Why the Old-School Music Snob Is the Least Cool Kid on Twitter - NYTimes.comI can barely contain my disdain for this sort of thinking, because it has nothing to do with the nature of art and creativity, which is inherently rooted in communication, and everything to do with an individual’s neuroses, selfishness and obsession with petty social capital. The kind of thinking expressed by Alexandra Molotkow in this essay is toxic in its contempt for creativity, in part because it doesn’t really acknowledge that her sentiment is, in fact, anti-art. It’s a consumerist commodity-driven collector mentality that has nothing to do with the work of an artist reaching an audience in a profound way that isn’t entirely dependent on social context.
(via perpetua)
Commentary.
That was basically what I was going to say. However:
1. I think, in the archaic stereotypes about indie snobbery, people tended to mistake shyness and interiority for a kind of elitism. I went directly from listening to the radio to listening to weirder stuff on the radio to reading message boards and Pitchfork; I never stopped enjoying the music I’d been listening to with everyone else at school a year or two earlier. But there were very few people at my high school who were interested in taking that journey with me, which led to a natural sort of outsider status that went hand-in-hand with getting good grades and not playing water polo. I used to think there were two types of people, those who cared about music in the way I did, and those who didn’t — for that age, that may still be true. That was the first time I learned that loving something earnestly was a reason for people to mock you, though I cared too much to stop. The bigger, more real part of indie cred used to be being an unwanted other, a role most of us never asked for. There’s certainly much more cultural capital in persecuting kids who are different than being one yourself.
In college, the indie types I knew weren’t interested in music because it separated them. They were interested in it because it was challenging and smart and powerful. Listening to indie rock was cool in the way that liking something that other people you relate to always is; going to the Decemberists concert wasn’t about asserting credibility, it was about finding other people who might want to hang out with you. When the bands we loved began to get more popular, my sense of backlash didn’t come from the secret club getting bigger, but because it was suddenly overwhelmed by people who didn’t understand or relate to the art in the same way I felt I did.
I wouldn’t call it snobbery, any more than I’d say people who don’t know what an IPA is shouldn’t go to a beer bar. Of course they should. But they should bring a healthy sense of curiosity and respect instead of bringing their baffled sorority sisters and talking through the entire Twin Sister set. I was, and probably still am, snobby about what I like because I think it’s important to care about things! But there are more shades of grey and more general acceptance (“I’m not the audience” vs. “This sucks”) in my opinions these days.
The crucial part of High Fidelity is that Rob Gordon never says something sucks because it’s uncool. He says it sucks because he thinks it does. He doesn’t care what anybody else thinks. And I’m not sure why Alexandra Molotkow thinks he does — or should.
2. As far as cred goes, I also think that the new Liking The Most Obscure Music is Spending The Most Time On The Internet (or at least Knowing How To Use The Internet The Best), which warps perceptions and leads to self-inflicted tragedies like the entire Lana Del Rey album cycle. (And is also the reason for the divide between Tumblr emo kids and Pitchfork and/or radio-listening country kids and Pitchfork. Hip-hop, which loves the blogosphere and was quite possibly custom-designed for it, does just fine. But this is also because of complicated racial/Other/”cool” dynamics in addition to the plain fact that hip-hop is probably the most dynamic, charismatic genre happening right now.)
3. Pulling your dismissive, sweeping opinions about Pitchfork from N+1 could be the Urban Dictionary definition for irony, or at least the Urban Dictionary definition for “unfortunate.”
I am actually against this, at least in terms of music/film/television consumption: people should either be the content consumers they purport to be in their carefully maintained Facebook likes and Pinterest boards or they should take the opportunity to be brave and reject the damaging, cultural capital-driven conceptual frameworks of high/lowbrow and guilty pleasures.
I feel bad for anyone who unwittingly signed up for the Washington Post social reader, though.
This lyric, from Tennis’ “It All Feels the Same,” is a possible comment on Christianity: the next line alludes to original sin, while the chorus seems addressed to God. “When I say your name, I look for a change, but everywhere I go, it all feels the same.” The words are simple, but the sentiment, the doubting of faith, is a strong one.
I was struck by that first line just now more in terms of health/work-life balance (a subject on my mind constantly), but maybe there’s depth in this band yet.
(Musically, I really love this album. It is sweet and sentimental and quite pretty.)
Edit: “Take Me To Heaven,” too, is pretty flagrantly about Jesus: “If you’re only passing through/then take me to heaven with you/If all that you say is true/then take me to heaven with you.”
I really think sentences like this are doing irreparable harm to America’s youth (i.e., that the body is a toy to show off, as opposed to a temple; the tacit expectation that Beyonce must be Superwoman first, mom second, musician third if at all), though I suppose there are bigger feminism fish to fry right now.
***
No it’s all connected really. Because it reduces her to an object meant for being gawked at and pumping out babies. Horrible.
And definitely not someone who receives insurance-covered birth control.
