-man to a record label or artist if I don't feel hot about the art. I have odd jobs for the purpose of being someone's dog (and to help with rent). If I don't have anything nice to write, I have no problem whatsoever writing it.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 1:17 am | Edited by: Jack Stands
 
what? they suck?

You think so?
You're right. They're no Gin Blossoms.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 1:25 am
 
I will refuse to be a yes-man to a record label or artist if I don't feel hot about the art.


I guess I am lucky - I do live totally off writing about music, and am not a yes man to anyone - do you know who assigns my stories every week? Me. Just me. If I like it, I write about it. So, maybe my approach is different because my situation is different. If someone told me what to write about, and I wasn't a fan, then yes, I would write why I didn't care for them, btu I would also actually try to stay away from being snarky about it and allow that my opinion is totally subjective and just that.

I am also not trying to be equal to the music that i write about or try to step out in front of it, as many "music" writers do - and I have never fancied myself a critic, but I am also not a publicist - journalism is a discipline of collecting, analyzing, verifying, and presenting information. I try to leave it up to the reader to use it as they will.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 1:44 am
 
I haven't heard anyone yet mention that Jimi Jamison of Survivor is playing the Star Spangled Celebration.

DUM dugga-dugga-dugga DUM DUM DUM dugga-dugga-dugga DUM DUM DUM dugga-dugga-dugga DUM DUM DUUUUMMMMMM

This thread is starting to remind me of lab discussions in journalism school. laaaaaaaaame
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 1:45 am
 
then stay out of it.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 1:54 am
 
Jimi Jamison of Survivor
I'm High on You.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 2:00 am
 
then stay out of it.

Oh trust me, I am. You wouldn't want to hear what I have to say.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 2:02 am
 
You wouldn't want to hear what I have to say.

I do, I do, I do, I do, I do, I do, I do, I do, I do, I do, I do, I do....
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 2:02 am
 
I'm with Ritchie on this. I was born in 1980 so that makes me part of the MTV generation. I quit litening to comerrcial music at a very young age. My next door neighbor's older brother inherited his dad's record collection. He was always listening to Sabbath and Led Zeppelin. It didn't take very long for me to figure out that Zeppelin kicked the shit out of MC Hammer. But, according to the press at that time, MC Hammer made some great music. Now he is a laughing stock. I thank the lord that my neighbor led me towards the light. If he didn't, I might think Interpol was cool also. After that, I went on to persue my life as what they call a "music snob." I thought "Damn, there has to be other bands out there as good as Zepp that I have never heard of before." So, my journey to hunt for records began. I started with Rock that lead into Garage Rock that lead into R&B that lead into Soul that currently lead me towards Gospel. If I had just watched TV, listened to the radio, and read music reviews, I would be excited about the White Stripes too. The reason for telling someone something sucks is because the "critics" won't. Musical standards have gone way,way,way down hill since the industry became such a money grossing empire. I blame a good amount of music sucking today on writers/critics. Not talking about anyone on here or in Memphis cause you weren't the first and you won't be the last. It started a long time ago. I am also aware that the critics aren't the ones with the guitars, but they make the ones who are playing the music feel like something they are not. Rock stars. By telling the public a band is good when they are clearly not, is just wrong. If you do this just to get a paycheck, your just plain wrong too. Like Elle said, "if you want good music, you can dig for it yourself." It sucks that you have to dig for good music. If people still had standards, most commercial bands would be laughed off stage. When we have older musicians play at the Hi-tone like Charles Walker, they are nice, professional, and have respect for the club. Why? Cause back in the day they had to earn their press and record sales by making a quality product and working really hard. I know current bands work hard also but I got 2 words...Chitlin Circuit. Also,striving to make it=better product. Other times we'll get some dude who has been playing guitar for 3 years and is rude as hell because according to the press... he is a rock star. This is just bad all the way around. I think that's why there are so many bands now days, cause it's easier to get a tour, a record deal, a sponser, and a music writer/critic to say that your band is good. I guess my point is...not everyone has the passion to seek out good music. Critics make this even harder. How can a band suck if Spin magazine tells me they are good? Cause it's someone's job to say they are good. I know writers get tons of promo CD's all the time from bands wanting them to review their music. If you were more cut-throat about your reviews, that stack of CD's that has been pilling up on your desk would be cut in half. Folks might think twice about the quality of the music on the CD they are sending you if you are likely to give it a bad review.
God bless Lester Bangs...where is he when you need him.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 2:02 am
 
Oh trust me, I am. You wouldn't want to hear what I have to say.


well, we agree on that.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 2:10 am | Edited by: Rachelandthecity
 
The reason for telling someone something sucks is because the "critics" won't.

this line of thought is still illogical.

Who gets to determine what is good? I could break down a theory for you that this type of mentality is the basis for many of societies problems.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 2:20 am
 
Enlighten me. But, if this is part of the "say something nice, or don't say it at all", I'm pretty sure there's some Rawandans that would like to speak with you.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 2:26 am | Edited by: Rachelandthecity
 
Look, Jack caught me on a bad day, cause I am open to him liking whatever shitty band that he wants, but he for some reason feels the need to make a post just for the sakje of taunting me - and there's no playing innocent about it now. We're all fairly intelligent people here - you don't accuse someone of digging Hoobastank on the Goner Board unless you're trying to be funny and this time it was obviously at my expense.

I am going to say this and then move on, cause I do have music to write about - that I like - and that I make money for writing about.

Since I studied philosophy in college, and not writing, my take is of a broader nature. When you unnecessarily criticize people's art, their opinion, them in general, you are bascally negating their life experience and calling it unworthy. And it's all based on your opinion. How anyone can line this up logically in their mind is beyond me. When music is sincere, and not obviously just about making money or someone into a celebrity, I find it hard to consider any of it truly bad - it's a personal expression built off a person's lifetime of experiences. How do you tell someone that they're art is unworthuy of an audience just becasue you don't connect with it.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 2:27 am
 
Enlighten me. But, if this is part of the "say something nice, or don't say it at all", I'm pretty sure there's some Rawandans that would like to speak with you.


Relativism is not the same thing as saying someone's music sucks.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 2:41 am
 
I haven't seen anything here (unless I missed it) about the role of corporate radio in the dissolution of rock and roll.

Without the populist venue of commercial radio, contemporary music has become fragmented due to the rise of a few media conglomerates and the resurgence of payola.

I heartily believe that this has led to the overabundant reliance on music critics, contributing to the overall rise of sucky pop music.

Beaker Street, where are you?
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 2:52 am
 
I heartily believe that this has led to the overabundant reliance on music critics, contributing to the overall rise of sucky pop music.


I have no idea what this sentence means.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 2:54 am
 
Who gets to determine what is good?

