Showing posts with label worst of. Show all posts
Showing posts with label worst of. Show all posts

Friday, October 8, 2010

How to read Pitchfork’s Corin Tucker review

Earlier this year, my colleague Jon Caramanica suggested that Pitchfork had entered its establishment phase: no longer a scrappy upstart with an outsider perspective, it now effectively defines tastes for its young demographic, and it knows that. By implication, Pitchfork now has a reputation to protect.

The same thing happened to Rolling Stone at some point — some people trace it to around the time it moved to New York in 1977, some a little later — when it became clear that it was no longer a “countercultural” publication, and it began to prop up a chosen pantheon by putting the same people on the cover again and again, the magazine reinforcing the stars and the stars reinforcing the magazine. That leads to a sort of eternal status quo, an attitude that extends to its famously cautious review section, where almost everything gets 3.5 stars and “legends” amazingly never make a bad album. The classic joke here is Bob Dylan, who gets 5 stars for a good album and 4 stars for a bad one.

Perhaps one sign of the aging of Pitchfork is that it has begun to coddle its heroes. It’s been around for 15 years now, and has had wide influence for 10, which means that right about now it is coming around to the sacred cows of the mid to late ’90s as they attempt their comebacks and await/enter/deny middle age. These are the figures who define the Pitchfork sensibility, and it’s only natural that the publication would protect them.

Today Pitchfork posted a review of “1,000 Years,” the first solo album by Corin Tucker of Sleater-Kinney. It got a 6.5, the Pitchfork equivalent of Rolling Stone’s 3.5 stars, and the piece is a textbook example of how to write a negative review in the nicest, most tentative and most indirect way possible, with all kinds of escape clauses to allow the writer to feel that she wrote a negative piece and the publication to feel that it still published a positive one. (I’m leaving out the byline; my problem is with the writing, not the writer, whom I don’t know at all.)

On a quick read it’s full of flattery, but looking closer the flattery is mostly about Sleater-Kinney, and the negative judgment of the album is dispatched as quickly as possible low in the piece. The blow of that negativity is softened by lots of foreshadowing, a cushion of nostalgia for Sleater-Kinney and friendly, almost sycophantic gestures toward Tucker. What this means is that 6.5 out of 10 was the lowest score Pitchfork was willing to give Tucker, even if she may have deserved less (I haven't heard the album so I have no opinion). After all, Tucker’s a star; she can do no wrong.

So here’s what goes on in the review, which I present line-by-line and complete:

Sleater-Kinney went on indefinite hiatus in 2006. Since then, drummer Janet Weiss released albums with Quasi and Stephen Malkmus' Jicks, while guitarist Carrie Brownstein embarked on a comedy career with Fred Armisen and became a music blogger for NPR. (The two women also recently announced a new project together, Wild Flag, alongside Mary Timony.) But Corin Tucker has been strangely quiet-- which is ironic given that she was the shrieking-banshee warbler of the group. Out of the spotlight, Tucker has spent the last four years attending to her family in Portland, Oregon-- she has two children with filmmaker Lance Bangs-- and, more recently, working on her own songs around her kids' school and playgroup schedules with a new eponymous band that includes former Unwound drummer Sara Lund and guitarist Seth Lorinczi of the Golden Bears.

Long, throat-clearing news lede; affirmation of Tucker's elite status and establishment of high expectations.

These new tracks, which now comprise 1,000 Years, are recognizably Tucker's, though they derive their intensity not from volatile guitars, driving rhythms, or brash vocal melodies, but from their surprisingly muted, slow-burning intimacy.

Foreshadowing of disappointment and failure, hedged by evocation of a lost golden age: No matter what Tucker comes up with, it couldn't possibly compare to the “volatile,” “driving,” “brash” riches back in those good old days.

So be forewarned, though: fans jonesing for a Sleater-Kinney fix will be disappointed.

Shifting of critical burden to “fans” whose “jonesing” functions as an arbitrary threshold giving critic and publication plausible deniability: “Hey, it’s the fans who have those expectations, not us.”

Instead of bursting into the expected shrieking choruses, these songs smolder. Melodies meander, encouraging patience in their listeners. Tucker uses her bold caterwaul sparingly, which is partially a shame since we are so starved for it, but also gives great weight to the few moments when she finally unfurls the full force of her yelp (as on "Riley", one of the few tracks that recalls Tucker's more incendiary Sleater-Kinney past).

