― Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Thursday, 28 August 2003 10:10 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Ronan (Ronan), Thursday, 28 August 2003 10:12 (twenty-one years ago) link
yeah, but i also think there were some funny moments in this. This article is not even asking to be taken seriously and in fact he's always written (funny) shit abt dance music and lots of stuff I like such as psych or whatever.
I mean, its so damn cartoonish.
There should be writing abt everything even if its 'hard' to do there are ppl out there who like a challenge.
― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Thursday, 28 August 2003 10:12 (twenty-one years ago) link
(actually wasn't nowhere near as funny as his anti-NME rant that was linked to here a few weeks ago by DJ martian).
― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Thursday, 28 August 2003 10:13 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Ronan (Ronan), Thursday, 28 August 2003 10:14 (twenty-one years ago) link
B-b-but... it ISN'T. Or at least, it wasn't. For YEARS the UK dance press completely oldsold NME, Kerrang, etc.
if singles were given the prominence they deserve both pop and dance would benefit
How would you like them to be given more prominence? What is the radio/MTV for if not to publicise singles? Why aren't you lambasting Radio 1 for not playlisting more dance music?
I get the feeling you're vastly overestimating the influence of the rock press, or the music press in general, and there are tons of failed NME Great White Hopes to back this up.
I'm also getting the feeling that everyday musical culture is far more rock-biased in Ireland than it is in the UK.
― Matt DC (Matt DC), Thursday, 28 August 2003 10:15 (twenty-one years ago) link
Also, laying the blame on the rock press is a very convenient way of avoiding the question of WHY dance music is less popular than it used to be (if it is).
― Matt DC (Matt DC), Thursday, 28 August 2003 10:18 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Matt DC (Matt DC), Thursday, 28 August 2003 10:25 (twenty-one years ago) link
― dave q, Thursday, 28 August 2003 10:28 (twenty-one years ago) link
I think the rock press are what look back and say "this is what happened" and you know well it's always going to be rock acts. Why put a dance act there when you can't continue to mention weirdo depressive singers, political movements, brilliant guitar licks, cliched "attitude" quotes to interviewers etc etc etc.
By prominence I mean if a great single was given more praise than a 4 line review, there's no ability but also no desire in the press for talking at length about anything except rock music. I've listened to my favourite singles of last year more than any of the albums, whatever way you look at it.
It may be about everday culture being more biased here, but it does go way beyond that too.
Why dance is less popular? No dance act is making dance music for rock fans.
― Ronan (Ronan), Thursday, 28 August 2003 10:29 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Ronan (Ronan), Thursday, 28 August 2003 10:31 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Tom (Groke), Thursday, 28 August 2003 10:32 (twenty-one years ago) link
In fact, I'm willing to walk down Oxford Street at lunchtime purely to test this.
― Matt DC (Matt DC), Thursday, 28 August 2003 10:34 (twenty-one years ago) link
when did i ever say this?
upthread i said im very interested in reading stuff abuot dance music, but i dont know why it matters about it being in bang or the independent or mojo. i'm not sure those publications are suited to dance music, unless it is of album/artist based stuff that can give outsiders a way in, or possibly from a cultural/sociological angle (though of course this is the angle that gives us lazy dance is dead pieces like the one linked in this thread). i dont think non-specialist press has ever successfully managed to engage with ground-up based musics.
― gareth (gareth), Thursday, 28 August 2003 10:35 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Matt DC (Matt DC), Thursday, 28 August 2003 10:36 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Ronan (Ronan), Thursday, 28 August 2003 10:38 (twenty-one years ago) link
what if some kinds of music progressively adapt themselves to favour the aspects which GET written about (well/at all) and other kinds of music adapt themselves to favour aspects which are hard to write about/elusive/rebarbatively jargonish?
― mark s (mark s), Thursday, 28 August 2003 10:39 (twenty-one years ago) link
― mark s (mark s), Thursday, 28 August 2003 10:40 (twenty-one years ago) link
― gareth (gareth), Thursday, 28 August 2003 10:41 (twenty-one years ago) link
the serious press should be the dance press should be the pop press, it's not getting wells to love dance, it's getting dance to love dance.
― Ronan (Ronan), Thursday, 28 August 2003 10:42 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Matt DC (Matt DC), Thursday, 28 August 2003 10:44 (twenty-one years ago) link
― gareth (gareth), Thursday, 28 August 2003 10:44 (twenty-one years ago) link
― gareth (gareth), Thursday, 28 August 2003 10:45 (twenty-one years ago) link
maybe these ideas like "canon" and "respect" (and "history"?) are intrinsically anti-dance?