Personally, for me...I make the calls. But for someone who doesn't take the effort to do their homework other than buying a magazine or looking on the net...the writer. The reason for me telling someone that something sucks is the fact that music can change your life. I would hate to think what rock music would have been like if Dylan had not been a record collector. By hearing Guthrie and others it inspired him to write songs of his own. There might be musical geniuses living in town right now but don't know it because they haven't heard anything that made them feel something they had never felt and inspired them to try and make music themselves. Seriously, do you think that the top 40 hits right now are good? A large percent of the world does simpley because they they are "hits" right now. I would like to think that someone could decide for themselves "what is good" but the world is a strange place. My own sister is a prime example. She is almost 30, married, a nurse, a mom, and on her top 3 favorite bands of all time list, you will find the Counting Crows and the Offspring. One of the greatest things I've ever done for my sister was give her Lucero's first album. I was living with Ben & Roy at the time and I thought she might dig them and I could possiblly get her to come out to midtown occasionally to see a show. She now calls me everytime they play to see if I wanna go. I'm not the biggest fan but I feel more comfortable knowing the fact that if you ask my sister who her favorite band is...it's Lucero rather than the Offspring.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 2:57 am
 
Beaker Street's still on Magic 105 in Little Rock, but it's nothing like it once was. I know, I've got a few old airchecks from the '70s. And if the atmopsheric conditions are right, you can hear Magic 105 here in Memphis. Bless you Clyde Clifford, but Evanessance and Lana Lang aren't 50 Foot Hose or East of Eden.

And oddly enough, back in the 60's, a corporation trying to be "cheap" (the one that owned KAAY) created Beaker Street (they didn't want to pay both a DJ and an engineer overnights, and the engineer decided to play records no one else was playing) so that my father in Iowa could hear some crazy music they weren't playing anywhere else. And millions everywhere else.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 3:14 am
 
Look, Jack caught me on a bad day, cause I am open to him liking whatever shitty band that he wants, but he for some reason feels the need to make a post just for the sakje of taunting me - and there's no playing innocent about it now.

Oh for fuck's sake. Alisa was right that at first this was some pigtail pulling stuff, but I didn't really think I'd have to think about buying a care bear at the end of the day. Whaaaaambulance, indeed. We've got a scenestar down with a case of the defensives.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 3:17 am
 
That was my dad, Sonny Martin, who was the program director and morning DJ on the mighty 1090, he was the Beaker St. guy (Clyde Clifford dj'd) --

The thing about fragmentation of rock and roll is simply that there are more music writers out there but less communication since radio is a series of tape loops now and people don't have the common experience they once had.

When my dad was a dj, radio made rock and roll a shared language. Now it seems like the tower of babel! But I applaud your creativity Rachel in promoting the Memphis vibe, it is a worthy effort. I just think radio's failure extends outward, and what a tragic waste!
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 3:19 am
 
Relativism is not the same thing as saying someone's music sucks.

Really?
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 3:20 am
 
Once again I've been put in my place by a professional opinion. I quit. And by "quit," I mean, I quit writing. That's it. My career's over. Leveled. I'm also going to stop reading my favorite texts by Lester Bangs, Susan Sontag, Pauline Kael, Nick Tosches, John Simon, Richard Meltzer, Robert Christgau, Greil Marcus, Camille Paglia, Gore Vidal, Cintra Wilson, Barney Hoskins and scores of others, because as critics that were/are not afraid to say that someone else's art sucked, their contributions to the written word have been proven irrelevant by a certain logic in this thread. It feels so good to finally wipe the crust from my eyes and ears.

"I don't have to boil an egg to know when one tastes rotten."

-Pauline Kael
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 3:40 am
 
I know what I know, love what I love, and hate what I hate about music (and music writing) because I spent my teen and adulthood pouring over fanzines, reading music books, taking huge gambles on new and used records that I knew very little about, and digging around in shitholes buying one dollar albums that often changed my life. Though I read about and download music online, the groundwork was laid with footwork. And yes, that makes me a fucking badass. Am I equal to the common trend of building taste and knowledge via blogs, downloads, and bad writing? No. I am better.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 3:42 am
 
That was my dad, Sonny Martin, who was the program director and morning DJ on the mighty 1090, he was the Beaker St. guy (Clyde Clifford dj'd) --


Oh wow, I know who he is (even if I wasn't born until 1975!). I've heard a couple of recordings of his morning show with George Jennings. Radio used to communicate and inform. I'm not sure what it does now.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 3:43 am
 
I really should just call it a night...

But, like Earles earlier, I can not hold my tongue.

The reason for me telling someone that something sucks is the fact that music can change your life.

You're post is a nice anecdotal peice, however, it is not logical as to the argument. I'm sure many people's lives have been changed by records that you would consider utter shite. I could list the albums that changed my life and you probably would tell me they were bad. I bet a lot of people's lives were changed by MC Hammer - I guess it depends on how you define changed.

I could write a review that Adios Gringos sucks, and then I would just be defending that.

Lester Bangs first article was a negative review of MC5's Kick out The Jams.

An opinion if I ever heard one.

Then he was fired from Rolling Stone for being disrespectful to musicians. And there is a literary consensus that his writings haven't held up as well as that of Meltzer and Tosches.

Once again I've been put in my place by a professional opinion. I quit. And by "quit," I mean, I quit writing. That's it. My career's over. Leveled.

I could have just as easily said this. Because if I don't make some time to figure out who sucks and why, well then I obviously have no business cashing my paychecks.

Like I said, if I did write some scathing reviews of a few local musicians, then I would probably just be on here defending those. I guess I lack the hubris needed to be a real music critic.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 3:46 am
 
music critic

What do these people actually do?
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 3:47 am
 
I must move on, too, as I have some writing to do...about music that I may or may not like. Thing is, they're paying me in stale pasta and cat litter, so I must be doing something wrong.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 3:51 am
 

What do these people actually do?



beats me - I should have asked Chris Morris when he was here - we had a 10 minute conversation on what a great guitar player John Mayer is - but he's probably wrong too.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 4:03 am | Edited by: Rachelandthecity
 
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 4:04 am
 
I could write a review that Adios Gringos sucks, and then I would just be defending that.


They're too good for you to appreciate. And they don't have a thing to do with Pearl Jam.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 4:06 am
 

They're too good for you to appreciate. And they don't have a thing to do with Pearl Jam.



see, I was just using them as an example, I've never heard them before, but you got another misleading dig in, didn't you?
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 4:07 am
 
Cash them paychecks, girl. You sure know the scene.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 4:22 am
 
Ha. Now I'm on Bangs kick - favorite quote so far:

The cynicism that permeates much rock criticism would annoy Bangs more than anything. You can see him now, grabbing a critic, shaking him and saying, "HOW DO YOU KNOW THIS ISN'T A GOOD RECORD? JUST BECAUSE IT'S BAD DOESN'T MEAN YOU GET TO SLAG IT!"
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 4:36 am
 
Tomorrow, I'm gonna probably kick myself for joining in the fray, but anyways... here goes nothing:

I write negative reviews all the time. The publicists even respect me more for doing it. I get plenty of hate mail for it too (read 800 words I wrote about how much Mos Def's last album sucked -- http://pastemagazine.com/action/article?article_id=1266. Now here's a blog about how much I suck -- http://luckyerror.blogspot.com/2005/02/great-moments-in-bad-writing-fo llowing.html#comments.

I wrote 1500 words about how much the 2nd half of REM's major label REALLY sucked, and the nice folks at Rhino made sure to send me watermarked advances, regular promos, and finished dualdisc CDs of the product, so I could sell, sell, and resell after verifying that -- YES -- REM's post-Monster output stank. Mojo paid me more than a thousand clams for the article, too.

