Why would anyone want to be a music journalist RATHER than a musician?

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Kate started two threads:

Why would anyone want to be a music journalist?

I want to ask a slightly different question.
I think it's obvious, given the choice, why someone would rather be a musician than a music journalist. What about the other way?

Suppose you had the talents and opportunities to do both. Why would you want to be a journalist rather than a musician?

― mei (mei), Monday, 9 June 2003 16:51 (twenty-two years ago)

alledgedly, journalism is a "vocation," though i use that term loosely near the words "music journalism" and so in theory it provides a more stable income. if stability important to you then that might be a reason to be a journalist and not a musician.

― martin (martin), Monday, 9 June 2003 17:01 (twenty-two years ago)

"People who write about music are just bitter that they themselves can't play it."

― Mr. Diamond (diamond), Monday, 9 June 2003 17:02 (twenty-two years ago)

(are you being strict on "journalist" here? i'm a terrible journalist as i have fairly severe phone phobia: i'm a writer who mainly writes for magazines)

(well mainly for ilm these days but you know what i mean)

― mark s (mark s), Monday, 9 June 2003 17:03 (twenty-two years ago)

what Martin said.
Not that I've ever had any inclination to BE a musician. I fart around with my alto sax, harmonica and am thinking of picking up a ukelele this week (perfect instrument to learn how to play in an apt. building with thin walls???). But to become a gainfully-employed music journalist is far less of a crapshoot than to become a gainfully employed musician.
You don't even have to be good looking.

― Horace Mann (Horace Mann), Monday, 9 June 2003 17:05 (twenty-two years ago)

music is an interesting to write about because it does things writing can't do (my theory i guess is that this is the point of it)

(that is v.vague but i am right now off out for a meal with two other professional writers neither of whom wanted for a SECOND to be musicians)

― mark s (mark s), Monday, 9 June 2003 17:07 (twenty-two years ago)

I don't see the point to making music, or rather don't have the drive to put forward a focused artistic intention as something *important*.

But I feel a drive to think/talk about *why* and *how* ppl. relate to what's already out there.

i.e. even if I were more talented musically my music would be uninteresting except as criticism in which case I'd be better off writing it instead of playing it anyway.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Monday, 9 June 2003 17:10 (twenty-two years ago)

critics judge
musicians get judged
do the math

― Horace Mann (Horace Mann), Monday, 9 June 2003 17:11 (twenty-two years ago)

...because you can be more creative, and reach more people, as a music journalist...

― Jerry (Jerry), Monday, 9 June 2003 17:17 (twenty-two years ago)

On what planet do critics not get judged???? (Or "journalists", for that matter, though I really prefer to think of myself as the former. Though I'm really both, I guess. And I did get a journalism degree.)

(And on what planet do musicians not judge, for that matter??)

Anyway, here's my initial post from the thread Mr. Diamond linked to:

--Not gonna read this whole thread; don't have time. Just want to add (inasmuch as I remember them) the immortal words of Dave Marsh (I think it was, correct me if I'm wrong -- might even be in one of those rockcritics.com interviews), when asked whether being a musician is necessary when writing rock criticism: "Since when do you have to be a musician to use a RECORD PLAYER?" (Which COULD suggest that people who write about music are just frustrated DISC JOCKEYS, which is much closer to the actual truth -- in my own experience anyway, since I've never had any desire to learn an instrument, and when somebody DID give me a guitar, I never found time to practice.)
-- chuck (cedd...), February 20th, 2003.

-----

Frank Kogan, though, says playing a record player is NO DIFFERENT from playing a guitar. Which is right in its own way, obviously.

― chuck, Monday, 9 June 2003 17:18 (twenty-two years ago)

>>Frank Kogan, though, says playing a record player is NO DIFFERENT from playing a guitar.<<

Which means rock critics ARE musicians. There's NO DIFFERENCE.

