Big Yawn is a Joke

She was referring to Jason Ringenberg, one of the godfathers of the 80's cowpunk movement that came along long before Jeff Tweedy ever met his Uncle Tupelo. To call him "this Ringenberg guy" either shows a complete lack of knowledge of the importance of Jason's past, or a complete disregard for it.

Originally posted by redsock:

Originally posted by Celeste:
there are no explicit qualifications per se, but if I was to write a commentary on FDA's handling of the Vioxx/Celebrex issue and in my commentary I referred to the FDA commissioner as "this Crawford guy" I don't think people would hold my opinion as valuable, since bu doing this I would have demonstrated that I don't really know much background on the agency or its commissioner…

get it?

Now that is just wrong Celeste, comparing something the FDA did to Joe Blow's thoughts on an album is hardly apples to apples.

"Ms. Lynn was extremely interested in working with Mr. Jack White, whose credentials as a producer and as a musician in the band, the White Stripes, were quite impressive.They speant three solid weeks in the studio, located in Nashville, TN. Mr. White was heard saying how impressed he was with te city, and the studio itself. 'It's the birthplace of country,' he was quoted as saying."

You want to read 300 words of that? The reviews are meant to be intelligently written, off the cuff description of the album. Not reporting for a trade publication.

Originally posted by Rhett Miller:
There are actually some people in the world who like BOTH rock and country music. Those are the people whose opinions I am going to trust when it comes to a review of a rock or country album. Duh.

I like rock music, but dislike rap. Would you like to hear my opinion of the new Mos Def album?

[/QB]


this is what i am saying. I understand some people like both, but i was not talking about those people, DUH.

and perhaps i would like to hear your opinion on the new Mos Def. honestly.

and if you just senselessly trashed it, i would say, whatever, but it wouldnt send me in a crazy rage!!!!!!

Originally posted by sonickteam2:
and if you just senselessly trashed it, i would say, whatever, but it wouldnt send me in a crazy rage!!!!!!

What if it was the new Muse CD? ;)

Originally posted by redsock:
Now that is just wrong Celeste, comparing something the FDA did to Joe Blow's thoughts on an album is hardly apples to apples.

you're still, STILL, missing the point, like so many others on the board right now, and it is so frustrating…I'm not comparing "something FDA did" with the Joe Blow reviewer…

I was using the subject as an example, if someone was to WRITE about something and refer to someone who is KNOWN as "this so-and-so guy" as though this KNOWN person is just some schmuck nobody's heard of ever…this only reflects that the person writing this has not heard of said so-and-so…and it reflects poorly on the writer and on the publication…I'm not suggesting you use Mr. or Ms…I'm suggesting your reviewers do their homework, stick to what they know (notice, not what they "like", but what they "know")…or, have some humility…

Originally posted by Rhett Miller:
one of the godfathers of the 80's cowpunk movement

what a title. how could we insult such an important person in music.


:roll:


and thats MR COWPUNK to you buddy.

Originally posted by Bombay Chutney:

Originally posted by sonickteam2:
and if you just senselessly trashed it, i would say, whatever, but it wouldnt send me in a crazy rage!!!!!!

What if it was the new Muse CD? ;)

whatever. it doesnt matter. some review is not going to make me act like a goddamn fool on a chat board.

the important question is

Will Jack White beat the shit out of Loretta Lynn when after her next album is out, she criticizes the production of Van Lear Rose?

No, Jack White only beats the shit out of girls (like that Von Bundies chick). Loretta Lynn is a woman.

Originally posted by pollard:
the important question is

Will Jack White beat the shit out of Loretta Lynn when after her next album is out, she criticizes the production of Van Lear Rose?

Originally posted by Rhett Miller:
I believe her point was that the reviews were written in a way that conveyed that the writer(s) did not have much knowledge of the genre they were dealing with. If the writer does not have a knowledgeable grasp of the genre they are writing about, why waste the bandwidth to post such a review?

Actually, I agree – I only looked at the Loretta Lynn review, but to start out this way to me means that particular reviewer should not be tasked with reviewing that album. Harsh words – vile, fecund, etc.

"Every ten years or so, Indie Rock Criticism goes through an identity crisis of sorts and opens its doors to an artist of what is traditionally the most vile, hated spew of the fecund popular music world – country music."

While the general point is an interesting one, it lost all validity with the opening paragraph.

And, though I don't think this board is the place to bash particular people simply to bash them, it is a local music forum, so a good place to generate discussion on local music websites, etc. God knows the exciting and invigorating discussions have been fairly few and far between this winter…

May all get better soon, as I'm probably not long for the board. And I get to leave having agreed with Rhett and Celeste!

Just for comparison's sake:

Originally posted by Rhett Miller:
….

Most overrated album: Loretta Lynn-Van Lear Rose. This sounds like a Jack White country album with Loretta Lynn doing vocal chores. Which is fine if you like Jack White. Personally, I prefer the Emmylou Harris-Daniel Lanois and Willie Nelson-Daniel Lanois collaborations, as well as the seemingly more hands-off Rick Rubin approach to Johnny Cash.

Granted, it's not an official review but Sonick, Random, Redsock and others have already detailed most of my thoughts somewhere above especially the fact that these people are writing for the love of it and not as a profession. Christ, it's the internet! I'm not even paying for some print copy or an excessive amount of advertising that I'd have to wade through!

Personally, one of the reasons that I rarely read music reviews is because they bore me to death which is something I've stated here many times. Way too many of them are by people who have worked their way up the journalistic career ladder after paying lots of dues and have been molded by the old established ways. While there are a few good lessons to be learned there, they end up becoming cookie-cutter writers who do nothing but kiss corporate ass with the right words in the right ways at the expense of any real knowledge or insight into the music angle of their work.