Most of my published work tends to be positive, because it's usually more fun to write about what I like. Of course, what I like is usually far, far off the mainstream path -- and to pay the bills, I often write ambivilent features about artists like, say, Celtic Woman or the Gourds, who I don't really think about either way, but whom I'm happy to spend an hour interviewing and writing about to make my house note. I will admit to tailoring different stories to different audiences -- because the average joe reading the Business Journal isn't gonna know as much as someone who subscribes to Wax Poetics.

I am honestly MUCH more concerned with penning an enjoyable read that's literate and pithy than I am either impressing my friends with my work or tooting the new Artic Monkeys or the current flavor of the week. Anyone can shill -- when I have enough time built into my deadline, I like to really dig for a story, and I've been fortunate enough to interview and hang out with some greats -- Rick James, Otha Turner, RL Burnside, Jimmy Webb, T.I., David Banner, and Bill Dance (oops, he's not a musician) are at the top of my list.

Reading Bangs, Meltzer, Tosches, Stanley Booth, Peter Guralnick, Robert Gordon, and some non-music reporters like Susan Orlean, Hemingway, and Alex Ross, as well as articles (music and non) in the NYT and the New Yorker help make me a better writer. Talking about writing (I will admit here that Earles and I sometimes trade stories, Mike Hurtt and I have a lotta late nite phone calls about deadlines too) has never done me a bit of good. School didn't mean shit -- I dropped out of MSU a few weeks in. I thank god for the folks who turned me onto good music -- Robert Freeland, Eric Friedl, and others -- but I also worked at 3 different record stores in a decade and absorbed everything I could in that environment (selling someone their first copy of Raw Power was the GREATEST thing EVER) before I ever thought to try to make a living as a "taste maker."

But I digress.

Getting paid to do all this is hilarious, and I expect the gravy train to dry up any week. When it does, I'll have one helluva vinyl and cd sale.

Until then, see ya'll in the funny pages.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 5:02 am
 
well. like I said - if someone offered to pay me to write about someone specific and i listened to the record and did not care for it, i'd write why.

But, as long as I get to pick, I'm going to write about stuff that I like. It is much more fun that way.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 5:02 am
 
me again.

Who gets to determine what is good? I could break down a theory for you that this type of mentality is the basis for many of societies problems.

Geez, I can't answer for anyone else who gets paid as a music critic/journalist, but that's exactly what my editors pay me to do -- use my expertise as a music fan to determine what is and isn't good.

Even my pitches are ranked according to what I wanna write about, whether I think it's great or it sucks. and likewise, my writing is based on a vocabulary of the "scene," be it local, national, or international.

It's like those darn SAT questions -- dog is to bone as mouse is to ____.

Being able to reference what came before, or what's happening simultaneously, be it Adios Gringos, MC5, Zeppelin, Os Mutantes, Public Enemy, Pearl Jam, Neil Diamond, or whatever, is IMPERATIVE to my writing style.

Chris Morris when he was here - we had a 10 minute conversation on what a great guitar player John Mayer is

Exactly -- Chris has the vocabulary to explain WHY he likes John Mayer. I might disagree with his opinion, but when he verbalizes the WHY, I can still enjoy reading his commentary on something that I think sucks. It's reading someone who can't articulate their opinion that kills me...
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 5:11 am
 
It's reading someone who can't articulate their opinion that kills me...


well, i'm obviously who you're talking about here...
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 5:57 am
 
Alright, I'll say my last bit, here.
Rachel, this thread was originally intended as fun. Yes, at your expense, but with all the comments you've made in the past about "Goner appropriate", "cool enough", blablabla, I figured you could take digs as much as you can dish them out. I was wrong, I misjudged you, and I am sorry that it made you defensive. But it's all out there now. You have inferred (albeit, veiled under other example of a venue's event) that one must pander to receive reciprocation, between artist and press. Maybe not what you meant, but how it read.
And then you stayed defensive. I even provided opportunities to throw some digs in at me, but I miscalculated your knowledge of the bands in this town. My fault.
What you didn't see here in this thread are some really good answers to the root of some of your questions in other threads you have participated in or created. "What is good or not good, and how is that determined? How can someone enjoy Iron Maiden over the Gin Blossoms? Who says Mudhoney is better than Pearl Jam, and how do people come to these conclusions?"
Music is one of the most subjective things in the world. Yes, people like Interpol. Yes, people like to hear the roots and where it all comes from. The difference is, not for good or better, a well rounded study in all forms of music affords some to call bullshit when they hear what they percieve to be dreck.
Again, does any of this matter? Absofuckinglutely not. The world spins, people make music, people listen to it, people respond or not.
I fancy myself a reporter, too, much in the same way I see some of my favorite local music photograpers as photo-journalists.
I record it, post it, let you decide. No opinion included other than my own perception of how things went down.
But this is really a hobby of mine, not a paid gig (but if anyone else out there can help me get that working... I'm talking to you, Memphis Venture Capitalists...). As a hobby, I can "report" what I want.
If you're coming down on the side of "I'm being paid to do this", I think you need to re-evaluate what your readership expects from you.
I'll give you your first shot. Come down to the next sonsabitches show. Write about how we're loud and hairy and icky or whatever you percieve us as. Honestly, we just don't care that much. Either way, at least you're playing it straight with your readership.

I'm ready to bury the hatchet on this unfortunate series of events. I guess I'm just more shocked that you were so quick to think I was attacking you, when I was one of the first to defend you when Anonymous boy/girl gave you the "fuck off" the last time around.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 6:33 am | Edited by: Rachelandthecity
 
Jack, your post contradicts itself on multiple occcasions.

If rock criticism is subjective and doesn't matter anyway - then what is the point again?

There is an obvious difference between pandering and not tearing down another event.

As said, my job is not that of critisising records - thank god. The opposite of love is not hate, it is indifference, therefore, if I do not like a record, I will continue to choose not to give it any attention at all.

You continue to make tired jibes at me by knocking my lack of knowledge of the entire Memphis Music Scene because I haven't heard of one band. That's ridiculous.

And that is my entire point - this whole thread to the uninitated reader - misconstrues the nature of the posts that you have cited in terms of Gin Blossoms, Pearl Jam, and the like - and I find it really insulting. And you know, it really just proves my point about critical reviews. This whole post is a critical review of me, but it hardly gives one the entire story.

I actually haven't been surprised by anything anyone has said - we all know each other and our personalities. It's all pretty much par for the course, isn't it?

And I really don't need you to give me a "shot" at anything - whether anyone here approves of my writing or not, I'm doing just fine. Afterall, I didn't toil that long to do this professionally. So either I'm a pretty decent writer with my finger on the pulse of what's going on musically or the greatest bullshitter you've ever met. Either way, I'll continue to be fine without you're stamp of approval.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 7:02 am
 
i'm too nice to be a local music critic. i don't like to tell people to their face that their music sucks. i'd just rather not go to their shows. i do that a lot here in memphis, actually. i avoid going to my friends' bands shows because i'm not into the music. i hate saying that, but you know, i just am not into certain bands. *shrugs* i don't want to tell them that because so many take shit personally and i am just a nice person. end of discussion on that.

i know it sucks to have to dig for good music. but look at the general population of the united states and what they're into and tell me that the fact that they like shit music surprises you. heh. (hey..i'm being a snob now.) if it were a perfect world, great musicians would get the respect and the listenership they deserve, but it's not a perfect world. and so many people rely upon mtv to tell them what is good and most are too lazy to look any deeper beyond the blaring television set.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 7:04 am
 
Tsk, tsk, Rachel my dear...