― chuck, Monday, 9 June 2003 17:19 (twenty-two years ago)

On what planet do critics not get judged????
sure, but I'm talking 'bout PRIMARY roles, within the crit/musico relationship. plus, begging the question a little bit.

― Horace Mann (Horace Mann), Monday, 9 June 2003 17:21 (twenty-two years ago)

Also:

1) Define musician please. Is it someone who gets paid, or makes a career, out of playing music? If so, then I think you've just answered your own question. What a fucking dull-ass way to make a living.

2) The tone of the initial query makes it clear Horace thinks musicans are somehow inherently "superior" to other "lesser" mortals. Why, because they've learnt the truly astonishing feat of remembering how to switch an amplifier on and plug it into a socket. (Remember, kids: that socket needs to be switched to "on" before you can get a noise out of your guitar...)

― Jerry (Jerry), Monday, 9 June 2003 17:25 (twenty-two years ago)

y'know, cuz I'm a jerk.

― Horace Mann (Horace Mann), Monday, 9 June 2003 17:25 (twenty-two years ago)

Or maybe it's those "deep", "meaninfgul" lyrics...

Whooooooooo!!!!!!

Man, I wish I was a musician (strictly I am: but there again i don't get paid for it - so does that mean I'm not?) (But hold on, I'm confused: I'm a music critic as well, but I don't get paid for that either. Does that mean I'm not?)

― Jerry (Jerry), Monday, 9 June 2003 17:27 (twenty-two years ago)

Yo, Jerry, that's pretty far from what I said. If anything, I would place musicians pretty durn low on the food chain, under Wal-Mart greeters, that's f'sure.

― Horace Mann (Horace Mann), Monday, 9 June 2003 17:27 (twenty-two years ago)

Which means rock critics ARE musicians. There's NO DIFFERENCE.

So, does that make musicians, like, double musicians? They listen to record players too.

― dleone (dleone), Monday, 9 June 2003 17:29 (twenty-two years ago)

Fair call.

OK, I have the opportunites and talent to do both. I choose journalism. Why? Because it's more creative, it pays better (when it does) and because I can reach more people.

― Jerry (Jerry), Monday, 9 June 2003 17:30 (twenty-two years ago)

What do you mean by 'more creative'? Could you explain that a bit more please.

― mei (mei), Monday, 9 June 2003 17:41 (twenty-two years ago)

what's going on in yr head counts more than what's going on anywhere else.

― Horace Mann (Horace Mann), Monday, 9 June 2003 17:43 (twenty-two years ago)

when you're writing that is

― Horace Mann (Horace Mann), Monday, 9 June 2003 17:51 (twenty-two years ago)

>>Suppose you had the talents and opportunities to do both. Why would you want to be a journalist rather than a musician?<<

Well, Frank Kogan and Lester Bangs had talents to do both, right? And they made a different decision than Neil Tennant, Chrissie Hynde, and Patti Smith, who also had talents to do both. (Falling James Moreland decided to DO both, at the same time, I think.) You say "I think it's obvious, given the choice, why someone would rather be a musician than a music journalist", but sorry, it's NOT obvious to me, at all. Why is making that decision any more obvious than the reverse, Mei??

― chuck, Monday, 9 June 2003 18:19 (twenty-two years ago)

Most of the dudes I grew up with are in bands, and I often think that in pursuing writerly whatevers, I sorta y'know, missed out on some things. Like, cuz being a musician is (most of the time) a pretty social activity, whereas writing is very solitary, and frankly, sometimes I'm lonely. Which is why I come here when I should be working, I guess.

― Horace Mann (Horace Mann), Monday, 9 June 2003 18:42 (twenty-two years ago)

A few obvious reasons why people might choose musician over music journalist (or any other job):

- (Small) possibility of huge wealth
- (Perceived) greater availability of sex
- Large number of very 'cool' people as role models
- Greater respect and admiration from your peers
- They hear great music, so they want to make it.

― mei (mei), Monday, 9 June 2003 18:46 (twenty-two years ago)

On what planet do critics not get judged????

