Godspeed vs. Exclaim Magazine

are you MAD man??

someone is got to get a meeting between efrim and Thom yorke. now that's something i'd buy. for a dollar.

Well, they don't, largely because of their contempt for it. Anyway, I don't particularly think it's an all-or-nothing proposition, nor do I see any inconsistencies with their selectivity.

all the promotional stuff that godspeed (to go by the link above) doesn't want to bother "dirtying their hands with" but just smacks of lazy disinterest

Of course it's lazy disinterest! They admit that firsthand here:

"What Exclaim! conveniently regards as a dispensation of "privileges" is in fact a mundane matter of 'not-getting-around-to-it' : a meaningless byproduct of the utter banality and soul-crushing emptiness of entertaining media requests. As if we should all be jumping to attention, hand-jobbing every journalist who calls, in the name of 'democracy'... obviously, we field 99% of these requests by ignoring, stalling, fumbling and dropping them. We make no apologies for the hurt feelings of spoiled media brats and their arch sense of entitlement."

Am I the only one who thinks the bit about "spoiled media brats" is horribly OTM?

could they be a little more melodramatic, please? If anyone sounds bratty here, it's them. They can't have it both ways. Claiming that the only reason they don't "dispense privileges" is because they're bratty and lazy and entitled themselves!

Yeah, or better yet, download the damn thing from your p2p file-sharing program of choice (and delete it once you realize what rubbish it is). A simply fuss-free experience!

Also: you should write for Exclaim!

My interpretation of their use of the word 'lazy' was to signify complete and total disinterest in the machinations of the process; read the piece - they basically say as much.

OTOH, you seem to be using the word as a signifier of GYBE's unwillingness to comply with the 'rules' of the industry (ie. they don't send out promos or do interviews = they are lazy!)

That's the entitlement they're talking about, and I think they're right to be angry about it.

i don't think it's all or naught either, mark, as i hope the fugazi comparison above implies. (however roundaboutly.) for all the popist rhetoric that gets tossed around on ilm, i think it's (meaning ilm) is rather loathe to engage with the politics of media delivery in the slightest. (i'm hestitating to use the word "scared.") i don't think a love of "pop" goes hand in hand with a "love" of multinationals anymore than a love of "indie" goes hand in hand with an assumed/implied (ambient) activism. although i suppose my opinion is suspect since i AM a part of the spolied media elite (although my bank account [heh, or lack of a bank account!] probably situates me more in godspeeds! camp on the surface of it). but i don't think i'm a "spoiled media brat" - i have no interest in receiving promo copies, doing 100 word reductionist "reviews" or conducting a fucking interview EVER, with possible few exceptions - again, i don't think it's all or nothing. if anything godspeeds engagement with the "mainstream" of media seems far more "all or nothing" than most writers i know. (who are - admittedly - almost all ilx based.)

i would've liked to have seen godspped's response if the journo did say that he downloaded it.

also, mark drops played radiohead comparison = he should write for exclaim! magazine.

Michael I excerpted this small part from a much larger piece (linked above) which discusses this more in-depth.

I think it goes far beyond the outrage that they trespass 'the rules of the industry' -- they also trespass the rules of etiquette as well. I mean, doesn't one of the core rules of netiquette state that one shouldn't post private e-mail communication in public without the sender's permission?

Sorry -> no obvious V. Delay reference points! Anyway, did you completely miss that it was Melissa I was talking to?

I have a lot more to say to all this (namely about the way in which media types tend to scorn GYBE for not running an airtight operation in the same way that CNN and various righty outlets smugly guffaw at G8 protest-types for sometimes driving their cars to work), but I have to leave now...

Mike did you conveniently erase GYBE!s accusations of slander from memory?

How do such accusations legitimize the breach of netiquette?

I am aware of this, Mark.

To their credit, Godspeed do say this right at the start:

"We warn intrepid readers that our annotations to the following article, published by Canadian music tabloid Exclaim!, are of extremely limited interest.  We took the time to respond to it and post it on our website as a point of information for the editors of Exclaim! and anyone else with an obsessive and unhealthy interest in the backchannel spite fostered by our mainstream Canadian music press."

In otherwards, they know it's a tempest in a teacup. Let it go.

and?? did you completely miss my attempt to deflate yr attempt at rendering mel's opinion "irrelevant" by making her look reactionary and hypocritical?

To paraphrase mark s, this seems to be a conflict involving the unfortunate non-existence of telepathy.

But Ned, seriously, that makes it all the much more worse. It's a prophylactic ploy that allows someone to indulge in their obsessions AND distance themselves from them as well.

Because without it they would look even more ridiculous.

this seems to be a conflict involving the unfortunate non-existence of telepathy

I WANT MY BRAIN IMPLANTS.