I think some psychoanalysis is in order. Take one of those cds you collect and use it as a mirror. Hold it to the light and inspect your soul. This wise old Viennese doctor suspects a little delusion on your part. I think you want to schmitz with Jack Stands, not kvetch with him, which has made your ego unbalanced. And arrogance is not a virtue, my dear, even poor Adolph knew that. Claim the bullshit- after all, it's one of the body's processes. Shape it and mold it, because you must work with you've got.

To undo the damage of these Freudian slips, I prescribe a minimum of three sessions per week on my couch. Now if only my fraulein receptionist can squeeze you in before my vacation in the Alps. Either way, have one of those big checks deposited in my Swiss bank account.

Your doctor,
S.G.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 7:08 am
 
the resurgence of payola.

You talk as if it ever went away!
michelle
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 7:28 am
 
Just curious, but isn't writing about music you're not familiar with alot like being an ipod dj? Rachel, I think these guys were just trying to give you some good advice. Memphis music has always been true to itself, timeless, and you really should get familiar with it.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 7:39 am | Edited by: Rachelandthecity
 
you really should get familiar with it.

what are you talking about?

I could talk circles around most people on this board in terms of what's happening now in Memphis music - I see at least 5 or 6 shows a week - many nights I go to two or three different venues. I see punk bands, country bands, pop bands, garage bands, soul bands, I go see it all.

isn't writing about music you're not familiar with alot like being an ipod dj?

huh? who said I wrote about music I was unfamiliar with?

this is absurd.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 2:43 pm
 
I am still confused as to why writing negative reviews is ILLOGICAL, but only writing positive reviews is LOGICAL. I dont get it.
Its like the special olympic school of music journalism...every body wins, everybody gets a ribbon.
you are not there to be a emotional support system for the bands, you are not their mom.
Also, why is comparing new bands to their obvious influence from days pasts a bad thing and pointless?...god forbid a writer demonstrate knowledge to show they know music.

Youre right, it is absurd...
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 4:07 pm | Edited by: Rachelandthecity
 
First of all Eric, I never said people shouldn't write negative reviews, as you mentioned earlier, in a very casual conversation that we had I said that I chose not to because there was enough stuff out there that I liked that I thought it was a waste of time. There are certainly situations where negatove reviews are appropriate. Once again, just usually not situations involving me.

When I read negative reviews I tend to think that they reflect more about the writer than the music that is being written about.

I also have no problem "comparing bands to their obvious influence". However, music has intrinsic value that is based on the listeners own life experience. I will never tell someone that their enjoyment of that music is not valuable based on some sort of percieved notion of superiority that I have based on so-called musical knowledge.

I reacted to this thread poorly yesterday, because it was obviously mean spirited. My two major claims in this thread have been that it sucks to make fun of someone else's event, especially on a board that is widely read by the sponsors of the event and by people that might attend said event - and that in terms of music writing I personlly find negative reviews unhelpful and a waste of time. Both opinions that I continue to have, but I think that hardly lashes out against anyone involved in this thread - people who jumped in on it on their own accord, while I was baited into it.

Like I said, whatever I'm doing is working for me and I don't think anyone in this conversation has the aurthority to tell me that anything they have to say is anything other than their own opinion. We're obviously not going to convince eahc other, so let's just drop it.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 4:15 pm
 
If you have an Interpol album, and you like it, the pleasure it brings you had little to do with who they may or may not be ripping off, because most people don't care!

I gotta jump in here. Here's the deal. If you are a music feature writer, that's one thing. Most features are puff pieces. But if you are a reviewer/critic it is your job to say what your opinion of a record is. This no negative review thing is utter bullshit. In the case of Joy Division/Interpol, it's the reviewers job to point out the the obvious "influences" a band has. For that, you need some historical background. They must be teaching critisism differently in journalism school than they when I was there 20 years ago. That what's wrong with almost every guitar/music magazine that's out there. They won't call bullshit on inferior product/music. Every review is glowing, everyone is a friggen' genius. They just don't want to offend ANYONE. Not the labels, the manufacturers, the public. Before you ever write another review, go read some Lester Bangs. I would bet you don't know who he is, so just google it.

Besides, Stands was just fucking with you. From your posts, I gather your musical tastes are a little different than most of the folks here. So are mine, but I don't subject myself to playfull ridicle by exposing what they are.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 4:19 pm | Edited by: Rachelandthecity
 
and you obviously have a little trouble with reading comprehension...
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 4:20 pm
 
I was wrong, you know who lester Bangs is. Probably the best rock critic ever, and you think he's a big meanie.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 4:31 pm
 
I think Lester Bangs was a lonely self-desructive drug addict, hardly worth glorifying. He wrote in an entertaining way about how certain music related to him in a very narcissistic manner. I have found his peices to be less enlightening about music than his state of mind at the time each peice was written.

And that's an opinion. It's based on my state of mind while reading Lester Bangs.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 5:01 pm
 
A few things to ponder before continuing this inane posting.

1. Just because you get paid to write doesn't make you legit. There are lots of bad writers collecting paychecks in this town and in every town.

2. The CA has undergone some changes as of late, which have resulted in people like yourself writing what was once written by incredibly knowledgeable writers. Koeppel has been semi phased out by the likeable but far less erudite Leslie Kelley. Ellis leaving left a gap that you filled, along with a handful of others. Not saying that you're bad, but you're no pro, just someone who goes to a lot of shows.

The best comparison I can make - it would be like handing over the arts coverage to a divorcee who never misses a First Wednesday at the Brooks.
So before you get all high and mighty, take a look at the big picture.

3. If you didn't know this to be somewhat true, you wouldn't have reacted the way you did and continue to do to this post, which was started as more of a joke than anything. Defensive people usually are only that way when there's some truth to the accusation.

And before you go knocking other people's comprehension or education, please know that piece is spelled this way, not peice.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 5:07 pm
 
Oh you poor misguided girl...

All the greatest artists are lonely, self-destructive drug addicts:

In the literary world, Dylan Thomas, Henry Melville, Hemingway, Fitzgerald, Kerouac, Burroughs, Kafka, Dostoyevsky, Lucy Greely, and yes, Lester Bangs are just the tip of the iceberg.

Comedians like Lenny Bruce, Mitch Hedberg, John Belushi, Chris Farley, and just about every other big guy who's appeared on SNL, and Sam Kinison.

Artists including Van Gogh, Basquiat, and Modigliani.

Musicians: Townes Van Zandt, Johnny Thunders, Hank Wiliams, Keith Moon, Jimi Hendrix, Sid Vicious, Brian Jones, Janis Joplin, Jim Morrison, Charlie Parker, Billie Holiday, Dinah Washington, Miles Davis, Chet Baker, Bix Beiderbecke, James Booker, John Bonham, Tim Buckley, Kurt Cobain, Darby Crash, Nick Drake, Pete Farndon and James Honeyman Scott, Gene Vincent, Keith Whitley, Danny Gatton, Alan Wilson, Tim Hardin, Helno, Rick James, Frankie Lymon, Phil Lynott, Steve Mariott, Little Esther Phillips, Jeffrey Lee Pierce, ELVIS, Robert Quine, David Ruffin, DeeDee Ramone, Gram Parsons, Joe Pass, Art Pepper, Bon Scott, Screaming Lord Sutch, Will Shater, Hillel Slovak, Epic Soundtracks and more...

