The best piece of rock criticism of the last ten years.

[RandomKoolzip]

I originally read this article, "A No Wave Guide to ELP," in a local zine in New Orleans in 1996. It blew me away then, and still makes me laugh and shake my head in amazement. This is the sort of stuff we should be seeing in Rolling Stone:

"This is No Wave Music. (As are their arbitrary robot sounds.) They have no real concept apart from attacking the piano. And then there's no music either. Just dynamics."


http://www.blastitude.com/14/pg9.htm

It's since been reprinted dozens of times in many many other zines and online sites, and it's worth a read for rock obsessives and fellow music writers.

[GOPisEvil]

1. A book called "Kill Your Idols"

Rock critics take apart some of the classics. I recommend this book because it makes you re-examine WHY you like these classics. (Also, my friend's fiancee wrote a piece for it.)

[RandomKoolzip]

3. Huh. We have differing opinions on that book....

For one thing, I'm not a fan of Jim DeRogatis. I think his Lester Bangs treatise was anmeic at best, and his snickeringly anti-indie stance (while simultaneously enshrining those lame-ass major-label "prestige" acts like Smashing Pumpkins or Radiohead) pisses me off. He's like the new, fat Anthony DeCurtis.

And the whole premise of the book is soooo out of date. I mean, those people who had been payin' attention for years have been knocking classics off their pedestals; so what? Woah, you mean "Sgt. Pepper" ISN'T the greatest album of all time?!? GASP!


If they had any balls, they'd be taking on Radiohead and Death Cab for Cutie and the White Stripes and Sigur Ros, not the same old easy-target whipping boys like the Stones and the Pistols. In fact, to me the time feels right for a new appreciation of the classics, since they've been kicked around for so long.

What's the name of the friend's fiancee?

[GOPisEvil]

4. She wrote the Patti Smith piece.

Caught holy hell from some folks, too.

Well, there are a lot of rock critics that wax poetic on the classics as though they are from the bible. Sometimes it's good to hear the other side of the coin.

[RandomKoolzip]

5. That's true.

And many times it's warranted. I've never felt that Springsteen belongs in the canon. Thus, I never read anything Dave Marsh has written in the last fifteen years or so (in Joe Carducci's words, he's become the "bitter old trivia expert" of Rock and Roll) because of his continuing boosterism of the Boss.

And that piece in the book about the Pistols is just horrible. Come on, if "Never Mind the Bollocks" doesn't rock your ass, you're just overanalyzing the music and not letting its visceral punch coldclock you like it should.

[GOPisEvil]

6. True...I disagreed with the point of view of several authors, but...

...in dissecting their arguments, you come to appreciate the albums.

Ohhhh...you can check out Melanie's work at www.austinchronicle.com I think she's writing the TCB column now.

If she starts getting freeper mail, she's going to kill me.

[RandomKoolzip]

7. That's also true.

Reading that book and realizing that I TOTALLY disagreed with the authors made me want to go back and listen to the album again!


Maybe we oughta get this thread locked so that that addy disappears......


(God, I wish I could go back to making a living off of my writing....)

[flamingyouth]

2. This is older than that, but I always loved this one

Michael Jackson: Bad

Yes.

(end of review)