banging your head against the wall

I also feel ultimately for every "wow well done" there's 100 "fuck you"s.

fuck the 'fuck you's'

I have it easy, ppl generally agree with me

Fuck you. Oh wait.

Damn it, Ronan, you got exactly what I'm going through (except without all the references to living in Ireland and such).

That, and the world-o-pop has been DEADLY BORING lately. Somebody get shot or something!

(OK, that was callous, sorry)

I would not bang my head against the wall over something as trivial as electricity and digits.

Go give a flower to a girl on the street instead.

See how she reacts.

Then, you may feel like banging your head against the wall.

But I would not recommend it.

Thing is Nate I am as into the music as ever, I just am beginning to lose my motivation, I think I'm going to have to make a much bigger effort to do some radio work or at least try and write some non music stuff.

buy a 909!

Who is Louis Walsh and why does that comment in particular send you into a towering rage?

I write very little in this day and age but when I did I always attempted to bear in mind who I was writing FOR (a straw-man, incidentally, although I did have specific people in mind as well), rather than trying to write for everyone. I think part of the reason that, say, Tom Ewing, writes the way he does nowadays is because he is completely aware of his audience (us lot, for the most part) and that gives him a lot of freedom which probably doesn't exist in the same way outside interweb ghetto land. But if you're trying to speak to everyone, as your post implies, you're bound to be disappointed when you're met with indifference.

Listen to the fuck you's. If you're getting 100 fuck you's you must be doing something right. Fundamentally writing about pop music isn't very important. But writing about politcis is equally as pointless (if for a point we are looking at changing the world). And even politicians would admit that the world changing aspect of their job is one percent at best.

Do you feel this way because you feel powerless? If that's the case that is okay, you are powerless. The written word has as much power as the reader invests in it. And most people are reading withoiut a critical eye at the piece of writing in situ, but for information. Writing for yourself is the only honest way of keeping yourself happy, cashing the paychecks is an honest way of saying you are valued by your peers (ie you can write good). And being disillusioned and writing about that every now and then is a no less interesting piece of writing.

Louis Walsh is the svengali behind Boyzone i believe, he was a judge on Popstars: The Rivals

murderer of pop music? possibly, who else has he been behind though? any good tunes? i figure what Ronan meant is that writing an article about Louis Walsh at all is/should be irrelevant because people like him would rather see the Irish Times art section run a lead story on Medicine 8 or something/someone deemed fresher and more exciting...i assume its not because the article was critical of Walsh as such, other than this is such an obvious target thus lazy journalism.

When I write about stuff on NYLPM, it's a case of:

1) I think people would like this song if they heard it.
2) People probably hate this song, but haha, I like it.
3) I think this piece is funny (others might not).

I'll never be a pro-writer.

Louis Walsh = Girls Aloud = genius.

''What, quite simply, is the point?''
why not?

''Also does anyone else get this affected by articles etc you disagree with?''

it depends on the subject and how the writer treats it.

It's not so much I'm doubting my ability Matt, though I do feel I've become stuck on the same few themes and ideas a bit, I think when I've written for FT or even the College Paper the response has been good, I mean, I can do it, I just have lost sight of the point. I feel powerless yeah and it is a matter of wanting to change things, it's not as though I think I can, I just am wondering if I can operate knowing that I can't. I think I want to reach the biggest audience possible, which is kind of the crux. Print may not be the way to do this.

The Louis Walsh example is just one, it's the kind of "this is real music thank god" stuff. It seems to be everywhere, and it's made me wonder is the ILM or maybe the old ILM mentality kind of a minority one.

I think my problem is I am overly annoyed by these little things, sidetracked, and thus am beginning to wonder would I be better off with some new approach.

Write about Justin Timberlake. The kids love him.

(I mean this)

i think there is something about 'speaking to the masses' that you are trying to achieve, and i just dont think thats possible anymore

I agree, I think buying a 909 or something is probably as good an idea as any.

As an aside, and generalising wildly here, I think even the old FT/ILM of 2001 or therabouts would have been pretty anti-Boyzone, PopIdol, Westlife, whoever (as proven by science in successive Focus Groups).

You seem to be more bothered by indifference than outright hostility it seems (as Pete says, the fuck you's mean you must at least be provoking a response). But I don't really care about reading film reviews, nor do I usually take them into account in the slightest when choosing what to go and see, so by the same token I feel a bit guilty about my annoyance when people don't share my interest or excitement over the forthcoming LFO album.

Any chance of a link to the article in question?

I think the ILM mentality is a minority because it has not yet been crytsalised into a wholly workable aesthetic. But never fear, soon the Geezaesthetic manifesto will be here to rescue you from doubt.

(Ronan, as a good exercise though, why not write in character? I find it quite liberating sometimes - not in a patronising way but to try and champion a viewpoint which is not my own without become too devils advocatish about it. It also helps you look at the quality of writing separate from the ideas you are trying to promote).

