Members nat whilk II Posted December 16, 2013 Members Share Posted December 16, 2013 NPR teaser quote:...in studying previous decades of pop and rock music journalism, I have noticed in pans and raves alike a strict attention paid to the words being sung; lyrics are largely the reason Kurt Cobain was hailed as the voice of his generation, and why Scott Weiland is still widley considered a buffoon.Today's almost complete lack of critical interface with lyrical content provides no such distinctions. Indeed, a person taking a survey of several leading print and online publications might be forgiven for concluding that a song's words are no longer a measure of its failures or successes, but an arbitrary component unworthy of serious discussion. Albums instead seem to be judged on a criterion of attitude, atmosphere and that nebulous catchall imprecisely referred to as "production." Get up offa that thing and write some real lyrics! nat whilk ii Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rsadasiv Posted December 17, 2013 Members Share Posted December 17, 2013 What a load of crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members kurdy Posted December 17, 2013 Members Share Posted December 17, 2013 rsadasiv wrote: What a load of crap. Yeah, that was kinda the reaction I had.On the one hand, I enjoy reading music reviews for their entertainment value, so I wouldn't want them to disappear completely.On the other hand, I'm not sure there's a more irrelevant occupation than music "journalism." There's a long tradition of these guys take themselves sooo seriously, regarding a subject (pop music) that to my mind, doesn't really warrant such seriousness. And this guy is basically criticising other journalists for not being as "serious" (i.e. pretentious) as he is. I find the last paragraph particularly unbearable."To be a mouthpiece of any kind in these content-saturated times is an enviable and increasingly rare position, and with this privilege ought come certain responsibilities: An artist's lyrics should honor the reciprocal contract between artist and listener; they should aim to seduce, puzzle, bewitch or provoke something in us that reflects our shared human experience. They should say something to us about our lives. But we as listeners and critics must fulfill our end of this bargain, and hold our favorite artists accountable for what they say Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members blue2blue Posted December 17, 2013 Members Share Posted December 17, 2013 nat whilk II wrote:NPR teaser quote: ...in studying previous decades of pop and rock music journalism, I have noticed in pans and raves alike a strict attention paid to the words being sung; lyrics are largely the reason Kurt Cobain was hailed as the voice of his generation, and why Scott Weiland is still widley considered a buffoon.Today's almost complete lack of critical interface with lyrical content provides no such distinctions. Indeed, a person taking a survey of several leading print and online publications might be forgiven for concluding that a song's words are no longer a measure of its failures or successes, but an arbitrary component unworthy of serious discussion. Albums instead seem to be judged on a criterion of attitude, atmosphere and that nebulous catchall imprecisely referred to as "production." Get up offa that thing and write some real lyrics! nat whilk ii He's talking about the top of the pops, clearly, and I largely agree.I've listened to and read a number of lyrics from 'top' writers as defined by some of our own forum members and clearly by the industry and been drop dead AMAZED at how incredibly peurile, cliched, and profoundly dull some of their biggest songs are.It's not that there isn't good stuff out there -- but the marketing of assembly line pop to maleable audience sectors (those responsive to taking their 'trend' marching orders from paid media figures) has become so efficient, and the linkage between designated hits and the radio play so locked-in, that the top of the pops is largely the province of insipid banality that descends beneath even the boogie-oogie-oogie depths of the mass market disco era.He's right, of course, that stupid lyrics did not pop up overnight. There is a long history of really stupid songs gracing sales charts -- but in the past they usually shared the heights with works of merit, at least from some perspectives. But, for sure, I had to laugh at this:I can attest with authority that America, New Orderand The Cranberries have all committed crimes against the English language that Win Butler, short of suffering some grade of concussion, could never hope to perpetrate. LOL! I do think he could have found worse examples than those he quoted. Not that those aren't bad. They certainly are. But I look up the lyrics to some of these to of the pops hits and they are literally just strings of cliches and everyday phrases. The only metaphors for the most part are cliches shopworn to meaninglessness. The storytelling is simplistic and superficial. For sure, there's a long tradition of insipid lyric in pop -- but in the past the really stooopid stuff tended to be the exceptions. Now they are pretty much the rule, from what I've seen.Thank heaven there is no reason to pay the slightest attention to what the big machine wants you to buy and that there are now better avenues of discovery than delivering onself over to the bottom-line driven professional 'taste-makers' in the industry and media. When critics do engage with an album's lyrics, their critiques are often neutered by secretive editorial policies. By now, almost everyone who reads online music reviews knows that many album scores are determined not only by the writer of the review, but by the editorial board of the journal, blog or magazine for whom he or she is writing. *I'm not anti-disco -- I was into the club scene in the early/mid 70s when they played R&B and funk, eager to find an antidote to dude culture -- but I was well out by the time the mass market picked it up following SNF and the studio hacks started piling on making the horrible pabulum that kept poring out of the labels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members SLScott86 Posted December 17, 2013 Members Share Posted December 17, 2013 I just coincidentally was introduced to that Isbell album today. Wow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members blue2blue Posted December 17, 2013 Members Share Posted December 17, 2013 I thought this comment from former Pitchfork reviewer, Rachel Bailey, was pretty instructive: I just read this and sighed -- I'm a writer for a handful of regional and national music publications. I wanted to be a music critic for as long as I can remember, but a few years ago I stopped reviewing records and started focusing on features because of an experience I had at one of the biggest national magazines at the time. I wrote a negative but reasoned and, I think, even-handed review of "Subiza" by Delorean. Pitchfork had given it a good review and was promoting the album's first single. They were "buzzing" or whatever. I thought it was unremarkable froth and gave the album a 3/10. Later that week, I was literally taken outside by an editor, where she explained to me that together the editors had decided we had to give it a higher rating -- they bumped it up to a 4.9. Still not great, but almost 60% better than my original assessment. They didn't say why. At the time, the publication was foundering, and our daily meetings often focused on our competition with the likes of Pitchfork. It seemed pretty clear to me that the editors had decided to up the rating in some kind of "keeping up with the Joneses" type headspace. I don't even know if they actually listened to the record before making this decision, just that they knew the climate around this record is that it was "cool." The decision-making in that case, and in a lot of reviews I read in that publication and elsewhere, seems to me to rely on some sort of attempt to guess what the consensus on the record was going to be, and to align our score accordingly so as to position ourselves smack in the middle of the pack. Of course, a lot of times, it's simpler than that. A 'consideration' (of some) sort is proffered along with the request for a review. 'Consensus' is often largely driven by by considerations of various forms.(And, consideration, is industry talk for an inducement. If you know what I mean.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rsadasiv Posted December 18, 2013 Members Share Posted December 18, 2013 The review in the OP is all get-off-my-lawn faux curmudgeon bull{censored}. You could substitute "musicianship" for "lyrics" and have exactly the same article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rsadasiv Posted December 18, 2013 Members Share Posted December 18, 2013 Better http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/10149470/lady-gaga-katy-perry-eminem-justin-timberlake-beyonce-year-music Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members oldgitplayer Posted December 18, 2013 Members Share Posted December 18, 2013 Quote from ^^^'Pop music has evolved into a lifestyle condiment'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.