Mars. The Valles Marineris Voice has the emptiest letters section I've ever seen.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Monday, 9 June 2003 18:47 (twenty-two years ago)

Hot people become musicians.
Ugly people become music journalists.

― NA. (Nick A.), Monday, 9 June 2003 18:47 (twenty-two years ago)

I agree, there isn't an "obvious" choice to make. People are prone to follow their muse at the expense of all "common" sense. But I don't think giving music and writing a similar artistic weight leads to saying there is "no difference". Not exactly sure how to elaborate on this, but I think there is a fundamental difference in the way critics and musicians approach music -- they are obv both listeners, so I can't really pinpoint this difference during the process of "experiencing" music. Maybe it has to do with the first action after listening (perhaps writing words rather than music or performing - although that seems pretty rigid, and there must be more to it).

― dleone (dleone), Monday, 9 June 2003 18:50 (twenty-two years ago)

further to dleone's post

musician: that sounds great! can i do that?
critic: that sounds great! can attach my name to it?

okay okay now I'm being unnecessarily cynical.

― Horace Mann (Horace Mann), Monday, 9 June 2003 18:52 (twenty-two years ago)

Hot people become musicians.

?!?!
How does this explain Kid Rock?

― Nicole (Nicole), Monday, 9 June 2003 18:52 (twenty-two years ago)

musicians - proactive
music journalists - reactive

― nickalicious (nickalicious), Monday, 9 June 2003 18:53 (twenty-two years ago)

Kid Rock? Um, musicians become hot people?

― mei (mei), Monday, 9 June 2003 18:54 (twenty-two years ago)

musicians - proactive
music journalists - reactive
only when musicians are doing it right, and when journos are doing it wrong or something that's neither empirically right or wrong, but merely reporting.

― Horace Mann (Horace Mann), Monday, 9 June 2003 18:55 (twenty-two years ago)

How does this explain Kid Rock?
Either Mencken or Barnum said that no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.

― Horace Mann (Horace Mann), Monday, 9 June 2003 18:56 (twenty-two years ago)

I like both. Making music feeds my intuitive side; writing about it feeds my logical/rational side.

― jaymc (jaymc), Monday, 9 June 2003 18:59 (twenty-two years ago)

What I mean above is that the relationship between the two careers/pursuits isn't exactly mutually dependent. Music journalists require there to be music to write about for them to be music journalists; musicians, on the other hand, don't require the work of music journalists as a platform for their own endeavors. Musicians can exist without music journalists, music journalists cannot exist without musicians.

― nickalicious (nickalicious), Monday, 9 June 2003 19:00 (twenty-two years ago)

Why would anyone want to be a music journalist RATHER than a musician?

Why would anyone want to be a racing driver RATHER than a motorsport journalist?

Why would anyone want to be a movie director RATHER than a film critic?

― mei (mei), Monday, 9 June 2003 19:01 (twenty-two years ago)

Regardless, Kid Rock will always be as hot as a garbage bag full of dead gophers.

― Nicole (Nicole), Monday, 9 June 2003 19:01 (twenty-two years ago)

Would you rather have sex or comment on other people doing it?

― mei (mei), Monday, 9 June 2003 19:02 (twenty-two years ago)

I like to do both.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Monday, 9 June 2003 19:05 (twenty-two years ago)

Would you rather have sex or comment on other people doing it?

If you're having orgasms playing music, I'd say stick with that.

― dleone (dleone), Monday, 9 June 2003 19:06 (twenty-two years ago)

Hint: not everyone enjoys the same things

― oops (Oops), Monday, 9 June 2003 19:11 (twenty-two years ago)

then why are there only five bands on top 40 radio?

― Horace Mann (Horace Mann), Monday, 9 June 2003 19:12 (twenty-two years ago)

Music criticism is essentially a parasitic activity, as it could not exist without music. The converse does not hold true. However, this does not negate the fact that musicians and journalists perform different functions, and that neither can obviate the other. The impulse to comment on music is different from the impulse to make music, so it is reasonable to expect that some people will be drawn to the one activity and some to the other.