Imagistic pseudo-poetics disguised as deconstruction; more nostalgia for Sleater-Kinney's old glory (“bold caterwaul”), which reinforces the prejudicial high bar; suggestion that Tucker is actually capable of providing that S-K “fix” that “fans” have been “jonesing for” — and thus if she doesn't, her endeavor is a failure.

Yet these songs have a quiet power of their own, and many surprise listeners by relying on gently finger-picked guitar lines or dreamy, sparse piano arrangements (as on the originally-made-for-Twilight: New Moon track "Miles Away" or the opening of the life-during-recession tale "Thrift Store Coats"). Without Weiss' fierce fills and Brownstein's fiery riffage, Tucker's tunes sound tame and downcast.

More critical peacocking and S-K remembrance; catalog of mild praise for Tucker, and foreshadowing that “without Weiss' fierce fills and Brownstein’s fiery riffage,” she ain’t shit.

Sometimes that restraint is lovely, as on "Half a World Away", a spare, staccato track about the difficulty of being separated from Bangs while he's traveling for work. That song is a bit of a fake-out for S-K fans, as it's built on a hiccupping vocal melody that recalls One Beat's "Combat Rock" in its verses, but fails to explode into a hollered chorus, which only makes its lyrical longing more palpable.

Yet more irrelevant, prejudicial "my favorite Sleater-Kinney moment" commentary, disguised as the faintest compliment for Tucker's album that the writer can muster.

But sometimes that restraint disappoints,

Here comes the dis

as on the wilting, acoustic "Dragon",

“Wilting” is bad

whose cutesy string pizzicatos

“Cutesy” is bad

only add to its overworked

“Overworked” is bad.

chamber-pop ambiance.

“Chamber-pop” in this context is a dis, implying a hard rocker who has gone soft.

The dis here is a quick barrage of specific negative judgments like one-two punches, which in terms of argument obliterate the wishy-washy praise that preceded it. These are the only concrete judgments in the entire review. But to protect the critic and the publication from the impression that they have bashed Tucker, whom they obviously love to pieces, those criticisms are immediately softened, and the argument that forms the basis of the piece — that Tucker's solo work does not compare to Sleater-Kinney — is withdrawn:

This album's strengths-- its intimacy, its containment, its subtlety-- are not the qualities that made Sleater-Kinney great, but it would be ungenerous to dismiss this because it's not as thrilling, confrontational, or exuberant.

“To be sure...”

Plus, 1,000 Years is clearly a personal collection-- it's hard to not hear songs like the aforementioned "Half a World Away" or the loneliness-tinged "It's Always Summer", with its lines about hotel bars and counting the days, as autobiographical tales of a marriage that is often plagued by work-related distance and separation.

“I mean, we still like you, Corin.”

And the comparably subdued nature of the album's music complements such lyrical confidences.

“And we think you are still capable of good stuff.”

So, if you are looking for catharsis via Sleater-Kinney, pull out your copy of Dig Me Out or The Woods,

“...which we gave a 9.0.”

but if you are interested in where Corin Tucker is now, 1,000 Years provides a thoughtful, subtle snapshot.

Polite dismissal, avoidance of critical summation, careful calculation not to burn bridges, and passing of buck to "you" fans, who will be disappointed by this thing that is not a Sleater-Kinney album, but is done by someone we still like a lot. World, meet Corin Tucker, solo artist.

Friday, August 27, 2010

Friday, April 2, 2010

The sad origins of ‘alternative rock’

Note the first cited example by the Oxford English Dictionary. Paging Jesse Sheidlower: somebody’s gotta right this wrong, because we built this city on far, far better things.


* alternative rock n. orig. U.S. rock music characterized by an unorthodox or uncommercialized style or approach, esp. as distributed by an independent record label.

[1981 Washington Post C11/3 Jefferson Starship is an alternative rock group. That is, they give an audience a taster's choice of stances{em}the psychedelic origins, the sci-fi middle ground and the metallic dead end.] 1986 Los Angeles Times 19 Jan. (Calendar) 74 Listeners..loyally supported the Long Beach-based station's eclectic, *alternative-rock play list. 2000 C. H. HANSEN & R. D. HANSEN in D. Zillmann et al. Media Entertainm. x. 181 They grouped the videos into eight types of music (rap, soul, country, heavy metal, pop, classic rock, alternative rock, and other).

