Reading this weekends’ Spectrum supplement of the Saturday Sydney Morning Herald, I was struck by the seemingly erroneous juxtaposition of Ruth Ritchie’s delightful musings upon her love of the television show which has not only captured the hearts of all, but also single-handedly revived the cravat as accessory du jour, Masterchef, against John Harris’ essay investigating the progression and place of music journalism.
Ritchie begins her piece by stating “Fans don’t make good critics”, finishing with the assertion that as fans we “simply love too deeply, too blindly, too boringly to be true…(and hence it is a) good thing so few fans type”.
Conversely, Harris contends that as accessibility to music has shifted from communal experiences of the latest Stones LP to late night downloads and ipod playlists “liberated from context”, the style of musical journalism has similarly changed. Gone are the Almost Famous experiences of the journalist living the experience and context of production, replaced by bit-part reviews to satisfy puff box requirements. In this way, the ‘writerly flourishes of yesteryear” have been lost, replaced by market awareness, record company contractual relationship awareness and branding.
In this sense, it seems the passion has largely disappeared from music writing. Is Ruth Ritchie in this case wrong? Is there a place for fans as critics and reporters?
Much has been written of the symbiotic relationship between emerging artists and forums which engage fans in new media. Despite its death as the choice of social networks, Myspace remains an integral and respected method by which both new and established artists can publish works, communicate directly with fans and other musicians, and most importantly, manage their own image with the pages often serving as first point of contact.
Similarly, Twitter has recently become a focus of commercial entities as a means of freely advertising and informing of happenings within the music industry. Locally, record label Ivy League Records has wholeheartedly embraced the concept of the ‘tweet’ update of the activities of their artists, most notably Red Riders, whose recently released album Drown In Colour has benefited significantly from a ground level buzz campaign.
Both of these forums provide a means where fans and music enthusiasts can directly interact with musicians in live time, and this in turn facilitates a community of sharing whereby social networking tools become mediums for review. Album releases, gigs and any artist activity is the subject of appraisal by those most acutely aware of the position the group occupies within the musical sphere.
Contrast this with a comment made by the oft-mentioned Jack Ladder, who criticised the tendency of professional music journalists to attempt to too easily typecast and categorise musicians. In doing so, the writer allows the reader to instantly identify, and henceforth subjectify the music emerging to personal critique within this framework.
Ladder bemoaned this lazy journalism as tantamount to misrepresentation, citing the comparisons made of him as example. Often described as a reimagining of Nick Cave, Ladder sees such a supposed resemblance as a disservice to both Cave and himself which serves only to leave potential fans dissatisfied. Compare this instead to the no doubt well-meaning, intensely passionate however somewhat derivative praise given by one fan for new single The Barber’s Son: “Jack Ladder could make reading the phonebook sound sexual.”
You won’t find passion like that in the pages of Sydney Morning Herald.
Similarly, music editors are quick to latch onto the latest perceived ‘hot thing’ which results in disproportionate coverage of certain artists to the detriment of others. In a listener-driven forum, there is a democratisation of participation. Most recent case in point: the onslaught of media attention devoted to Melbourne band The Temper Trap. The band is undoubtedly highly skilled, and I am admittedly a fan having seen them in their final show before leaving for London and SXSW. However since their inclusion in the BBC list of 2009 bands to watch list, the group have been lauded across every media channel imaginable despite having only released initial single Sweet Disposition at the time. Similarly, recently released Grizzly Bear album Veckatimist has been feted as the must have album of the year. Whilst brilliant, immediately and so blindly placing a work on a pedestal just because every other outlet is doing the same reeks of journalistic apathy.
The major difference which separates the fan from the professional is distance. Distance in two senses: namely distance from the music, and distance from the artist.
Distance from music in that the fan has actively sought out, (somewhat) independently appraised and chosen to include the music within their personal rotation. As Lester Bangs states, “You got to get beneath the surface: If these people turned up on your doorstep, would you invite them in? And if not, why are you listening to their music?”.
The fan makes a personal, long standing commitment to the sound as a partial reflection of their identity. The journalist reviews in order to tick off their to-do list of tasks to qualify for salary. Whilst enjoyment may occur, it is secondary to the professional demand.
Distance from the artist is seen in terms of accessibility. The artist is (and in some ways, should be) physically distant from the fan. The professional has access in an interview capacity, able to directly question and understand motivations.
This is inherently advantageous, as the average writer is left to pick up quotes and fact scraps from professional writing (as clearly evident here!).
