David Samuels vs. Mope-Rock

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Oops: I hate threads where everyone picks on someone else's review. I don't want to do that. But I do want to talk about this thing with David Samuels where he seems to be talking about a musical universe completely different from the one I live in -- like I'm accidentally buying the records he's talking about but they were mispressed with some other band's actual music -- and how despite this I always strain to figure out what he actually means about stuff because I simply can't fathom exactly why he has the taste he does. I can't even decide if I disagree with him or not, even when I know I do disagree with him -- I'm only confused.

Here he talks about "mope rock" and reveals himself to have had the same central pillars of early listening as I had. Then he says a bunch of things that honestly make no sense to me, like on the order of writing that radishes are actually a meat product. But then he has great things to say about My Favorite, who I thought only I and Dave Raposa liked.

Someone help me before I get any more baffled by him.

― nabisco (nabisco), Tuesday, 7 January 2003 22:31 (twenty-three years ago)

Oops: I hate threads where everyone picks on someone else's review. I don't want to do that.

I'm that guy. Don't be that guy.

ah what the hell (recontextualized/reconstituted random comments from another site):

I am so sick of people calling the Pixies "surrealist" just because of "Debaser"'s lyrics. The Smiths and the Cure were on John Hughes soundtracks? Who determined who these “Important Bands” were? First off the Smiths and the Cure were around way longer and before the Pixies, second off I think both bands had more fans than the latter (although I'm sure a lot of their audiences overlapped). Why not mention the Furs in the opening para? HOLY SHIT! Chris Lombardi and Gerard Cosloy should read this! Moz and Bob Smith were shoegazers? Dusty black clothes? Which band rips off Fields of the Nephilim?

― hstencil, Tuesday, 7 January 2003 22:38 (twenty-three years ago)

This bafflement is completely ignoring the fact that he posits this whole mope-rock trend just so he can be the first to criticize it -- the only album of this sort to get any attention recently is Interpol's. The bafflement is more: only three listenable songs on the Interpol record? (I mean, it's fine not to like the whole thing, but that seems like a weird comment for a record that sounds pretty consistently the same across its entirety.) Interpol as Psych Furs tribute band? (It's as accurate as everyone saying that about Joy Division, I suppose, but we all just need to admit there are a thousand equally valid comparisons to be made.) Why does he think every NYC band getting attention sounds like the VU and Iggy -- just because that's what the articles say? (The Gang of Four and P.I.L. axis is surely the bigger one.)

I get baffled because he has very idiosyncratic interests -- he's constantly pulling up for discussion weird collections of of-the-moment records and then bottom-bin indie bands no one cares about and giving them space. Which seems like a good thing, if only I could figure out what Bizarro-world logic is actually animating his thoughts on them.

― nabisco (nabisco), Tuesday, 7 January 2003 22:44 (twenty-three years ago)

Oh yeah, the Matador thing was odd, too. It's not that I want to pick on him, I just always read his articles and find myself scratching my head in completely incomprehension. I have no idea where he's coming from, which I think could be a great thing. But I'm too baffled to get anything out of it.

― nabisco (nabisco), Tuesday, 7 January 2003 22:46 (twenty-three years ago)

Yeah, I can't see calling a band a Psych Furs rip-off unless the singer sounded like Richard Butler. I like the Furs okay (as far as 80s "mope-rock" bands go), but I never thought their music really stood out as much as the vocals/lyrics.

Which brings up another point: typical of mainstream pubs, his analysis is almost entirely lyric-based.

― hstencil, Tuesday, 7 January 2003 22:49 (twenty-three years ago)

Actually I think I've figured out what it might be: maybe his contextual knowledge of the stuff he's writing about comes entirely from major media and not really from listening to much? (He always posits such-and-such as currently happening when it's not actually happening, it's just what a particular NPR piece said is happening.) Basically I think it's possible that he doesn't actually follow the type of music he usually reviews, and just writes up whatever is in the promo pile and looks important or sounds interesting to him personally. Which would explain why his approach seems like it should be good (actual unprejudiced approach to the promo pile based on what he honestly likes!) but comes out all weird (situating those records in a larger landscape that doesn't actually exist).

― nabisco (nabisco), Tuesday, 7 January 2003 23:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I think his "I'm gonna break these other bands" angle is kinda funny.

― hstencil, Tuesday, 7 January 2003 23:03 (twenty-three years ago)

Why does he call 'The Bands' 'Vowel Bands'? I don't understand that.

― kate, Wednesday, 8 January 2003 01:25 (twenty-three years ago)

Because clearly he is a PRML SCRM fan.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 8 January 2003 03:08 (twenty-three years ago)

David Samuel, Ben Greenman

Ben Greenman, David Samuel

― James Blount (James Blount), Wednesday, 8 January 2003 05:28 (twenty-three years ago)

Test your internet sleuthing ability: identify three other current or former music critics with whom David Samuels attended college. Clues: two are current, one is former, and the former one is the most famous of the four (but not for music criticism).

― ara, Wednesday, 8 January 2003 05:46 (twenty-three years ago)

Seth Mnookin? Matt Groening?

― James Blount (James Blount), Wednesday, 8 January 2003 05:48 (twenty-three years ago)

No, although one Simpsons producer and the co-creator of Futurama wrote for the same college magazine as three of the four...

― ara, Wednesday, 8 January 2003 07:01 (twenty-three years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.