Actors: Montgomery Clift, Dorothy Dandridge, WC Fields, Judy Garland, Bela Lugosi, Marilyn Monroe, River Phoenix, Freddie Prinze, Jean Seberg, Edie Sedgwick, Margaret Sullavan, Inger Stevens, Natalie Wood, and Lupe Velez.

Even me -- I overdosed on morphine with the assistance of my personal physician.

But my dear, what does this incredible fraternity of lonely, self destructive drug addicts have in common?

We are the greatest stylists of their generations, the superbly talented, narcissistic iconoclastic legends. We are the avatars of creativity and talent that everyone else is measured against.

Now, Uncle Sigmund isn't recommending that you run out and buy a dime bag, a case of whiskey, or a syringe, but he does recommend that you learn how to recognize and respect greatness. Otherwise, next time, it might just bite you in that apple-shaped ass!

One hundred guldens please, you may pay on your way out.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 5:18 pm
 
How do you define legit? Again, I never said I was a great writer, and you have no idea what my background is, in terms of my musical backgorund I've done a lot more than work at a record store - so your opinion is incredibly shortsighted. When Ellis left the Commercial Appeal, I opted not to even put myself in the running because I am fully aware of my limits in terms of my music knowldge and writing skills. I have never claimed that I was a badass.

And thank you for taking the time to point out my typo. My legitimacy has now been officially proved faulty.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 5:42 pm
 
yes it has, but long before the typo.

I'm not attacking you personally, but you need to take a breather. The best writers know when to stop writing, and I believe that time has come, at least for this board for a while.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 5:45 pm
 
who asked you?
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 5:46 pm
 
You did, whether you know it or not, with your sad little "this is not Goner worthy...is this cool enough?" posts.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 5:50 pm | Edited by: Rachelandthecity
 
I have no idea what you are talking about - you obviously started a new screen name for the sole purpose of anonomously shooting off your mouth. I'm not impressed. At least I stand by what I say publicly. I've got nothing but time, so if you want to keep taking shots at me, I will continue to defend myself.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 5:59 pm
 
The screen name is not to hide from you, but from my employers, who would not appreciate what I'm wasting my time on.
I'll happily tell you this to your face the next time I see you, my dear.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 6:02 pm
 
I can hardly wait.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 8:10 pm
 
Hoobastank is playing ?!

Sweet!
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 9:13 pm
 
wow this thread grew really fast.

just my opinion, but i don't read music reviews to find out if the critic liked the record or not, i read it to be entertained. just like andria was saying about chris morris, it doesn't matter to me what he likes, it matters how he says it. i don't find it to be journalism. it's entertainment. that's all. i like it to be funny or interesting, or poetic, or innovative. i don't care about almost anybody's opinion when i'm thinking about buying or attending music. that's just me.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 9:19 pm
 
I stick by the notion, if something sucks - why the hell do you need someone to tell you? Can't you figure that out on your own?

If something is great - why the hell so I need someone to tell me? I sure as fuck can figure it out on my own!


Also, I wouldn't hesitate to call Dan a complete flaming faggot asshole to his face, and then make fun of him about ipod DJ night.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 9:26 pm
 
If you have an Interpol album, and you like it, the pleasure it brings you had little to do with who they may or may not be ripping off, because most people don't care!

Most people are idiots! If someone is stupid enough to buy an Interpol album AND like it, they are very likely to find more music they like by just listening to what Interpol has to say when asked who influenced them.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 9:35 pm
 
The reason for telling someone something sucks is because the "critics" won't.

this line of thought is still illogical.

Who gets to determine what is good? I could break down a theory for you that this type of mentality is the basis for many of societies problems.


So...you're not going to review music anymore? I mean, if you don't think you should determine if the music is good...
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 9:41 pm
 
When you unnecessarily criticize people's art, their opinion, them in general, you are bascally negating their life experience and calling it unworthy.

You're assuming that the people making the alleged "art" give a fuck about what you have to say. That's awfully presumptious of you. I've recieved move bad reviews than good. I'm usually quite proud of them. Doubly so depending on how "unworthy" the critic is.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 9:53 pm
 
How do you tell someone that they're art is unworthuy of an audience just becasue you don't connect with it.

Once again your overinflated ego is misguiding you. All you are telling people is that YOU don't connect with it. A true and good music writer should have character and quality the music does. Some people will like them, and some people will not. The public will learn how the writers tastes lean, and that will help them in their decision more than whatever words of praise are typed on the paper (and I know you don't use paper). If I read reviews from you about two different bands, and you said one was good while the other was bad, I would be far more inclined to check out the bad band. That's not me being insulting. That's me pointing out that we both know we share vastly different tastes in music.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 9:54 pm
 
What is art without criticism? One can not improve without criticism.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 10:03 pm
 
Jesus Christ Scott.

I knew your would end up here sooner or later.

I agree with Justice, I also think it's entertainment. And like he has pointed out before, I'm not a critic. Never have claimed to be one.

The funny thing is, I could understand why a lot of people in this thread would have a problem with what I write if I did tear apart music based on my musical knowledge and opinions. Instead, all I've said is that I don't feel comfortable doing that - and still people have taken the opportunity to tell me why I'm wrong not to. It's not an argument of perspective, it's a clear problem that some people have with me as a person. For whatever reason that is, I'm not sure.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 10:17 pm
 
You continue to make tired jibes at me by knocking my lack of knowledge of the entire Memphis Music Scene because I haven't heard of one band. That's ridiculous.

Two. Adios Gringo and Breaking Point. Those are the only ones to come up in this thread.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 10:22 pm
 
This whole post is a critical review of me, but it hardly gives one the entire story.

You are correct. This post doesn't give the whole story. The whole story is who you are in person and, most importantly, what has happened to you in your life to make you the way you are - what people, places, events, and MUSIC have influenced you. According to your arguments, however, that whole history thing doesn't matter.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 10:38 pm
 
in terms of my musical backgorund I've done a lot more than work at a record store

Was it MTV or VH1? I forget.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 10:42 pm
 
According to your arguments, however, that whole history thing doesn't matter.

Where did I say that? I think what I said was that because I respect people's histories, I don't think I am the end all be all when it comes to determining if they are any good or not. If I like something I can try to communicate why it moves me personally. If I don't like it, I tend to think that I don't have the type of life experience that makes me connect with it, rather than thinking that it must suck.

like I said, if I wrote a bunch of critical reviews, many would just be on this board taking me to task on why I was wrong.

I don't know what you want me to concede. I mean whats the endgame here? What would make you happy other than taking any opportunity that comes up to tell me I'm wrong about something?
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 10:46 pm
 
Was it MTV or VH1? I forget.


both, and I've music supervised about 6 projects for various networks - oh so mainstream, right?

Well, I work for a mainstream paper!!!!