The overlap between the two vocations is that both musicians and critics put forth a value judgment about music. By playing the music that they play in a certain way, the musician makes a statement about what makes music worthwhile and valuable. In a more direct way, the critic makes these statements through their criticism. In this arena, the arena of value judgments, the critic and the musician clash as equal combatants. However, there is something inherently sterile about the critic - because they can only describe how music should be - they can never create it.

― o. nate (onate), Monday, 9 June 2003 19:20 (twenty-two years ago)

only 5? cause this ia a nation(s) of pod people & i dont mean ipods.

pod people vs ipod people. fite!

― kephm, Monday, 9 June 2003 19:21 (twenty-two years ago)

Music crit can exist without musicians WAAAY more than the other way round.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Monday, 9 June 2003 19:21 (twenty-two years ago)

X-post with Nickalicious on the one-way dependency of music and criticism. Same point, different words.

Explain yourself, Sterling. You speak in paradox.

― o. nate (onate), Monday, 9 June 2003 19:22 (twenty-two years ago)

"musicians can exist without music journalists" -->

what's funny about this statement is that it's unproveable by definition

haha maybe fishbone could verify?

if it were possible to absolutely freeze the circulation of cultural information globally, i doubt the music that would result from would be anything worth listening to. this is the question, right: what would happen if we all stopped reading and participating and just ignored everything but what was right in front of us, what records were already in our collections. actually records wouldn't even exist, or they'd be extremely limited-run pressings, because no press = no advertising = no sales = no investment in music / no radio play. you'd have a music-listening public constituted heirarchically, much like the world was for thousands of years before the democratization of letters and media: two main groups: elite interlocking circles of music-heds with access to the limited-run stuff and money to seek it out, and then everybody else who essentially has to live on a diet of this guy:

http://ws64.com/cabin/2002/Street%20Music.jpg

although i bet even this guy has a couple of contacts at listings pages and summer festivals

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Monday, 9 June 2003 19:24 (twenty-two years ago)

music & music criticism are the SAME THING for heaven's sake i.e. all music is music criticism (this does not work backwards, not all criticism is music but still)

― J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Monday, 9 June 2003 19:28 (twenty-two years ago)

Music can't exist without social discourse surrounding it, of which criticism is the sharpest embodiment.

Music crit can make do with the body of already produced music (and largely does -- Uncut could survive for years on the product of the 70s alone)

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Monday, 9 June 2003 19:29 (twenty-two years ago)

Anyway j0hn none of my criticism is criticism, so its hardly music either.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Monday, 9 June 2003 19:30 (twenty-two years ago)

Skipping 252 messages at this point... Click here if you want to load them all.

I think the stats have somehting to do with how many musicians and how many critics people have even heard of.

If this wasn't ILM they'd be even further unbalanced.

Ask some random person in the street to name a music critic.

― mei (mei), Wednesday, 11 June 2003 13:16 (twenty-two years ago)

"Nick Hornby!"

― Nick Southall (Nick Southall), Wednesday, 11 June 2003 13:17 (twenty-two years ago)

They'll be unaware that he's a music critic, and they'll they'll look at you like yr an idiot.

― mei (mei), Wednesday, 11 June 2003 13:19 (twenty-two years ago)

Sterling Clover!

― Andrew Thames (Andrew Thames), Wednesday, 11 June 2003 13:20 (twenty-two years ago)

"Alex Petridis!"

― Nick Southall (Nick Southall), Wednesday, 11 June 2003 13:20 (twenty-two years ago)

They might say David Mellor.

― mei (mei), Wednesday, 11 June 2003 13:23 (twenty-two years ago)

Nick and Andrew, you're disqualified from answering this as you post to ILM.

― mei (mei), Wednesday, 11 June 2003 13:24 (twenty-two years ago)

Hmmm. There might be a little flaw in my plan...