Is there a solution? Possibly not… and I have neither the energy nor wordspace to ponder one. This is nearly 1000 words of pondering… quite enough for one day… now off to pad it out with pretty pictures.
Ritchie begins her piece by stating “Fans don’t make good critics”, finishing with the assertion that as fans we “simply love too deeply, too blindly, too boringly to be true…(and hence it is a) good thing so few fans type”.
Conversely, Harris contends that as accessibility to music has shifted from communal experiences of the latest Stones LP to late night downloads and ipod playlists “liberated from context”, the style of musical journalism has similarly changed. Gone are the Almost Famous experiences of the journalist living the experience and context of production, replaced by bit-part reviews to satisfy puff box requirements. In this way, the ‘writerly flourishes of yesteryear” have been lost, replaced by market awareness, record company contractual relationship awareness and branding.
In this sense, it seems the passion has largely disappeared from music writing. Is Ruth Ritchie in this case wrong? Is there a place for fans as critics and reporters?
Much has been written of the symbiotic relationship between emerging artists and forums which engage fans in new media. Despite its death as the choice of social networks, Myspace remains an integral and respected method by which both new and established artists can publish works, communicate directly with fans and other musicians, and most importantly, manage their own image with the pages often serving as first point of contact.
Similarly, Twitter has recently become a focus of commercial entities as a means of freely advertising and informing of happenings within the music industry. Locally, record label Ivy League Records has wholeheartedly embraced the concept of the ‘tweet’ update of the activities of their artists, most notably Red Riders, whose recently released album Drown In Colour has benefited significantly from a ground level buzz campaign.
Both of these forums provide a means where fans and music enthusiasts can directly interact with musicians in live time, and this in turn facilitates a community of sharing whereby social networking tools become mediums for review. Album releases, gigs and any artist activity is the subject of appraisal by those most acutely aware of the position the group occupies within the musical sphere.
Contrast this with a comment made by the oft-mentioned Jack Ladder, who criticised the tendency of professional music journalists to attempt to too easily typecast and categorise musicians. In doing so, the writer allows the reader to instantly identify, and henceforth subjectify the music emerging to personal critique within this framework.
Ladder bemoaned this lazy journalism as tantamount to misrepresentation, citing the comparisons made of him as example. Often described as a reimagining of Nick Cave, Ladder sees such a supposed resemblance as a disservice to both Cave and himself which serves only to leave potential fans dissatisfied. Compare this instead to the no doubt well-meaning, intensely passionate however somewhat derivative praise given by one fan for new single The Barber’s Son: “Jack Ladder could make reading the phonebook sound sexual.”
You won’t find passion like that in the pages of Sydney Morning Herald.
Similarly, music editors are quick to latch onto the latest perceived ‘hot thing’ which results in disproportionate coverage of certain artists to the detriment of others. In a listener-driven forum, there is a democratisation of participation. Most recent case in point: the onslaught of media attention devoted to Melbourne band The Temper Trap. The band is undoubtedly highly skilled, and I am admittedly a fan having seen them in their final show before leaving for London and SXSW. However since their inclusion in the BBC list of 2009 bands to watch list, the group have been lauded across every media channel imaginable despite having only released initial single Sweet Disposition at the time. Similarly, recently released Grizzly Bear album Veckatimist has been feted as the must have album of the year. Whilst brilliant, immediately and so blindly placing a work on a pedestal just because every other outlet is doing the same reeks of journalistic apathy.
The major difference which separates the fan from the professional is distance. Distance in two senses: namely distance from the music, and distance from the artist.
Distance from music in that the fan has actively sought out, (somewhat) independently appraised and chosen to include the music within their personal rotation. As Lester Bangs states, “You got to get beneath the surface: If these people turned up on your doorstep, would you invite them in? And if not, why are you listening to their music?”.
The fan makes a personal, long standing commitment to the sound as a partial reflection of their identity. The journalist reviews in order to tick off their to-do list of tasks to qualify for salary. Whilst enjoyment may occur, it is secondary to the professional demand.
Distance from the artist is seen in terms of accessibility. The artist is (and in some ways, should be) physically distant from the fan. The professional has access in an interview capacity, able to directly question and understand motivations.
This is inherently advantageous, as the average writer is left to pick up quotes and fact scraps from professional writing (as clearly evident here!).
Is there a solution? Possibly not… and I have neither the energy nor wordspace to ponder one. This is nearly 1000 words of pondering… quite enough for one day… now off to pad it out with pretty pictures.
Nice Blog I have Subscribed !
ReplyDeleteThanks !