I think you can still speak to the masses, but the masses aren't what you might think they are (ie they are a bunch of individuals with different views who don't have one big mouthpiece.) Or would you rather speak for the masses?

I also have a sneaking suspicion (having seen a load of geezers nodding along to Craig David, and a room full of indie kids dancing to Justin Timberlake in the last few days) that the "it's not real music!" viewpoint isn't quite as widespread as we think it is - certainly I don't think it's proportional to the amount of airing it gets in the media or on ILM.

"real music" is just like this horrible hangover from the nineties.

Hmmmmm yeah I'll try and find the article now, maybe people will think it's fine, personally I just really hate the "fuck Louis Walsh, he is killing our soulful rock music" crap and it's very prevalent in Ireland, the article is very tired. Actually it seems you need to have premium membership to the Times site or something. It also had a massive picture Wild West style of Walsh with bars in front of his head.

I feel this kind of stuff is just negative and that I've got bogged down on thinking the messages contained are illogical and poorly thought out to the point where I don't care how it's written. I've also got bogged down with disagreeing with these things.

The character idea might not be a bad one. I think my problem is that, when I think about maybe writing something for the College Paper, I feel as though I have to start from some point X, X being where the audience does not have any idea of so many things my usual audiences might take for granted. I also feel that when the likelihood is the article below mine will be something about how MTV is killing music or whatever that it's a bit of a waste of time. I can't compete with what's fashionable. It's not that I'm blaming the world for this or anything, it's also a failure on my part to be able to communicate the ideas I want to in an interesting way.

Also writign a point - counterpoint type piece for the paper against an article they have had submitted shows the debate in full flow (problem with the Louis Wlash one is that it isn't presented wholly as opinion - its soft rabble rousing).

Take a stand. Explain how Louis Walsh has actually saved Irish pop muisc from its trad, heavy reliance on rock with constituted the main export of the country. Are kids in bands now as worried about the heritage of Irish music, are they looking further afield for inspiration? Are Boyzone and Westlife a useful buffer between the past of Irish RAWK and a bright future?

It's not even that difficult an argument, she leads with that picture and then goes on to say how pop is dying and dynamic interesting artists like Coldplay, Nelly Furtado, and Miss Dynamite are an example of this. Who obviously write their own songs etc. I just can't believe a newspaper prints this blatant attempt to disguise a personal opinion as a doom theory, it's bleak.

Like, I mean that her point was about Irish and British pop music, pop music in general, and it finished with "wake up mr walsh" or something equally tired and infuriating.

(this is a thing which may not be around alot in Britain but rest assured in Ireland Louis Walsh hate is just fucking everywhere hence my annoyance)

Write her an e-mail directly. Shame her, she's just a lazy old journo, you're the young pup.

If Louis Walsh hate is everywhere then it is your duty to show what a force for good he has been & how irrelevant he is and that the only thing killing music is poeople saying it is dead (and home taping obv.)

That is probably what to do, I think my doubt is that it's actually worth fighting all these battles for such a crappy living. I mean would they ever have ran a story saying the opposite, I doubt it. It's hard to know how much to compromise.

Start an article like this...

"Real music is dead, *yawn*, Louis Walsh wanted for crimes against pop *yawn*, Cold Play are our saviours *yawn*..."

and then talk about something completely unrelated!

It's got to the point where I almost wanted to do the character essay as a really bitter angry "pop is crap, dance is crap, rap is crap" one just to show the twats what they really want.

They would run an opposite article like a shot. Since when did newspapers ever win awards for agreeing with the concensus? If you think Louis Walsh is crap would you even bother reading this article? No. But "Louis Walsh, Saviour Of Irish Music" - you'd read it just to disagree,to be challenged to be (alright maybe not but you get the idea).

I'm not sure, if I worded it as him being the saviour then maybe, but I'm not sure I think that or that there's a case for it, I don't like the nature of that kind of article, ie using your personal opinion of X as a springboard to Y which is a trend you create for the benefit of the article. My disagreement would be more about how lame the anti-manufactured pop thing is. I think you've touched on another part of the problem though, maybe that writer didn't suggest the Louis Walsh behind bars picture, I hate that type of thing too, the spin aspect of it all, the cheap tricks to grab more readers. This is a serious problem as well.

cf Photo's of Catherina Zeta Jones in the business section of the newspaper to connect by four or five degrees of seperation to Hello! magazine.

Perhaps the first part of my post is complaining simply about "pitching a story", actually.

i'm sick of the 'bad pop killing music' rants, but have you noticed how the only thing that seems to be being written about is how something or other is killing something else e.g. nu-metal is killing genuine teen angst or punk rock, manufactured pop is killing the illusion of accidental pop, surprise hits and chart-climbers (athough did anyone notice Good Charlotte jumped back into the top ten last week - what was the cause of this?!), dance music is killing itself, the New Rock Revolution is killing everything (but its a good thing supposedly), music piracy is killing the music industry...quite a massacre going on wouldnt you say?