― mei (mei), Wednesday, 11 June 2003 13:24 (twenty-two years ago)

I will ask a random person at work. Hang on.

― kate (kate), Wednesday, 11 June 2003 13:25 (twenty-two years ago)

I asked the blokes at work, and they said "Jonathan King!"

― kate (kate), Wednesday, 11 June 2003 13:26 (twenty-two years ago)

Fame fame, fatal fame.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 11 June 2003 13:29 (twenty-two years ago)

Fucking great answer, random people at kate's work.

― Nick Southall (Nick Southall), Wednesday, 11 June 2003 13:30 (twenty-two years ago)

Of course, now they want to know what I've won, and are making me stand by the printer and stick invoices in envelopes when I've been successfully avoiding any kind of work all day. Grrr, thanks guys.

― kate (kate), Wednesday, 11 June 2003 13:30 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm nopt askinh anyone here to name a random music critic, i'd get a slap.

― mei (mei), Wednesday, 11 June 2003 13:32 (twenty-two years ago)

Ha ha, this is great! I asked another bloke at work, and he said "Yes! Yes I can! Fiona Fletcher!" I feel very chuffed now. :-)

― kate (kate), Wednesday, 11 June 2003 13:33 (twenty-two years ago)

Rah!

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 11 June 2003 13:57 (twenty-two years ago)

>Or those white birds that ride on the backs of rhinos and peck bugs out of their skin folds?<

They're called zikzak birds, and I have no idea how their shit smells.

I liked Kate's yogurt culture post best, though. (How does that guy in De La Soul whose name is "yogurt" backwards fit into this, though?)
But sorry, the word "maths" as a plural will bug me til the day I die.

― chuck, Wednesday, 11 June 2003 14:46 (twenty-two years ago)

I like this game.

Ned Raggett! Tobi Vail! Steve Malkmus! Lou Barlow! All of Ladytron! Chris Charlesworth!

I could be here all day...

― Jerry (Jerry), Wednesday, 11 June 2003 14:47 (twenty-two years ago)

John Robb! Jorn Darnielle! Jon Slade! Jon Rogers! John Peel!

Wheee, this is fun....

― Jerry (Jerry), Wednesday, 11 June 2003 14:49 (twenty-two years ago)

Well, yr easy to amuse

― Andrew Thames (Andrew Thames), Wednesday, 11 June 2003 14:50 (twenty-two years ago)

They couldn't name any other music critics, though. :-(

Jerry, you are DOUBLY disqualified as being both an ILM poster AND a member of the music press, so stop it. I will get a broom now to sweep up all the names you've dropped on the floor!

― kate (kate), Wednesday, 11 June 2003 14:50 (twenty-two years ago)

let's bug chuck eddy till he dies!!

― mark s (mark s), Wednesday, 11 June 2003 14:54 (twenty-two years ago)

Make sure you wrap my name in plastic, it can be fairly toxic.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 11 June 2003 14:54 (twenty-two years ago)

Jonathon Ross.

He said Radiohead's new album was great on his show last week which, ooooh, millions of people watch.

― mei (mei), Wednesday, 11 June 2003 14:55 (twenty-two years ago)

Can we *bag* Chuck Eddy till he dies?

― Jerry (Jerry), Wednesday, 11 June 2003 14:57 (twenty-two years ago)

kate you are on top form!!!!

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Wednesday, 11 June 2003 15:00 (twenty-two years ago)

I am used to sweeping up names. I used to live with Suzy, remember? ;-)

― kate (kate), Wednesday, 11 June 2003 15:07 (twenty-two years ago)

chuck - mathematics = maths
i have never heard anyone say: "i am very good at mathematic."
therefore:
english people = right
US folks = wrong

― Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Wednesday, 11 June 2003 15:28 (twenty-two years ago)

What do you know? You're Welsh!

Your word for mathematics is probably Llangffyrrddillgggbbbhhhhhttthhhdddddddddyyyyyyyyyyyllllddddd or something!

