Is Rock Criticism Dead?
Los Angeles Times‘ Patrick Goldstein seems to think so. Of course, what he’s really talking about is consumer criticism–telling people how to spend their time and money.
I tend to agree more with Robert Christgau, who says–and I’m paraphrasing here–rock criticism isn’t for fans of rock music, it’s for fans of rock criticism.
15 Responses to “Is Rock Criticism Dead?”
Leave a Reply
Recent Posts
- Jazz and Electronica Meet at ESL (1
)
Thursday, the 11th, sees an additional entrant into the musical category that I called "breakbeat ja… - Stormy Weekend shows (0)
While you're indulging in the D.C. tradition of weather-related paranoia and stocking up on food, wa… - Hanna Ruins Jazz Festival (0)
Stupid Hurricane/Tropical Storm. Arlington Arts, the good people behind the annual Rosslyn Jazz Fest… - Sonic Youth Hyperthink/Auxes @ Black Cat Sunday (1)
"Hair in the hole in my head/Too bad the scene is dead." Thus runneth the lyrics "Chapel Hill," a l… - RATM Urge McCain to “Get the F*ck off tha Commode” (0)
Shockapella report, RNC edition: Rage Against the Machine's Tom Morello and Zack de la Rocha made a …
- Jazz and Electronica Meet at ESL (1
April 15th, 2008 at 11:00 am
Well, he really says that ALL professional criticism –not just rock–is dead, doesn’t he?
April 15th, 2008 at 11:07 am
There are other types of criticism?
April 15th, 2008 at 11:10 am
A.O. Scott addresses this issue in a Sunday piece on Ebert. He says that yes, criticism is being cut from newspapers across the country. But blogs are filling the void. Which isn’t quite the same. Still there’s a ton of good music blogs out there commenting, assessing, and of course, playing booster.
April 15th, 2008 at 11:44 am
Goldstein’s 9-year old chooses a friend’s opinion of a videogame over a newspaper critic’s opinion of a videogame and Goldstein concludes that criticism is dead. How profound.
April 15th, 2008 at 11:47 am
The real issue with this kind of criticism is that it was created so consumers could learn how best to spend their money. Now DVD rentals are nearly free (about $1.50 on netflix), the tivo already guides you to things you want to see, but didn’t know about, and music is free to sample online legally and illegally. About 4 years ago I would read about some new band, then immediately go to their web page and listen to the music. So often the critic made serious mistakes in trying to categorize the music- think of the Pitchfork mistake where the writer’s depth of knowledge of music is 1997 onward, and I soon realized that there was no reason to waste my precious time on earth with consumer reviews.
April 15th, 2008 at 12:02 pm
A particular critic (or critics) had no depth of knowledge so you decided not read any critics. Interesting jump there. As for the netflix and downloading thing, I find that there are so many movies and albums new and old out there, that it’s valuable to read the opinion of others, to help narrow down choices (esp. when you’re busy with dayjob and other stuff)
April 15th, 2008 at 12:08 pm
I think Don brings up a good point. If you can hear the music for free, why bother reading through a Pitchfork review? That’s why I think Other Music’s website is such a go-to for me. It offers concise descriptions and backgrounds of its releases and allows you to listen to soundclips. If I’m interested, I usually hit up the band’s myspace or…other blogs.
That being said, I do think there should be space for long-form reviews, arguments, and well-constructed essays. Burton’s Art Ensemble of Chicago review comes to mind. Glenn Dixon’s take down of Patti Smith comes to mind as well.
I also think Love is a Mixtape is a book I couldn’t recommend enough.
http://www.randomhouse.com/crown/mixtape/
April 15th, 2008 at 12:09 pm
Agreed. I’m kind of amazed, in this day and age, when print media wastes space on kickers like “if-you-like-X-you’ll-love-Y.”
Granted, this is now the realm of the “OMG-I-just-heard-this-leak” blog post (”Track 7 is faster than track 6!”). But even there it’s just silly. What these people are really be saying is that, ‘hey, I heard this song/record befor you did.’
I read criticism because I like to read. Not because I’m planning my time/budget for the week.
Arts criticism predates everything we’re talking about here–movies, records, videogames. It’s probably a safe bet that it’ll be here long after we’re gone.
April 15th, 2008 at 2:04 pm
I want to say that I still read criticism for guidance on my CD acquisitions…but at this point I’m getting 20 CDs a week, for free, in the mail, so who’m I kidding?
But then, that’s REALLY the point, isn’t it? We, the critics, wade through piles of dreck and find the gems so the public doesn’t have to. And I don’t think that vocation is in any danger: Everybody wants to find the good stuff themselves, but ferreting out the crap is someone else’s job.
April 15th, 2008 at 3:00 pm
The vocation is not in any danger as long as you’ll work for free cds and not money.
April 15th, 2008 at 3:19 pm
I think that there’s something to the efficiency argument that Michael’s making (I’ve called it gatekeeping before, but that upsets a lot of people). And I think that will eventually save a lot of jobs. Or it will inspire new jobs after the old jobs are gone.
But I don’t even think it’s an issue of listening to a lot of free CDs–which are not as plentiful as they used to be–so much as sorting through a lot of electronic information (upcoming release lists, emails from PR folks, digital downloads, etc.) and finding something that might interest you enough to inspire 50 to 1,200 words of criticism.
April 15th, 2008 at 9:18 pm
Well, it’s both, the advance CDs and the electronic information–at least in my case. At least for now.
But I wouldn’t call it gatekeeping, more like a filtration system: You, sir, are the one who distinguishes the noteworthies–successes AND failures–from the staggering tide of mediocrity.
April 16th, 2008 at 9:14 am
Well, I think what’s important now is not just the lone “filter,” but the aggregate. Goldstein longs for the uber-critic, the person who can vastly influence culture with a handful of keystrokes.
I’m not sure that’s possible anymore (see: the information age), or even desirable. Was Meltzer right about seventies rock music? No. He was like Godard, burning through possibilities as such a fast clip that he didn’t know where to go next. He was bored, so, therefore, the music must be boring.
For better or for worse, that era is behind us, I think. But, you know, if colleague after colleague goes to bat for a record that means a lot more to me than, say, a single Sasha Frere-Jones column.
Back in the day, people paid attention to their friends, too. I mean, I had never read a review of Led Zeppelin IV or Unforgettable Fire when I bought those records. My sister played them for me. Or someone at church. Or I heard them at camp.
You know?
April 16th, 2008 at 3:35 pm
Talk about a death long-overdue!
April 16th, 2008 at 11:16 pm
Good criticism will only die when good writing dies. Has that already happened?
Who gives a shit about the consumer? Writing and analysis is an art form in itself, and that’s to be respected. What we have to give up is the idea of adequate compensation for our labors. (Something many musicians have already come to terms with — and once again, I’m one.)