Often the very best reviews, in my eyes, are those that get deeply involved in the music side of the craft but are a bit short on the standard methods of writing the same old boring review over and over again. Too many of them are like form letters with bands and outcomes keyed in. Some of the worst are the ones with all of the flowery words that try to overcompensate for a lack of ability to communicate any real information that a reader might need to have a clue what is being said so that by the time you've completed reading, you still don't know whether or not it's something that you would have any interest in buying or even listening to.

Rhett, I actually agree with the first part of your statement even though we have very different tastes in music. It just seemed that a little 'black kettle therapy' was needed. Word of advice, take some chocolate home with you. Lots of chocolate! ;)

Originally posted by Jaguär:
Word of advice, take some chocolate home with you. Lots of chocolate! ;)

lol!!! i herrrrr dat!!!!!

Funny, there's a similar thread happening on the Big Takeover's mailing list discussing Pitchfork.

Well…this is what I come home to!

I guess it's hard NOT to comment on all this.

I'm really finding it hard to see why Celeste is so upset. If the reviewer is so discredited, then why care? Why not just dismiss it as ignorant? I work in retail these days…and I like the things I sell. But everyday, someone comes in and looks at something I love and says "that's ugly." What an angry and unstable person I'd be if I had to rant and rave every time that happened. Another thing I don't understand is that the person has admitted to not liking or knowing country music. So a) why are you even paying attention to it as one who DOES like country music and b) why do you expect someone to afford the same reverence as you do? That's like asking a follower of Islam to praise Jesus Christ. You have to understand…some people are Muslim, Jewish, Wiccan, Atheist, Agnostic, Buddhist, Confucist,or Taoist
and they don't have the respect for Jesus as a Christian would. With so many other types of religion out there, why get upset at all of the people who don't praise Jesus? That's a lot of people to get upset at.

And I don't see how insulting their catchphrase and whatnot is adding to your argument. That just seems really petty.

I'm bringing copies of the Tao Te Ching for everyone to the Chrimmus party. HA!

Well anyways this was interesting, folks. Especially since I plan on going into journalism! Yowza.

PS. I was going to say something about Jesus but I'll refrain

Originally posted by Samantha:
You have to understand…some people are Muslim, Jewish, Wiccan, Atheist, Agnostic, Buddhist, Confucist,or Taoist and they don't have the respect for Jesus as a Christian would.

But, to stay with Celeste's point, would you want to read on a site about religious texts a 'review' of the Torah by the Wiccan, who's coming at it with a biased attitude (signaled by starting the review by describing Judaism as vile, fecund and all…) and isn't familiar with any of the context? If the Wiccan had deconstructed the Torah as an investigatory manner and looked at how it might play off of Wiccan lore, that could be interesting, but to start of ranting….

Originally posted by Bags:

Originally posted by Samantha:
You have to understand…some people are Muslim, Jewish, Wiccan, Atheist, Agnostic, Buddhist, Confucist,or Taoist and they don't have the respect for Jesus as a Christian would.

But, to stay with Celeste's point, would you want to read on a site about religious texts a 'review' of the Torah by the Wiccan, who's coming at it with a biased attitude (signaled by starting the review by describing Judaism as vile, fecund and all…) and isn't familiar with any of the context? If the Wiccan had deconstructed the Torah as an investigatory manner and looked at how it might play off of Wiccan lore, that could be interesting, but to start of ranting….

If it were a Wiccan site, I wouldn't be surprised. I also wouldn't be upset by it (if I were Jewish) because I know it came from someone who didn't have the same respect as I would have. A country fan would probably call some of my music "vile and fecund." But I would understand it to be their opinion and I certainly wouldn't be upset by it.
It seemed to me to be a tongue-in-cheek "rant." It just didn't seem like it was meant to be such an insult, more like a joke.

<img src="http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0SQDxAjEXKXRu4KE8Upu!I4Bwqa92JkAkpIkJj4!vbx83IPo6Hrim7q6iUuFeL2LxaMfv!gBf8Dv047tcuRSm1pHdsUjZsv0kUn5T9uTUVDFWNmtS1WsMGw/pregnant.jpg?dc=4675501988481707638" alt=" - " />

to clarify to you all "fecund" is not a pejorative term…it means "productive" or "fertile"

also, Samantha, I am not "so upset" and to Jag, I do not need chocolate

I was emphatically criticizing the reviews, and thus, the site (since they were allowed ON the site, hello is there an editor in the house?) in the same manner in which the reviews were written

I'm personally not upset by any of this, nor am I bothered by the reviewers' opinions of the CDs in terms of whether they like them or not (I personally think the Loretta Lynn album stinks, but I won't presume to know enough about it all to write something for public consumption for a website about it), it is the shoddy manner in which they were written and the complete lack of any indication of depth of knowledge that I was railing against here, and, if you all want BY to remain a private enclave and a hobby site, then, by all means continue in this vein, but if you want respectability, well, I've given my pointers…

the reason I posted on this board is to see if anyone agreed/disagreed and have a discussion about it, I don't really care to have a private conversation with the writer…that's no fun

Originally posted by Xmasie Markie:

Originally posted by Celeste:
I'm a Mrs.

Are you entirely sure about that?

&lt;img src="http://www.eco-action.org/smelly/images/smellyelse1.jpg" alt=" - " /&gt;

this needs updating, it must be from 2000 or early 01

You asked for it:

<img src="http://uk.geocities.com/littlemissmental/images/logos/LMM_txt.gif" alt=" - " />

Originally posted by Celeste:
to clarify to you all "fecund" is not a pejorative term…it means "productive" or "fertile"

also, Samantha, I am not "so upset" and to Jag, I do not need chocolate

are you still talking? jeez. maybe you need a ball gag or something. I bet Markie could help you out with that.