― kate (kate), Wednesday, 11 June 2003 15:42 (twenty-two years ago)

you arsehammer kate!

― Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Wednesday, 11 June 2003 15:45 (twenty-two years ago)

maths
maths maths maths
maths maths maths maths maths
maths maths maths maths maths maths maths
maths maths maths maths maths maths maths maths maths
maths maths maths maths maths maths maths maths maths maths maths
maths maths maths maths maths maths maths maths maths
maths maths maths maths maths maths maths
maths maths maths maths maths
maths maths maths
maths

― Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Wednesday, 11 June 2003 15:59 (twenty-two years ago)

Mathemateg :-)

― mei (mei), Wednesday, 11 June 2003 16:53 (twenty-two years ago)

You say tomato, I say tomato.

― mei (mei), Wednesday, 11 June 2003 16:56 (twenty-two years ago)

BUT YOU'RE WRONG!

― mei (mei), Wednesday, 11 June 2003 16:56 (twenty-two years ago)

beacuse i'm tone deaf and rhythm-impaired, which never stopped me from gainful employment as a writer/editor.
and, more importantly, i'd rather drink a beer at the bar and be entertained. the music sounds better in front of the stage.

― bucky wunderlick (bucky), Wednesday, 11 June 2003 18:15 (twenty-two years ago)

U R Gay. Science roXors!!!

― kate (kate), Thursday, 12 June 2003 07:21 (twenty-two years ago)

Crisps, crisps, crisps!

― mei (mei), Thursday, 12 June 2003 07:26 (twenty-two years ago)

Chips!
Shopping centre!
Trousers!

― mei (mei), Thursday, 12 June 2003 07:27 (twenty-two years ago)

I also hereby claim the song title "Math Vs Maths".

― mei (mei), Thursday, 12 June 2003 08:40 (twenty-two years ago)

'cause music journos get more pussy?

― Tad (llamasfur), Thursday, 12 June 2003 08:42 (twenty-two years ago)

Pants! Pantspantspants!!! World-WIDE pants!

― kate (kate), Thursday, 12 June 2003 09:09 (twenty-two years ago)

Oh, we have pants too, but we choose to wear them beneath our TROUSERS!

― mei (mei), Thursday, 12 June 2003 09:45 (twenty-two years ago)

The only person I know who wears his pants over his trousers is Superman.

― kate (kate), Thursday, 12 June 2003 09:46 (twenty-two years ago)

Hey! That's it! Clark Kent was a journalist! They all secretly think that they will get superpowers and save the world through being music journalists rather than musicians!

― kate (kate), Thursday, 12 June 2003 09:47 (twenty-two years ago)

Don't you hate pants?

― Homer Jay Simpson, Thursday, 12 June 2003 09:48 (twenty-two years ago)

"Leaving the house requires one part sunshine, one part pants, and two parts will to live." -Jess Harvell

― Jody Beth Rosen (Jody Beth Rosen), Thursday, 12 June 2003 09:49 (twenty-two years ago)

(WHISPER)
I hope he tells us to burn our pants.. these things are driving me nuts!
(WHISPER)

― Homer Jay Simpson, Thursday, 12 June 2003 09:49 (twenty-two years ago)

seven months pass...

valerie are fuckin excellent; their songs are dancing in my brain! why u want a be something not is valerie for, "k, a, t, e" - you could never be valerie because they are!

― cozen googler (Cozen), Thursday, 5 February 2004 01:29 (twenty-one years ago)

haha i'm not really that drunk, just got back from seeing electrelane and valerie supported and wr amazing. like that dream you had where life without buildings were good. apologies kate. you are on crack in history, though.

― cozen (Cozen), Thursday, 5 February 2004 01:31 (twenty-one years ago)

Do they have much of a choice, really?

― Geir Hongro (GeirHong), Thursday, 5 February 2004 01:34 (twenty-one years ago)

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