MattZ Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 This article in the Village Voice was pretty amusing... not the least of which was the look back at some hilarious rankings (e.g., 1989 - Neneh Cherry's Raw Like Sushi #5). http://www.villagevoice.com/pazzandjop06/0...t,75736,22.html Critics' polls have evolved and arguably withered lately, but at least we didn't vote for Timbuk 3by Chris Ott Beyond its status as a discerning metric of the Bands That Matter in a given year, Pazz & Jop became one of the hottest potatoes in the field of music journalism in 2006, following the Voice's dismissal of its patriarch, Robert Christgau. Within the community the poll had consulted for nearly 35 years, its fate was a pressing concern rivaling the most important question of all: whether TV on the Radio, Clipse, or Bob Dylan released the year's best record. P&J has grown in renown and influence since its early-'70s inception, curated and tallied Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 Jann Wenner has been writing "Nothing happened today" in his diary for two years. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MattZ Posted February 14, 2007 Author Share Posted February 14, 2007 Finally, 2006 made it plain: Everyone who's telling you to listen to the same 50 records is caught in a closed loop of incestuous self-assurance, and you owe it to yourselves to leave them behind. Ouch. As a side note -- I think this is the guy that slammed Colin Meloy in the Voice a couple of months ago. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
uncle wilco Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 i remember back when a rolling stone review actually meant something. i think that was around the time the original star wars trilogy came out. nowdays anyone can spout off that has access to the internet and paid music critics are now irrelevent. looking back now, they've probably always been. i can make up my own mind...thank you very much. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Beltmann Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 I didn't know the purpose of criticism was to help others make up their mind. Interesting. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
uncle wilco Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 I didn't know the purpose of criticism was to help others make up their mind. Interesting.what the hell else is it for then? an avenue to vent about ones own shortcomings by placing the target on someone else? that's what message boards are for. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
LouieB Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 i remember back when a rolling stone review actually meant something. i think that was around the time the original star wars trilogy came out.Were you even born then?? LouieB Quote Link to post Share on other sites
aricandover Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 Were you even born then?? LouieB yeah, he was 26 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
LouieB Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 yeah, he was 26He was born, but a pre-teen. LouieB Quote Link to post Share on other sites
uncle wilco Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 Were you even born then?? LouieBborn in 1968 i think you were probably smoking your first doobie around that time...weren't you....come on louie..fess up! i was one of the idiots waiting in line for hours outside our legendary local glenwood theater (now demolished) when the original star wars came out. i see the end of rolling stone significance as starting with the late 70's and it was definately d.o.a. by the time MTV went on the air. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 I don't know about you all, but I'm pretty excited for Beltmann's response. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ction Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 "This is so exciting!" Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 or something. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 I've said this before, but to me critics are at heart consumer protectionists, trying to alert people so they spend their entertainment dollar more effectively. That said, taste is the hardest thing of all to quantify - it can't be rated like one would rate toasters or water softeners. And some critics, who, it must be said, are artists themselves, can't resist showing off their chops at the expense of the reviewed, but I appreciate their efforts. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MattZ Posted February 16, 2007 Author Share Posted February 16, 2007 While we wait for Beltmann's response, I'll jump in and say that I think I agree with the premise that a year-end critic list serves a different purpose depending on the audience: (i) for the die-hard fan, it spurs debate in bars and on message boards; and (ii) for the more casual fan, it serves as a road-map/cheat-sheet to music that he/she doesnt have the time to check out on his/her own. So, no, the purpose of criticism isn't to help people make up their mind. But these lists aren't really critiques, are they? And with the advent of the internet and the relative ease with which one can stumble across indie recordings, it seems that the value provided by year-end lists and sites like RollingStone/Pitchfork is waning. I mean, shit, if I can post a review on a blog, who the hell needs Rolling Stone? Still looking forward to hear from Beltmann though. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
tongue-tied Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 it's been three days in waiting, beltmann must be cooking up something earth-shattering, or has forgotten about this thread. with all this anticipation, will the response live up to the hype? what kind of backlash will come from those who see this delay as a lack of enthusiasm? Are the glory days behind him? Can he give the post of the year before it's even March? the world waits. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Beltmann Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 what the hell else is it for then?I waited for my question to sink in. Why, exactly, do Americans avoid foreign movies? Near the front of the class, a thoughtful high school junior squinted, pressed her lips together, and finally raised her hand. "I really believe that if the story was worth telling, it would have been made here first." Did she mean that the United States has a monopoly on creativity? Or did she mean that stories about non-Americans, made by non-Americans, simply don't matter? One of the central functions of criticism, I think, is to root out such insular thinking, identify its causes, and ambush it at the source. In other words, criticism is about modeling new ways of thinking about art in general, not changing opinions about works in specific. It Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MattZ Posted February 17, 2007 Author Share Posted February 17, 2007 In other words, criticism is about modeling new ways of thinking about art in general, not changing opinions about works in specific. It Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Beltmann Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 I agree with the original article, and with what you just said. But I wasn't responding to the article... I was responding to UW's comments about criticism in general. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MattZ Posted February 17, 2007 Author Share Posted February 17, 2007 I was responding to UW's comments about criticism in general. I suppose that makes more sense to me now. Oops. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Beltmann Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 I suppose that makes more sense to me now. Oops. I edited for clarification. Wish I had more time to elaborate on this, but I just don't. Life's been hectic, especially the last six months, which accounts for my infrequent posting around here. I miss our regular chats. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
uncle wilco Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 I waited for my question to sink in. Why, exactly, do Americans avoid foreign movies? Near the front of the class, a thoughtful high school junior squinted, pressed her lips together, and finally raised her hand. "I really believe that if the story was worth telling, it would have been made here first." Did she mean that the United States has a monopoly on creativity? Or did she mean that stories about non-Americans, made by non-Americans, simply don't matter? One of the central functions of criticism, I think, is to root out such insular thinking, identify its causes, and ambush it at the source. In other words, criticism is about modeling new ways of thinking about art in general, not changing opinions about works in specific. It Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.