And along the way I've written about Greg Cartwright, Jack Yarber, Harlan T. Bobo, Gonerfest - etc, etc, trying to write about people supported on this board but ignored in the mainstream media. So, what's my sin again?
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 11:27 pm
 
getting your knickers in a twist when some guy was pulling your pigtails?
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 11:35 pm | Edited by: Rachelandthecity
 
done! and agreed.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 11:56 pm
 
Your sin is that you don't write negative reviews, I think.
Posted: Jun 6, 2006 11:58 pm
 
see, now you're back and that's the first thing you have to say to me?

welcome home. There's a big party next door to you Friday - come over.
Posted: Jun 7, 2006 2:03 am
 
can't keep my mouth shut any longer.

there are a lot of people on this board who are not just 'garage rock snobs' but who have a deep and profound love for music. they have a vast knowledge of american music, of its pre-colonial roots, and of the events and cultural shifts that shaped this artform from the beginning. there are people on here who have not only watched documentaries and read books, but written books, papers, collected records for decades, taken college courses, and probably even taught college courses to have a greater understanding of this fascinating subject.

most of us will attest to this as being a sort of sickness, because we are on many levels unable to relate to people who do not share the same enthusiasm. and I think you draw the ire of these people, rachel, not because you don't have the same tastes or because you don't write negative reviews, but because as a mainstream writer you are representing an entire culture that we do not relate to or understand.

it's not just about people liking hoobastank, it is about a culture that constantly searches for the flavor of the month rather than searching for something that is profound and meaningful and beautiful. it is about a culture that would rather read the latest issue of Spin than a Lester Bangs book. It is about a culture that would rather watch Behind the Music than a PBS documentary about the blues. It is about a culture that would rather listen to a radio station play the same 40 songs over and over than listen to something thoughtful and challenging. We cannot comprehend this culture. We refuse to be a part of this culture.

And even though I think you're trying to change this culture for the better in many ways, you also pander to it, and I think that is people's bone of contention. I don't know you or have any beef with you, but I am just trying to extrapolate everything I have read in this thread and lend a different perspective to it. I will shut up now.
Posted: Jun 7, 2006 3:13 am
 
Beleive me. I hear you. And I think you make a lot of valid points.

I just think that we can find value in a lot of different places. I try to spend an equal amount of time seeking out the old and the new. And I think that if you want to truly enlighten someone else, attacking them is hardly the way to do it.

I'd rather say to someone that likes Hoobastank - "well, that's cool - but have you ever heard this?"

rather, than tell them they're an idiot with no taste and they should be listening to what I tell them to. Not to mention that I rarely have a problem with someone eles's personal tastes, because thyey hardly affect me.

I also belive that I am in my infant stages in this career and will probably hold a few different opinions about the whole thing before it's all over.

But at least we know now where everyone stands.
Posted: Jun 7, 2006 4:21 am
 
I will now chime in a bit and say that there is a middle ground between trying to seriously offer a Hoobastank fan a likely pleasing and better alternative (doubtful) and the "You are an idiot with no taste" diatribe. I seriously doubt the many with minds on this board would truly take this latter tact (of the tactless). Maybe they'd joke around about it on a silly board--god knows Jack Stands and I have gone round n round about Eddie Money and Thin Lizzy--but for reals? Well, yeah, those people are on here too, but generally they are over in the noticibly "Full of Morons" area of the Goner Board AKA "????" Who cares about them? I mean, as long as I rest easy that Jack Stands is an idiot with no taste (other than our shared love of Fastway and Judas Priest), then I am so so fire.

Forgive me, it has been awhile (Hey Robin!!!!!!)
Posted: Jun 7, 2006 4:33 am
 
well now i'm gonna jump in and i have to defend rachel for a second, if for no other reason than she's worked her ass off to use her position and the traffic her sites generate to give people an insight into what goes on here in memphis.

i had a long talk with russell simins today and we were laughing about how what makes memphis music great is that people make music and art and they don't really give a shit if anyone likes it or not. it's part of what gets memphis so much respect amongst people who really love music.

it seems like when someone steps in to cheerlead for what's out there, there's always someone with some fucking opinion about why one band gets the attention and the other one doesn't. waah, my band didn't get a good write-up or, similarly, waah my band didn't get written up at all. and then all of us who write about music are suddenly music snobs and assholes to the lot of you, most of whom really aren't that different from the rest of us.

if you have an opinion about some kind of music or band, you have an opportunity to share it. if you take that opportunity, good for you. if you don't, don't shit on the parades of the people who do -- particularly the ones who, whether you realize it or not, are doing it for the greater good of everyone here.

my own personal shit with rachel aside, give her some fucking respect for sticking her neck out for what she digs. i'm not a ryan adams fan, but she is and she doesn't mind writing about it. you don't have to like it, but when she takes the time to write about ryan adams and, at the same time, write about the secret service or imagination head et. al., she's doing what music journalists vs. music critics vs. music bloggers do -- she's harnessing the interests of the already well known to draw attention to those who are not well known or are just starting out.

stuff like what she does makes memphis part of the music community of the rest of the world, not just an in-bred hate-fucking self-destructive chasm of hopelessness.

i dont think it's important to ask why people write about what they write about or what happens when they do. it's important that they do it at all.

all of this to say i think this thread was started as a joke and the person who was supposed to laugh now thinks they're being hated on. no comment.
Posted: Jun 7, 2006 7:16 am
 
Oh, no, you didn't. I was totally gone from this subject, and now I read this on your site (yeah, I read it):

Well, I haven't written anything personal in a while, but I'm fired up now. I have been taken to task on a certain music forum for the past two days, and while early on, I had decided to leave it be and not engage the taunters, I ended up changing my mind because I didn't want there to be an idea that they had beat me down. It's a fine line, isn't it?

And what was my crime you ask? Um, saying that it wasn't cool to go on a well known Memphis message board and make fun of another person's event. This warped into various personal attacks due to my refusal to write critical reviews of Memphis musicians. My viewpoint is simple. There's enough stuff that I like, there really is no reason to fill space with stuff that I do not like. Of course, as I stated in the forum, if I was writing very critical peices, the same people would be taking me to task for that, and why I don't have the background necessary to make my case.

Anyway, in simply explaining my forethought on how I conduct my writing, somehow the door was opened and the thread bacame about me. And I know I'm an easy target. What I couldn't understand was if a few people were purposely misconstruing things that I have said in the past or are really just that dumb. Things that I have said about how I handle things were all of a sudden written as an my rulebook for everyone. Which anyone who knows me knows is the antithesis of how I am.

Anyway, whatever.


Is that what this is about? The Ipod thing? This is some high-school shit (granted, pulling pigtails is Kindergarten). Who brought it up in this thread, Rachel? Who? In THAT thread, I mentioned a printer and even gave some ribbing to the '78 folks, one-upping them with tin cylinders. I never made fun of anyone's event. Then you try and drag the Hi-Tone into it, saying I'm disrespecting them, when I didn't say a fucking thing about it. And, if you aren't calling me out for this, then who are you calling out?
Posted: Jun 7, 2006 3:01 pm
 
I wasn't calling you out Robin.

The whole thing had really nothing to do with you.

You just hit my button at the wrong time.