I did this yesterday. It hurt.

Ow.

What?

heheh now that he hardly ever posts here anymore i can sneakily say that tim finney's singles reviews in our local street magazine is the best thing about it and the first thing i flip to (tho there is also a good pop gossip column) - i can't believe i'm the only person in town that feels this way! i actually feel like the tide is turning against all that bad 'real music' juju. reach out to that one person (and it's probably way more than one) ronan! if you have something worth saying someone will really really appreciate reading it.

Yeah Steve I agree, it's kind of this "the language of polemic is stronger than the language of praise" thing again, everyone myself included wants to be the jaded hack, is alot of it to do with the fact that if you go to college and do journalism you are thought doom theories all day long, too much of a focus on hard news also for me.

that should be "taught", oops!

haha irishest typo ever

heh, how is that Irish? I'm glad I changed it SO.

well ok irish or tweetie bird maybe

it's practically the same thing

Write a piece placing Walsh in what you claim is the greatest tradition in pop, that of manufacturing it. Cite Motown, Spector, the Monkees, Chinn and Chapman and so on. Compare to the Neptunes, say. Point out that dance music is a producer based form, and the singers an afterthought, whoever's name is on the record. Who cares whether TLC or Destiny's Child write their own songs, any more than, say, the Supremes or Four Tops. The idea of performers writing their own material is just an approach, in no sense inherently superior, in threory or practice. 'Why Pop SHOULD Be Manufactured' could be the title.

'Should' almost seems too loaded, though why pop 'is' or 'can' be isn't much better and loses the intent. Hrm.

'Should' almost seems too loaded => fucking go for it, Ronan!

'Why Pop SHOULD Be Manufactured'

good idea, changing should be to is/needs to be would also work. is it worth making the distinction that there are is of course good and bad? there are artistic and sonic principles that make Motown/Spector pop undeniably superior to Girls Aloud and Boyzone - OR DO THEY? could this be argued? i suppose this is a matter of personal taste/opinion and it'd be hard to explain why without tripping up, but i'd say Take That are superior to Walsh's bands too - maybe i'm dazzled by the illusion of it all...does it really just come down to 'well i like this song but not this one' and is the nature of manu-pop anymore frivalous than any other music anyway?

WAKE UP! NON-ROCKET SCIENCE LESSON:

Ronan, first rule of bitching about the work of a journalist on a paper is to present what you have to say as a non-bitching counterpoint and approach NOT HER, but HER EDITOR for a commission to answer back (this is like so DUH as not to be believed - you mark yourself out as a pleb if you approach the journo). Tell him so many people are buzzing about the other writer's article, they don't agree, and they're all under 30. Wait for a reaction, then tell him you have a precis/proposal you'd like him to consider and can you email it? Editor will love it, shows attention being paid to a writer by pop-consuming readership, and you as a writer on ucd paper are looking to step up to that anyway, which shouldn't be a problem because Irish papers' voice/style/writing isn't as coherent or articulate as yours.

I agree with your tastes, Stevem. Take That are an odd one - semi-manufactured, very packaged, but had their own great pop songwriter, as it turned out.

I don't really believe pop should be manufactured, BTW, I just thought it was a stromng counterpiece to the article under discussion, much better than "No, It's Not So Ban To Be Manufactured, Really". It's the side that is put forward far less often, so I think we need to exaggerate a bit by way of positive discrimination.

Yeah, it's not like it's going to be brought up during his run for president.

Suzy what's the best medium for all this? snail mail?

NO WAY. In papers you're going to have to go quick, so you have to phone at start of business day because you could well have to file by four that afternoon. The less time between now and when the article appeared, the more likely it's still 'news' so interweb is always the way to go. Locate the editor (be nice to the receptionist, ask her/him who is X's commissioning editor, then ask for their title eg. senior editor so you know where in pecking order they are). Thank them and ask to be put through and sound the person out. Do what I said above and have your 300 words ready in an email where you only have to put in the e-addy and name and thank them from the chat you just had. Your contact details eg. phone number go after the pitch, and he'll be able to email by return the second he reads it.

The mutation advice is good, but my real problem was the motivation to actually do the above. I could have thought of a response to that article. That article in itself is not really significant to what I meant, it was just the most recent example, I guess what my real problem is that I doubt the medium, writing, and amn't sure I like the way people engage with it. Hence my comments that maybe radio or something even a tiny bit closer to performance is the way to go.

Are you Dobby?

Matt DC knowing my audience is exactly why I don't write much any more, I think :(

(Not that I don't love my audience but, yeah.)

I think its more to do with genrally being quite happy Tom. And to be fair other aspects of your life are eating into your time too,

Me, I just need a decent wind up to start writing something big soon.