It's a prophylactic ploy that allows someone to indulge in their obsessions AND distance themselves from them as well.

But why is not surprising and hackles-raising for me at all? Maybe I'm just jaded by jadedness. ;-)

Fair enough. Suprising? Well, no, not really. Still pisses me off.

The people that are making the most noise here, I'm noticing, are the ones that:
a) are music journalists
b) predisposed to hate Godspeed in the first place
c) both

Being both a journalist (music, computer and otherwise) AND a Godspeed fan, I'm a bit conflicted about this. Ultimately I think Roman's request for an interview and a play copy were fair, EVEN IF he was aware that Constellation didn't like Exclaim much...he wouldn't be doing his job if he didn't. But at the same time, as a music journalist you have to be prepared not to get the play copy (or in my computer world, not to get the cool new MP3 player) just based on the fact that you asked for it. Ultimately it's the band's decision, the label's decision, or the manufacturer's decision as to who they choose to service. So Exclaim wasn't a priority...they should make the request and live with it instead of this sour grapes/conspiracy theory thing. And I think Constellation was certainly justified in responding to the piece, considering there 100,000 copies circulating the country questioning their business practises. (Reproducing the private email is another question altogether.)

to ensure that profits from future recordings are re-invested in local infrastructures and projects, as opposed to lining the pockets of a couple of guys in Chicago

'Future infrastructures'?

And it allows them an ivory tower stance from which to respond to any criticism that might come their way -- and in the past, they have retaliated like vipers to those who've written about the band without "permission."

That passage makes up for all its short commings. Even better, try taking a picture of them, for maximum hostility try doing it while being an anglophone female wearing a GAP sweater. Also the only band I can think of that mid tour would not allow me the privilege of buying their brand new debut cd. I had to get someone else to buy it for me. All I got was smoke blown in my face by twelve chainsmoking frogs who hadn't bathed in a few days when I asked. Guess they were too busy plotting the overthrow of the local capitalist machinery.

Surprisingly, no one wants to speak on the record.

Gosh darn, somethings never change.

Constellation used(?) to have a venue set up in a loft for live performances. The label now makes money from Godspeed CD sales (something that only Kranky made money from in the past), they can invest it into doing similar things again/in a better locale (this is all assumption on my part).

I think what everyone who has responded to this thread so far has completely over-looked the most telling thing in the write-up; the response from the writer of the article. "what I forgot to mention was that part of the mag's m.o. in regards to running a piece on the band was to get you to write a nasty letter back that they could print." I don't know if he's trying to wash his hands of all of this, or fan the flames, but it is an interesting comment on what Exclaim wished to accomplish.

chainsmoking frogs

In Quebec, the slur is "Pepsis".

anyway: its just some things in their reply were stupid. The article itself was garbage.

if they actually build it i will forgive them their music
if they let me ride in it i will actually to listen to some of it

But Godspeed does have a valid point that the media doesnt have the inaliable right to free CDs before the CDs actual release, and they shouldn't complain or put down the band when they dont receive it. And the guy writting the article should totally puss out and write the band an e-mail saying SORRY GUYS MY EDITOR MADE ME WRITE IT. However, for making the whole thing seem like some big example of all that is wrong with the music industry as a whole, well that's just B.S.

I want to (surprise) get back to something Jess said earlier in response to a comment I made to Melissa. I know what I said to her might have seemed flip or easy, so it's important for me to come back and give it a little more substance before this thread dies completely.

and?? did you completely miss my attempt to deflate yr attempt at rendering mel's opinion "irrelevant" by making her look reactionary and hypocritical?

First of all, Jess, you have a "nasty" habit of quoting words that were never actually used (see: "irrelevant"). I didn't bring up Radiohead in a cheap attempt to activate Melissa's Achilles Heel (in the interest of full disclosure: I've seen Radiohead live 13 times, including a six-show span across three countries in two weeks), but rather to imply that both bands attract a certain gut hatred for very similar reasons.

This is of specific importance with reference to Melissa because, as a fan, she presumably resides somewhat inside of Radiohead's aesthetic; as such, the very same words, music and gestures that Radiohead haters so gleefully (and often automatically) deride as "melodramatic and bratty and lazy and entitled" are things that Melissa (like any other fan on the inside) is ostensibly able to decode, justify and relate to. I really couldn't have asked for a better example than Meeting People Is Easy. That movie basically split audiences into two camps: a) those willing to extend a certain amount of sympathy and b) those not. At some very early point, the discussion stopped being about the movie itself; it was more a question of Can I Buy Into This Or Not?

GYBE! polarize people in the same fashion; I hear far fewer complaints about their music than I do about their politics and overall aesthetic and what they represent. The most boring ones are from people like Julio who trot out variations on the same ultra-conservative hardline stance employed by Washington fatcats to subjugate political activists ("they should do NO interviews at ALL then" = "you bought INORGANIC VEGGIES, you insincere hypocrite!")