Everyone has had their say, and we know exactly where everyone stands. I'm actually glad to hear it. So, let's just drop it.
Posted: Jun 7, 2006 3:39 pm
 
i dont think it's important to ask why people write about what they write about or what happens when they do. it's important that they do it at all.

OKAY, this sentence is just screwed in the head. Lets just throw all of the literature out the window, burn libraries, quit having classes on literature, quit having a perspective, an opinion, or a thought about anything, lets just not think thoughts ever again (especially not bad thoughts they harm society, boo-fucking-hoo). Let us never question Shakespeares meaning or ask an author what they felt when writing their work. It is not just writing something down that makes it what it is, it is the tone, the theme, all that other stuff that they should have taught you in school. Why people write and what they choose to write about is essential to the art.

it seems like when someone steps in to cheerlead for what's out there, there's always someone with some fucking opinion about why one band gets the attention and the other one doesn't. waah, my band didn't get a good write-up or, similarly, waah my band didn't get written up at all. and then all of us who write about music are suddenly music snobs and assholes to the lot of you, most of whom really aren't that different from the rest of us.

I don't know a single person in a band in Memphis that has ever said some bull shit like that, or even thought it.

And what makes Memphis different and unique is the fact that mainsteam music does not influence much of the music made here. We don't need to be like the rest of the world, we like being different, not conforming, being weird and dirty. People here don't make music for any other reason than a love of what they do. And people of the world were introduced to Memphis music way before Rachel started her blog. And that is not an attack on Rachel, but what you said is just an insult to the artists and musicians of this city who have shared their music on a global scale for years and years.
Posted: Jun 7, 2006 3:44 pm
 
sounds like everyones positions are heavily fortified. so here's my middle ground opinion. of course, music critics should not be negative all the time but readers actually need to see them criticize the occasional band just so they know they're not acting as a publicist or being manipulated by record labels, publicists, etc. a little credibility restoration never hurts.
the inspiration to write or critique something comes from many different places but mostly it should come from the heart or your gut. love it or hate it, the music should make you feel something. total joy or total repulsion. whatever as long as its something. but when inspiration comes in the form of advertising dollars, being on the guest list, or any other seemingly unethical trade off/perks that music critics have come to expect then they diminish the effect the actual writing has on people. that's why theres a fine line between the principled journalist and the ride-the-coattails journalist. the one seeking to trully inform or the one who jsut wants their fifteen minutes of so called fame. the latter is why we have to read ridiculous articles about My Chemical Romance changing the face of music while bands actually pushing the boundaries are pushed to the outer limits of the industry. did i jsut write the word industry? oh, i did it again. what utter bullshit.
Posted: Jun 7, 2006 3:46 pm
 
makes memphis part of the music community of the rest of the world, not just an in-bred hate-fucking self-destructive chasm of hopelessness.
You know what I really can not believe that you would write this on this board. It infuriates me that you would insult my friends and my city. Zac and Eric bring in acts from all over the world. They bring good music in and send good music out. This board brings memphis music to the world.
Posted: Jun 7, 2006 3:51 pm | Edited by: indiepop
 
Then this board and goner records, zak and eric, are part of the solution and if my comment doesnt relate to you then dont take it so much to heart. i didnt say shit about goner records being part of that problem did i? no.
Posted: Jun 7, 2006 4:00 pm
 
I think we have very different ideas about what the problem is.
Posted: Jun 7, 2006 4:04 pm
 
to respond further:

Why people write and what they choose to write about is essential to the art.
you completely missed my point here. are you daft? why people write CRITICISM of art is none of your goddamn business and it never was. they write it and it's written and their machinations don't concern you. you accept their opinions or you shut the fuck up and go about your life.
I don't know a single person in a band in Memphis that has ever said some bull shit like that, or even thought it.

And what makes Memphis different and unique is the fact that mainsteam music does not influence much of the music made here. We don't need to be like the rest of the world, we like being different, not conforming, being weird and dirty. People here don't make music for any other reason than a love of what they do. And people of the world were introduced to Memphis music way before Rachel started her blog. And that is not an attack on Rachel, but what you said is just an insult to the artists and musicians of this city who have shared their music on a global scale for years and years.


being one of those artists and musicians myself, i think your take on my comment is insulting to artists and musicians because it ignores the fact that Memphis artists TODAY are struggling like everyone else in the world AND we're not talking about exposing the LEGACY of Memphis music to the world here i'm talking about exposing the current crop of up-and-coming Memphis bands to the outside world using the tools of today. who are you, Fred Flinstone? are you waiting for Barney Rubble to bring over the HP Pavilirock to send out emu-mails to all your friends? wake up and smell the calendar.

to ignore the fact of what she's doing because you've got some kind of problem with her speaks volumes about how little you care about those up-and-coming Memphis artists whom you claim i just insulted.

you owe them an apology asshole.
Posted: Jun 7, 2006 4:06 pm
 
I think my choice of subject matter speaks for itself. If there are any perks to what I do, I have yet to see them. The money I have spent out of my own pocket to cover events involving Memphis musians has almost bankrupted me. Do you think th paper covered my trip to SXSW to cover the Goner showcase? Think again. I used to live in the corporate music world, and I walked away from it to seek out something more authentic. I sacrificed a lot to do what I am doing now. All of the points directed at me here just go to show how little anyone on this board knows about me, my purpose, or my accomplishments. My "blog" is hardly my claim to fame.

and Robin neglected to give the headline on his copy and paste work. It said:

This is Stupid.
Posted: Jun 7, 2006 4:30 pm
 
rachel, i was simply commenting on music journalism as a whole. the post was never meant to imply that you do or do not exhibit any of those qualites, etc. personally i could care less about all the posturing thats going on here. earles and buck wilders had some great posts that inspired me to make a post of my own but please, everyone, continue the petty bickering. sorry to interupt.
Posted: Jun 7, 2006 4:33 pm
 
I'll leave this thread with this thought:

"Most rock journalism is people who can't write, interviewing people who can't talk, for people who can't read." --Frank Zappa
Posted: Jun 7, 2006 4:47 pm
 
Firstly I have never said that I had a problem with Rachel. I just don't think she is the first or will be the last to bring Memphis music to a broader community, and I think she would agree. Memphis music is about an art, not a write up in the paper. I don't owe anyone an apology. I have nothing but respect for the people out there making music and little respect for people who can get their head out of their own ass and see that there are people in this town staying true to who they are and making a difference without compromizing themselves or their art.

Second, I am not sure how a critique is not my buisness. If it is a good critique I imagine the writer would include things that his/her audience could relate to. and if the audience is public...??

Third, what artist does not struggle (it usually improoves the quality of art to have had adversity). And I am not talking about legacy, I am talking about the here and now, the bands that play down at the buck and murphys and the hi-tone.

If the tools of today are to have no respect for the art or the artist and only worry about write ups, people in the industry, money, blogs and webshits than I will take my place in the "fred flinstone" world.
Posted: Jun 7, 2006 4:56 pm | Edited by: indiepop
 
Once the idea leaves your head, it's already compromised, so you can save the indie cred bullshit line. When the world of fashion begins to take note of our preceedings, which it always does, the people who were squeezing their lump of coal so tight get pissed off when they see someone else holding the diamond it made. In my experience, they get upset and are often the first to call out, "I was doing that ten years ago."