Friday, February 12, 2010

The sole 99¢ song on iTunes’ list of its 20 best-ever sellers


The outstanding question: Is its price an implicit admission that the song is 23 percent worse than all the others?

Thursday, January 7, 2010

Best of 2009

For fun, and for explanatory exhaustion, I’m keeping my blurbs to four words apiece:

1. Wye Oak, The Knot. Brave hurricane of feeling.
2. Dirty Projectors, Bitte Orca. Decade’s boldest indie vision.
3. Fool’s Gold. Hot, culturally malleable Afroism.
4. Bat for Lashes, Two Suns. Arty eye, amorous heart.
5. Amadou et Mariam, Welcome to Mali. Cosmopolitan Bamako blues, smiling.
6. Grizzly Bear, Veckatimest. Harmony dreams, almost vertigo.
7. Micachu and the Shapes, Jewellery. Re-sculpted rubbish. Rauschenberg? Punk.
8. Jason Lytle, Yours Truly, the Commuter. Outsider’s diary, finally outside.
9. The Almighty Defenders. Delicious degeneracy. (Sorry, Sam!)
10. Antony and the Johnsons, The Crying Light. Pastoralism eulogized pastorally, eerliy.

Also recommended:

Neko Case, Middle Cyclone
Cryptacize, Mythomania
Cymbals Eat Guitars, Why There Are Mountains
Dinosaur Jr., Farm
Florence and the Machine, Lungs
Girls, Album
The Pains of Being Pure at Heart
Phoenix, Wolfgang Amadeus Pheonix
Regina Spektor, Far
The Very Best, Warm Heart of Africa
Vivian Girls, Everything Goes Wrong
M. Ward, Hold Time
Wilco, Wilco (The Album)

Worst album of 2009 (tie):

Ray Davies, The Kinks Choral Collection
Decemberists, The Hazards of Love

Thursday, September 3, 2009

“Fame ’90” addenda

The Angels

It’s been a while since I last updated the “Fame ’90” 90, my list of date-flagged song updates by singers unashamed of self-exploitation.

I’d like to say it’s because I was so thorough the first time around — ’cause I was — but the truth is that until somebody creates a Wikipedia list for these things or I have a really, really clever eureka about search terms (song + title + new + year + suck?), it’s hard to find them. So here are the ones I’ve stumbled upon recently.

C’mon and help expand the list. You know that somewhere under your bed or behind the bookcase is a dusty CD with “Shout at the Devil ’97” or “Rhythm Is a Dancer ’96.”

Special award to Sergio Mendes for the consistent updates of his band: Brasil ’65, Brasil ’66, Brasil ’77, Brasil ’86, Brasil ’88, Brasil ’99.

Here’s “My Boyfriend’s Back ’08”:


Photobucket

Wednesday, September 2, 2009

Oh dear God

Stereogum has the story on this horror:

‘UNLOCKED KURT COBAIN SINGS BON JOVI IN GUITAR HERO 5’



UPDATE, where credit is due: Looks like Rolling Stone had this earlier, crediting Agent M Loves Tacos.

Tuesday, September 1, 2009

Oh dear

Photobucket

Snapped on Ludlow Street earlier this evening:

In their short time together, The Pixies managed to invent a musical style all to their own, that went on to influence an entire generation of rock music. The Death to The Pixies Sk8-Hi honors the legendary band by bearing a graphic from their earliest poster and T-Shirt art, depicting lead man, Black Francis, showing the thumbs-down salute. There’s no better backdrop than the Vans model that influenced a generation of high top skate shoe, the Sk8-Hi.

They’re $65.

Monday, June 22, 2009

Bad cover alert: ‘Crazy Train,’ G.I. Joe style


What’s a big-budget action movie without a snotty, anonymous, corporate-rock-still-sucks punk/metal/NIN-ish cover of a classic rock song or TV theme? You had My Chemical Romance doing “Desolation Row” for Watchmen, MxPx playing the Scooby Doo theme, Green Day defacing the Simpsons theme, and zillions more that I can’t remember just now. (Can you think of any good ones? I would love to get a list going.)

Here’s the first contribution of summer 2009 that I’ve noticed so far: In the background of this new trailer for G.I. Joe (above), you can hear CTRL-ALT-suck being applied to Ozzy’s “Crazy Train.” It starts at about 0:30. No soundtrack that I can find yet, so I guess we’ll have to wait to find out whether Disturbed, Papa Roach or Trapt did this one.