― mark s (mark s), Thursday, 28 August 2003 10:46 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Matt DC (Matt DC), Thursday, 28 August 2003 10:46 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Matt DC (Matt DC), Thursday, 28 August 2003 10:48 (twenty-one years ago) link
― gareth (gareth), Thursday, 28 August 2003 10:50 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Thursday, 28 August 2003 10:50 (twenty-one years ago) link
― dave q, Thursday, 28 August 2003 10:52 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Thursday, 28 August 2003 10:54 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Thursday, 28 August 2003 10:56 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Thursday, 28 August 2003 10:58 (twenty-one years ago) link
― dave q, Thursday, 28 August 2003 10:59 (twenty-one years ago) link
― mark s (mark s), Thursday, 28 August 2003 10:59 (twenty-one years ago) link
― stevem (blueski), Thursday, 28 August 2003 11:03 (twenty-one years ago) link
― mark s (mark s), Thursday, 28 August 2003 11:08 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Matt DC (Matt DC), Thursday, 28 August 2003 11:12 (twenty-one years ago) link
tom's point is totally pertinent, even if his judgment is on its head (i don't know if it's on its head or not)
(eg one of the loose assumptions of ordinary political journalism is that a mass of "bad" writing can have good political effects => i am agnostic abt this, though i think you can point to eras when it's arguably the case, like the decades in the UK up to the first great reform bill)
― mark s (mark s), Thursday, 28 August 2003 11:14 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Thursday, 28 August 2003 11:17 (twenty-one years ago) link
― mark s (mark s), Thursday, 28 August 2003 11:20 (twenty-one years ago) link
― stevem (blueski), Thursday, 28 August 2003 11:24 (twenty-one years ago) link
Petridish in the Guardian is a different kettle of fish, I think.
― Matt DC (Matt DC), Thursday, 28 August 2003 11:24 (twenty-one years ago) link
dave- ok.
― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Thursday, 28 August 2003 11:25 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Thursday, 28 August 2003 11:26 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Thursday, 28 August 2003 11:32 (twenty-one years ago) link
― mark s (mark s), Thursday, 28 August 2003 11:33 (twenty-one years ago) link
This suggests to me that a successful language for writing about rock has been found and is being used. I don't think an equally successful language has been found for most other genres (pop maybe if we're separating it out; hip-hop possibly but I don't read the hip-hop mags enough). My hunch is that the success of the rock language has had bad effects for rock (plus bad effects in forcing other genres to the side, as Ronan says) - in terms of helping to set up a bunch of rock values and expectations, defining 'what rock is' by how we talk about rock (I'm not just referring to paid print criticism).
(I'm NOT saying it's impossible for good writers to write well about other genres or that genres can't be written well about. Good writers can write well about loads of things. What I'm saying is that a mediocre rock writer is more convincing to a rock fan than a mediocre dance writer is to a dance fan.)
― Tom (Groke), Thursday, 28 August 2003 11:35 (twenty-one years ago) link
― stevem (blueski), Thursday, 28 August 2003 11:37 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Thursday, 28 August 2003 11:39 (twenty-one years ago) link
but also there's tom's point that unless you think quite hard about what the achieved goal is to be, you may end up with something you can't bear
― mark s (mark s), Thursday, 28 August 2003 12:44 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Ronan (Ronan), Thursday, 28 August 2003 12:48 (twenty-one years ago) link
(*ie not publishable only in slim volumes of poetry handprinted in vilnius)
― mark s (mark s), Thursday, 28 August 2003 13:00 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Thursday, 28 August 2003 13:01 (twenty-one years ago) link
need to be given room to make these manoeuvres
What are the chances though eh? At least in print anyway.
― Ronan (Ronan), Thursday, 28 August 2003 13:07 (twenty-one years ago) link
you need to write for american magazines who don't pay!
― Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Thursday, 28 August 2003 13:11 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Ricardo (RickyT), Thursday, 28 August 2003 13:12 (twenty-one years ago) link
― dave q, Thursday, 28 August 2003 13:15 (twenty-one years ago) link
― stevem (blueski), Thursday, 28 August 2003 17:55 (twenty-one years ago) link
― dave q, Thursday, 28 August 2003 19:02 (twenty-one years ago) link
NOBODY deserves that much money for six hours work.
Nobody deserves than money for 1 months work.
― Chewshabadoo (Chewshabadoo), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 14:30 (nineteen years ago) link
Nobody deserves that money for 1 months work.
― The Ghost of Black Elegance (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 14:42 (nineteen years ago) link
― nabiscothingy, Tuesday, 27 September 2005 14:47 (nineteen years ago) link