The tools of today have complete respect for the art and the artist, only they do it in a way that you don't seem to comprehend. It doesn't work for you, so why should it work for anyone? Staying true to who and what you are doesn't mean you have to work in the kitchen for the rest of your life in order to create music.

If that's what you want to do, then you should either (a) tell people you don't want anyone to know who the hell you are and when approached about critical reviews of your work tell people they can't do it, or (b) don't create anything.

If you're going to put yourself out there, regardless of whether you do it with millions of dollars in your pocket or $5.25 an hour from Blockbuster, eventually someone will take notice of it. Of course it's your vision and you should never sell out your own vision. But how other people choose to interpret that vision is not up to you.
Posted: Jun 7, 2006 5:01 pm | Edited by: indiepop
 
Oh and one other thing:

Artists who read their own press are selling out in my opinion. If you are a musician and you start to believe your own press, you are destined to lose sight of your vision and fail to be true to yourself and will end up selling out. Why? Because you start to rely on the feeling that reading your own name in the press gives you.
Posted: Jun 7, 2006 5:15 pm
 
lutenizer, i appreciate your desire to point out what is good about what's going on in memphis music business, but anyone with any experience at all in this town with the attempt to get your music out of memphis knows how bad this town is at it. there is no infrastructure for this at all. it is one of the worst major cities for exposing the world to it's good new music. that doesn't mean that there aren't any good souls out there giving it a damn good shot, it's just a sorry fact of the way things have gotten set up here. Rachel is one of those good souls for me. she is kind, thoughtful and hard working and she has a good purpose in mind. taking all the rest of it so personally (by everybody on all sides) is stupid. both sides have turned this into some kind of bullshit yelling match. there are a hundred and fifty something posts on here and about five of them have any ground to stand on. the rest is utter crap. everybody should just shut up, have a drink and chill the fuck out. seriously.
Posted: Jun 7, 2006 5:16 pm
 
that first sentence i just wrote is a doozy. damn wasn't i an english minor?! that was terrible!
Posted: Jun 7, 2006 6:18 pm
 
"no heroes, no enemies... just sounds." --wayne coyne
Posted: Jun 7, 2006 6:35 pm
 
Entire thread was just negated due to inclusion of Frank Zappa quote.
Posted: Jun 7, 2006 6:40 pm
 
Frank did say "most" not "all", so carry on.
Posted: Jun 7, 2006 7:14 pm
 
There is a reason why most music writing is terribly boring. The culture is so attractive and begs for people to find some way to participate if they aren't actually playing it. Sometimes, when we are all very lucky, we have some great writers who also happen to enjoy music. Some of these writers have actually been capable musicians as well.

However, for the most part, music writing (and increasingly, film writing) has become a ghetto for people who may really enjoy music and definitely enjoy the world in which it exists...and they need a job and a way to be an adult in that world...and they simply aren't very good writers. Worse, no one even is requiring them to be better writers.

I say all this from my own personal experience. I tried it and realized the only fun I ever had was when I was ripping something apart. Hate brought out some pretty decent writing. Trying to write about what I liked was really difficult and I didn't want to put the energy into finding the words for those emotions. So all my writing on anything good was either copped directly from the same type of language of publicists or ,in one case, I went out and did an oral history on a band just interviewing everyone who was anyone on the scene in Memphis in 1999. Hello George Plimpton.

OK, that is it. Maybe not as succinct as Frank Zappa, but he was rarely succinct and I am sure that quote was picked out ot 5 hours of blathering on his part.
Posted: Jun 7, 2006 7:17 pm
 
I do everything I can to live a Zappa-free lifestyle. I have no problem with the thought.
Posted: Jun 7, 2006 7:20 pm
 
No fucking diggity.
Posted: Jun 7, 2006 7:55 pm
 
the alternative to thoughtful criticism of music is Beavis & Butthead

everything's cool or it sucks

maybe i should try that for a while and see how it works
Posted: Jun 8, 2006 2:24 am
 
Nah--you can very thoughtfully and creatively hate something or love something. And who--including Beavis and Butthead (I hate typing those words)--gives a fuck about the pap in the middle?
Posted: Jun 9, 2006 3:48 am
 
hey i cant read all of this thread. too much. but since the subject was 'to rachel', i'll add PLEASE KILL YOURSELF.
and yes, your knowledge of, and representation of, memphis music is a local embarrassment.
Posted: Jun 9, 2006 4:35 pm | Edited by: dangerouspinkie
 
those are two really stupid comments. the only smart thing about that post was your decision not to read all of this idiotic thread. you just won the prize as the dumbest poster in the dumbest thread in a LONG time!
Posted: Jun 9, 2006 5:32 pm
 
I'm new in town and don't know a soul on this board, but when I posted one thing about looking for a band, Rachel (who I still haven't met), jumped right in and offered to help, and has helped. And I appreciate it very much. Just my two cents.
Posted: Jun 9, 2006 6:24 pm
 
that's pathetic
Posted: Jun 9, 2006 6:26 pm
 
You people make me want to VOMIT!
Posted: Feb 14, 2007 4:31 pm
 
Man, I forgot about this thread! (good morning, sunshine!)
Posted: Feb 14, 2007 5:47 pm
 
Hey! I'm off to a meeting to raise money to help promote Memphis Music at SXSW! Of course, it's music I like, so it's probably utter crap!

Oh well, I wish you the best of luck in your endeavors to tear people down instead of doing something to contribute! You're a winner!
Posted: Feb 14, 2007 5:59 pm
 
Rach, I know you'll do a terrific job today! And you're gonna help people! Because you're good enough, you're smart enough, and, doggonit, people like you!
Posted: Feb 14, 2007 11:33 pm
 
[Posted: Jun 5, 2006, 2:33 pm



i cannot BELIEVE i never read this thread before. . . . hahaha

i
love
miss linda!
Posted: Feb 15, 2007 1:04 am
 
The most important thing here is that dee should not post. At all. SHE IS THE NAME THAT CANNOT BE MENTIONED!!!
Posted: Feb 15, 2007 1:04 am
 
Shit, I said it, didn't I?
Posted: Feb 15, 2007 1:39 am
 
Where the hell has Lute been anyways????
Posted: Feb 15, 2007 1:40 am
 
Lute don't post no mo'. I miss her, too.
Posted: Feb 15, 2007 1:43 am | Edited by: Jack Stands
 
Saw her the other day, though, and her and the man seem to be doing fine.
Posted: Feb 15, 2007 1:50 am
 
SHE IS THE NAME THAT CANNOT BE MENTIONED!!!
Betelgeuse ,Betelgeuse ,Betelgeuse!
Posted: Feb 15, 2007 1:57 am
 
The Name That Cannot Be Mentioned is running for office. Anybody feel like, oh, I don't know....


AN EGG PARTY?!?!?!?!?
Posted: Feb 15, 2007 4:16 am
 
Where the hell has Lute been anyways????


Med school has been sucking up all her free time. She still lurks in Memphis section occasionally though.
Top
Your Reply Click this icon to move up to the quoted message
 

 
Only registered users are allowed to post here. Please, enter your username/password details upon posting a message, or register first.

 
  Goner Message Board Powered by PHP Forum Software miniBB ®