There are many trends in modern (and especially online) music reviewing that are unseemly and unhelpful, tendencies that I certainly found myself caught up in when I first started writing (re-reading some of the first things I had published makes me cringe). It's true that music is difficult to write about. Most elements of music don't translate well into words, and many times technical descriptions of composition have little meaning to the large number of music appreciators that haven't extensively studied theory (I'm looking at you and your jazz reviews, Thom Jurek). Perhaps even more important, the ways that music can make someone feel are often beyond articulation, and anyway are completely independent of the technical aspects of the music. It's one of the most complex, awe-inspiring examples of "the whole" being "great than the sum of its parts." With this in mind, one has to be forgiving when considering pieces of music criticism. But a lot of music reviewers really overdo it with metaphor. In extreme cases, the focus is completely shifted from finding the best way to describe the music to an interested reader to finding the most clever, creative metaphors, regardless of how germane they are to the musical content. This over-stretching applies to name-drops, as well. Though this problem pops up more in promotional material, a lot of writers draw the most tenuous parallels between artists, connections that, at their worst, can be completely baffling stretches well outside the realms of logic. And, with a bit of self-conscious irony, this last sentence exemplifies my final complaint, which is the hyperbole with which such shaky-metaphors and doubtful name-drops are presented. It's a wonderful thing to be excited about music, but it's not fair to build expectations unrealistically with hyperbolic praise and unfounded comparisons, just as it's unfair to exaggeratedly denigrate music that rubs you the wrong way. I guess the take-home point is: writing about music is supposed to be about the music, not the writing. It's about a musical artist's creation, not the creation of the album reviewer. It's about informing fans of music, not about showing them how many obscure, dubious references you can make. Purple prose is largely frowned upon in literature, and it has no place in music criticism, either.So it is with these points in mind that I officially kick things off. As for what's to be covered, genre specifics are difficult to pin down. One of the things I also grew to dislike about my time with DoA was having to review countless releases in genres I knew very little about or simply wasn't interested in. Here, I have the luxury of choosing what gets reviewed. Naturally, this means that there won't be much by way of "bad reviews." Perhaps "review" isn't even the right word. I'd like to focus on highlighting interesting and creative artists and albums, keeping things less about issuing a judgment and more about acknowledging novel ideas and spreading awareness of unique music.
Generally, I find improvisation to be vital to creative music, so a lot of what will be covered here will fit in various categories of jazz. Still, I try to keep an open mind about music, so there may be features on things in genres as varied as funk, modern classical composition, noise and drone improvisation, progressive and psychedelic rock, alt-country and indie rock, fringe metal genres, etc. The idea is to draw attention to novelty and creativity. There's more great music out there than any one person could ever hope to ingest, most of which is criminally robbed of the attention it deserves. I'd like to share a few things I've come to love over the years, as well as share the new things I'm enjoying as I discover them.
So welcome. As with all operations, it'll be modest to start. But poke around. Hopefully you'll find some things that you'll grow to love, too.
Photo by Bombardier
No comments:
Post a Comment