So back to the original question: I'd love to discuss what it is about GYBE! that impedes our willingness to place any faith in their motives. Or rather: why bands that take a discernably hard political line are so prone to accusations of hypocrisy when it's clearly a quality we abide in our decidedly less vocal pop stars?

see what donut bitch and daddino have been saying.

Mark- you're an apologist for their antics. That email exchange showed what twats they were by making the reviewer believe they were considering their requests for an interview, when they prob stashed it along with the 99% rejections. The interviewer was wrong to believe it is his god given right to expect a free CD.

From their reply (this point abt being constellation's reply is a no no since constellation represent godspeed really) the whole business is too much for them so why not stop the interviews. I don't see what's so conservative abt this line i'm taking.

I think their politics in fact are conservative because their music is.

Interesting point, but what do you mean?

Incidentally, I disagree with you (surprise surprise) about the band's music being "conservative"; it's certainly minimalist, but there's something happening there...and there's definitely a structure there. I just wonder if you're approaching it from the perspective of "out", which would certainly make it seem like nothing was happening. I wouldn't think that this was meant to be evaluated that way, any more than something like Fushitsusha is meant to be evaluated from a melodic angle. I could just as easily say "oh, those guys are all just sitting up on stage whacking off with their instruments, throwing out random bursts of noise just for the hell of it."

Incidentally, one question coming out of this thread that has made me wonder is the "political" nature of Godspeed, an INSTRUMENTAL band. What kind of responsibility does a musical artist have to follow through on a provocative title? Do they have to detail their opinions on something they reference down to the last dotted i, or is it simply enough to have the opinions? And at what point does it become "empty sloganeering", and does anyone who doesn't know the artist personally (and how they live their lives and integrate their political opinions into same) have any right to judge? I know it's a blurry area, so I'm interested in what all y'all have to say here.

Looking over it again, it seems like Roman was a fan who wanted to do a piece on them, but wasn't too professional about it. Instead of just telling him no from the getgo, Constellation stretched out these ridiculous, oblique messages past his deadline, thereby fucking him in the ass. This would give him only a couple of days to write it (although judging by the piece I would wager that 5 minutes went into its writing), and I am sure that Constellation was well aware of this. His piece is shit and he should be ashamed of it, but if he hadn't been jerked around I doubt it would have ended this way.

We warn intrepid readers that our annotations to the following article, published by Canadian music tabloid Exclaim!, are of extremely limited interest....

...Read all about it below, if you care to give up half an hour of your life you'll never get back. But please, unless you are an Exclaim! staffer or otherwise mired in the music industry, do something more worthwhile...

They have posted this at their own website only, from what I can tell (anyone with other information can feel free to refute this), and the ones making a big deal of it are YOU (and ME).

Some of the innuendo in his article really was shitty, though, and I have to side w/ Constellation. I would have paraphrased his emails instead of printing them outright, but for saying that stuff about Albini and so on he should expect some bad karma coming back. It's kind of pathetic that he still hoped for an interview after the 3rd or 4th "I'll pass it along to the band" in any case. Time to move on at that point.

As an instrumental band Godspeed is in a weird position, having to provide context & backdrop for their music & the message. I bet if they had it to do over again they would have kept everything cryptic & let the music & packaging speak for itself -- every piece about the band asks the same questions now, covers the same ground, and I bet the band themselves are so used to it that they have trouble figuring out another way to present what they do.

It's kind of intersting how, considering what an underground force they've been in certain music circles the last five years, there has been almost nothing intersting written about them. I still thing that first album, the vinyl w/ all the goodies, is so so great.

But there was a big whining tone to the (really big) reply, actually.

But some of the points you make are fair enough (though I still don't see what the big prob is with not sending any promos and not doing interviews, in my mind that seems feasible).

''Incidentally, I disagree with you (surprise surprise) about the band's music being "conservative"; it's certainly minimalist, but there's something happening there...and there's definitely a structure there. I just wonder if you're approaching it from the perspective of "out", which would certainly make it seem like nothing was happening.''

I don't think its beacuse its minimalist. and yes, there is definetely a structure there but I do think its always the same quiet, loud thing over and over. I think that becomes really dull after a while. i think that more interesting shapes can be conjured up. having said that, I've only heard their first two albums and sort of lost patience with it after that.

There are ways around it, however. Muslimgauze's own political position -- however extreme and sometimes apparently muddy -- was constantly referenced in all his work, from song titles to graphics. But aside from one or two songs where direct samples were used ("Hebron Massacre" most notably), it was all instrumental straight up. Mind you, he was also convinced that the media, music and otherwise, wanted nothing to do with him anyway for many years, a mindset he was starting to let go a bit from at the time of his death.