Friday, March 13, 2009

Who watches ‘The Watchman’?

At this point I’ve read reviews I don’t agree with, reviews I do agree with, and others that have struck me as condescending or dismissive. But none have mystified me quite like this piece by one Brooke-Sidney Gavins. It’s in the otherwise solid Pop + Politics, which was founded and is edited by legit journalists.

Where to begin? How about the lede:

It’s really bad when the state of humanity hinges on a bunch of pseudo-sadomasochists parading around as costumed heroes who haphazardly decide to save the world for mere kicks and giggles. This is the twisted sense of humor and entire point of the mystery adventure The Watchman.

Ignoring for the moment the error in the title, is this really what the film is about? Do “pseudo-sadomasochists” (?) decide to save the world “for mere kicks and giggles,” and “haphazardly” at that? Most critics have figured out that the story is about Batman-style crime-fighters who, adrift and powerless in the real world, discover “the futility of heroism,” as one writer put it.

But I know how Gavins feels. I once saw a film that, despite a very long and labored build-up, turned out to be all about a guy’s sled. Talk about a “twisted sense of humor”!

Like her I was disappointed by some aspects of the film, such as the lack of depth in characters like “Oxymandias,” and its failure to convincingly portray the anxiety of a society on the brink of nuclear war. The movie is also very violent. Some have said excessively so, although I believe there’s a worthy debate to be had here, since in its time the comic was seen as shockingly gruesome. I learn from this review, however, that such a debate would be moot: “The violence depicted in scene after scene was extremely bloody, gross and overdone — enough to make a grown man cover his eyes.” 

The sex scenes have also been called out as fetishistic. I agree with that complaint, although I’m not sure Gavins exactly zeroes in on the problem by saying that these sequences “weren’t worth actress Malin Akerman even baring her breast.” Butt, maybe. Breast? No — Malin Akerman, you have gone too far.

But these are mere details. Surely we can agree that the movie has something to do with the idea of superheroes, and what it says about our society that we fantasize about salvation by these gods in Halloween costumes. Gavins illuminates:

Aren’t most superheroes like Superman concerned with unnecessary violence and killing people? Don’t most champions of justice risk their lives to save others and humanity? And don’t all superheroes have a special power or two that us mere mortals could only dream of?

On these accounts, viewers could legitimately question whether the movie had any bonafide superheroes at all.

Here’s the thing, Brooke-Sidney Gavins: The movie is about people who dress up like superheroes but have no special powers. They learn the limits of their humanity in painful ways: they are condemned by the society they strive to protect; their vigilante personas infect them to the point where they are sexually impotent without the costumes; and despite their excitement about getting back into the crime-solving trade, they can’t stop the deaths of millions of innocent people.

Let’s be fair to Gavins: it’s a complex movie, with a lot of big ideas in it. And how can you expect this Huffington Post contributor to piece it all together when she hasn’t bothered to look up the title, or even look beyond the press kit to find out who actually wrote it? (“... based on DC Comics’ award-winning, limited series graphic novel illustrated by Dave Gibbons.”) Given, that, I understand how she missed these rather important plot points, and also why it left her no time to spell-check. But at least Gavins got the “main theme”:

Thus, the only characteristic Watchmen smiley face this movie deserves is one that is turned completely upside-down and covered with the blood of its own fake super heroes. Like the main theme of The Watchmen: “Life’s a joke,” clearly this movie was too.

Or at least the review.

Saturday, March 7, 2009

Enjoy ‘Watchmen’? Try Goo Goo Dolls!

What do fans of Watchmen and the Goo Goo Dolls have in common?

I have no idea, but apparently Warner Brothers thinks there must be something there, because the page for this YouTube video — just one digital drop in the movie’s enormous Internet promo flood over the last couple of weeks — includes nothing but Goo Goo Dolls links in the “related videos” section. (Seriously, every single link is for the Goo Goo Dolls.)

And they’re not even on the soundtrack.

Photobucket

What’s up, Warner Brothers?

Friday, February 27, 2009

Update to ‘Jai Ho’ remake

The Wall Street Journal has a piece today about the Pussycat Dolls’ remix of Slumdog Millionaire's “Jai Ho,” which I posted about yesterday.