The consensus seems to be that either it’s not as good as the debut, that the debut was never good in the first place (which I agree with) and that other bands are doing this sort of thing better. I’ve seen She & Him mentioned twice. But She & Him are doing a totally different thing, a pure homage to the ’50s with more of a rustic, Nashville quality, while Tennis’ new album is an update — it’s the ’50s through the edgier lens of the rock era, the Zombies and the Who. This all sort of has the air of avoiding a person at a party you had a crush on, but then things got weird and you’re trying to hook up with the host, anyway, which is how a lot of “criticism” feels these days.
It’s a very charming record, with much sharper songwriting than the debut. They sound like a band with something to say now, or at least the skill set to eloquently say a thing that still bears repeating. Give it a try.
pgwp:
As expounded upon in my post on Dr. Dog’s new album from earlier today, I think Dr. Dog are a great, underrated band that not enough people have given a fair shake. So with that in mind, I’ve made this Spotify mix as an introduction to the band.
(Alternatively, you could just start by listening to Fate in its entirety. It’s still the best entry point for the band.)
Thank you for this.
Re: Pitchfork, for whatever reason, the site has always seemed to have trouble with sensitive, Beatles-influenced indie-pop that doesn’t attempt to be “progressive” or carry some veneer/gimmick of otherness or, on the other end, Americana authenticity like Fleet Foxes. See their middling reviews of Sondre Lerche, Elliott Smith, Miles Kurosky, Ben Folds Five, anyone who’s ever worked with Jon Brion.
Two songs into Fate and I’m itching to switch to Beulah or Wilco, though, so there’s also that.
“It’s not that Chris Brown is categorically unforgivable. It’s more that he’s no longer an acceptable vehicle for corporations to use to sell products to young adults. On a human level, I’m more than willing to eventually forgive Chris Brown, once he seems genuinely remorseful and changed (which, at this point, he definitely does not). But there’s no obligation to continue supporting him as a pop star. Chris Brown would not exist without millions of dollars of production and marketing and styling and whatever else. He’s not some troubled genius that exists on his own, creating pop music in a corner. He’s just a handsome and fit guy who can dance and sing pretty well. There are plenty of other people who are more than capable of filling that role and who haven’t beat a woman into a state of unconsciousness. Why not give one of them a chance to be rich and famous instead?”
Related: why didn’t Usher premiere his spectacular new jam at the Grammys during the silly tribute to electronic music? (Because it already has 300,000+ plays and he didn’t need to because he knew it was that good?)
(Source: cordjefferson)
“Think of your typical folky, indie, female singer/songwriter. It probably sounds something like a mix of Sharon Van Etten, Regina Spektor, Feist, or something more extreme, like Joanna Newsom. Now, take away the raspiness, the bird-like voice, those little yelps and other vocal oddities, the quiet crooning, the rock edge. All that you’re left with is a raw, unadulterated, clear, powerful, and honest voice. In other words, you’re left with Laura Veirs.”—
I wasn’t going to say anything on this subject on a technicality that it doesn’t concern me, but on second thought I believe it does. I’m female and I’m a songwriter. Writing like this strips away all the individuality of these women, but it does so under the guise of a supposed compliment. The artists above have singular gifts, talents, and ambitions—and to toss them together like winking Bettys and Veronicas is a disserve to them all. What is a typical female singer/songwriter anyway? What is a typical woman?
I would love to see more writing where these musical “oddities” were not implied to be “female” qualities. Off the top of my head right now I can list as many men with a unique, singular quality in their voice and somehow at no point did this writer think to include them in the laundry list: (Bob Dylan, Randy Newman, Michael Jackson, Thom Yorke, Dave Longstreth, Neil Young, That Guy From Youth Lagoon etc.)
What’s sad is that this creates a Versus category, as though these women are somehow in competition with one another. Let’s take the few sporting women in the room, point out their flaws, and pit them against one another ‘til the best survives! The entire first half of this paragraph could have been cut to reveal that Laura Veirs has “a raw, unadulterated, clear, powerful and honest voice.” Now, that would have been a real compliment.
Real talk.
Before it even names names, “your typical folky, indie, female singer-songwriter” is about as condescending a sentence as you could write in what appears to be a positive couple of paragraphs. Each of these performers is anything but typical: they set the template for the imitators.
(Source: consequenceofsound.net)
Ava Luna have a superficial resemblance to Dirty Projectors - female backing singers, lots of suspended “ooooooh!” harmonies, soulful frontdude, squiggly percussion - but once the initial appearance wears off, they mostly sound like ’60s soul, Sly in particular, interpreted through a modern lens. The parts where the band forgot to play “indie rock signifiers” and just grooved were the best. If their singer looked more like James Blake (whose vocal equal, he very nearly is) and less like Nick Kroll, they’d be on the cover of Fader already.
There were squadrons of horrible TALKING PEOPLE positioned on both sides of the Echo and — at nearly 1 a.m., as Twin Sister tore through this just unbelievably perfect krautrock build-up — I had to stop myself from yelling at them to just go outside. [via the Cults.] Why would you pay money to come to a show for a really good band, stay till the end, and start babbling about your day? Have you never heard of bars? Do you hate coffee? Sigh.
I saw Charlyne Yi at the Brite Spot after the show and wanted to tell her that we’re Facebook friends (which we are) but it was 2 in the morning so I went home instead.