Remember those awful lyrics? Here's what Ron Fair, the A&R man with the golden touch (PCD, BEP, Xtina, etc.), has to say about them:

Mr. Fair enlisted several lyricists to create English lyrics that satisfied competing goals. “The challenge was not to make it too literal, too uncool,” he says. “We were trying to make something that would appeal to contemporary music fans, yet still be true to the story of the film.”

Oh come on.

Granted, “You are the reason that I breathe/You are the reason that I still believe/You are my destiny” is vague enough to suit pretty much any romantic film ever made. But how do “When you touch my body/I’ll make you hot" and “This beat is heavy, so heavy/You gonna feel it” remain “true to the story of the film”?

Admit it — it’s a skanked-up remake that borrows the hook and nothing else. And there’s nothing wrong with that, in theory. In practice? It’s no “Don’t Cha.”

Thursday, February 26, 2009

‘Jai’ hos

Photobucket

Larry Rosin at Edison Media Research took note of the skanky and extremely lame lyrics in the Pussycat Dolls’ remix/remake of “Jai Ho,” A.R. Rahman’s Oscar-winning song from Slumdog Millionaire:

In an attempt to make the song more palatable for American audiences, it has been re-created with the Pussycat Dolls replacing the original singers.

Let’s take a look at the original lyrics translated from Hindi:
Jai Ho! (Victory to thee!)
Come, come my Life, under the canopy
Come under the blue brocade sky!

Iota by iota, I have lost my life, in faith
I’ve passed this night dancing on coals
I blew away the sleep that was in my eyes
I counted the stars till my finger burned

Come, come my Life, under the canopy
Come under the blue brocade sky!
And now, the Pussycat Dolls lyrics for American consumption:
I got (I got) shivers (shivers),
When you touch my body,
I’ll make you hot,
Get what you got,
I’ll make you wanna say (Jai Ho)

I got (I got) fever (fever),
Running like a fire,
For you I will go all the way,
I wanna take you higher (Jai Ho)

I keep it steady uh-steady,
That’s how I do it.
This beat is heavy, so heavy,
You gonna feel it.

You are the reason that I breathe,
You are the reason that I still believe,
You are my destiny

“I wanna take you higher”? Seriously, Nicole, is that the best you could do?


Wednesday, February 18, 2009

The return of ‘Nookie,’ and other signs of apocalypse

Photobucket

Chris Weingarten has a good post at Rolling Stone today headlined with a question few dare ask: “Is the Rock World Ready for the Return of Limp Bizkit?”

As a good journalist, he lays out the evidence and talks to the experts about the Bizkit’s imminent return:

It’s no industry secret that the landscape has changed in the eight years since this lineup was actively touring and releasing records. Heavy music comes with eyeliner instead of fitted caps, rap-rock bands like Linkin Park have traded beats for ballads, and Fred Durst is best remembered for his macho posturing and public tantrums instead of a lasting music legacy. So will a reanimated Limp Bizkit work in the year 2009?

[...]

“We played all Limp Bizkit,” says Danni, assistant program director and music director for New York active rock station 92.3 KRock. “We had huge ratings. It was all about Limp Bizkit. And then there was sort of a shift and people stopped caring and stopped wanting to hear about the angry side of things. Nowadays, with people losing their jobs right and left, I feel like it’s more of a banding together. Even the stuff from the ’90s, like some of the Pearl Jam stuff, that angst-ridden stuff, just doesn’t really work as much… I think there’s more of a positive spin on things with the new president and people trying to be positive about the economy.”

Danni lost me somewhere in there, but his sincerity is touching. There are more choice quotes throughout, leading up to this closing thought, again from Danni:

“I liken them to Creed in a way because people want to hate them, but they don’t. They don’t really hate them. Everybody owns those albums, everybody loves ‘Nookie.’ If they go out and tour, as long as their ticket prices are reasonable, I think they’ll be fully welcomed back.”

I’m going to have to go ahead and disagree with you there, Danni, on several points. Not everyone owns those albums, nor loves “Nookie.” I also think people succeed in their desire to hate Limp Bizkit, and the kitsch cycle hasn’t yet come around. In addition, even if their ticket prices are reasonable, I think they may face many, many obstacles to success.

‘The End Is Truly F@#$ing Nigh’

Photobucket

Topless Robot reports on what it calls the official Watchmen condom:

For when you want your penis to look like Dr. Manhattan's little blue Gibbons-drawn nub. It's also the only condom that lets you metaphorically fuck Alan Moore while you're literally fucking your loved one!

Anyone got confirmation that this is indeed official merch?