Taking Sides: Lester Bangs vs Richard Meltzer

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

who better? choose ya out, punk...

― Romilar Jag (nonthings), Tuesday, 17 February 2004 23:58 (twenty-two years ago)

In this a writing contest or a drinking contest?

― Barry Bruner (Barry Bruner), Wednesday, 18 February 2004 00:01 (twenty-two years ago)

Erm, none of the above.

― Sym (shmuel), Wednesday, 18 February 2004 00:03 (twenty-two years ago)

sym otm

― the surface noise (electricsound), Wednesday, 18 February 2004 00:12 (twenty-two years ago)

The wisdom of the armchair chemists is:

"...If you really wanna lean, nothing less than a deuce (2 oz) will do. And that deuce goes into your styrofoam cup, not a 1,2, or 3-liter. DXM is something completely different. I've robo'dONCE in my life and been sippin' since 1993 - there's a big big difference. Real lean actually tastes sweet like candy and is tasty to sip. DXM comes from Robotussin or elsewhere, tastes like crap, and makes you nauseous easily..."

This means Mezzler wins over Saint Cough-Syrup.

Romilar ain't da shit.

Und

The shrine to Saint Cough-Syrup.

― George Smith, Wednesday, 18 February 2004 00:33 (twenty-two years ago)

The wisdom of the armchair chemists is:
"...If you really wanna lean, nothing less than a deuce (2 oz) will do. And that deuce goes into your styrofoam cup, not a 1,2, or 3-liter. DXM is something completely different. I've robo'dONCE in my life and been sippin' since 1993 - there's a big big difference. Real lean actually tastes sweet like candy and is tasty to sip. DXM comes from Robotussin or elsewhere, tastes like crap, and makes you nauseous easily..."
This means Mezzler wins over Saint Cough-Syrup.
Romilar ain't da shit.
Und
The shrine to Saint Cough-Syrup.

― George Smith, Wednesday, 18 February 2004 00:33 (twenty-two years ago)

stop that boldfacedness.
― Matos W.K. (M Matos), Wednesday, 18 February 2004 00:34 (twenty-two years ago)

fuck!
― Matos W.K. (M Matos), Wednesday, 18 February 2004 00:34 (twenty-two years ago)

No. Learn mark-up.
― George Smith, Wednesday, 18 February 2004 00:36 (twenty-two years ago)

I prefer Bangs
― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Wednesday, 18 February 2004 00:41 (twenty-two years ago)

Maybe this will work.

― Michael Daddino (epicharmus), Wednesday, 18 February 2004 00:41 (twenty-two years ago)

TS: Richard Lester vs, Richard Belzer

It's been a hard day's night, and some law and order is called for.

This had better not be boldface.

― Nom De Plume (Nom De Plume), Wednesday, 18 February 2004 00:42 (twenty-two years ago)

George used the < STRONG > tag, btw.

― Michael Daddino (epicharmus), Wednesday, 18 February 2004 00:43 (twenty-two years ago)

Maybe this will work.

Good man!

― George Smith, Wednesday, 18 February 2004 00:43 (twenty-two years ago)

Rock-cricketism-wise, it's Lester, since Meltzer's most "serious" criticism practically predated the form itself. (He'd probably tell you that himself.) But I think Meltzer's a better writer now than Bangs ever was, even though it wasn't until '81 or so that he began to make conscientious attempts to improve his craft. (By not neglecting such nasty, unpleasant tasks as proofreading and rewriting.) I think Meltzer's probably smarter, too: smart enough not to medicate himself to an early death at any rate. BAsically, I love these jokers' work & could insulate the apartment quite nicely with all the newsprint of theirs I've got lying around, so bottom line: I'll take Bangs for writing about rock 'n roll, Meltzer for everything else.

― Myonga Von Bontee, Wednesday, 18 February 2004 01:44 (twenty-two years ago)

Vera Wang v. Alka Seltzer

― Huck, Wednesday, 18 February 2004 02:06 (twenty-two years ago)

not comparable. both are involved in very different tasks that each has its own crucial purpose.

― jack cole (jackcole), Wednesday, 18 February 2004 03:11 (twenty-two years ago)

there are about 50 critics that i like better than either bangs or meltzer.

i'd say about 65% of that group posts to ILM. many of the rest have blogs (and probably lurk on ILM.)

― geeta (geeta), Wednesday, 18 February 2004 03:18 (twenty-two years ago)

...and despite the griping from various sides, Lester and Matos now have at least one thing in common...

― Paul (scifisoul), Wednesday, 18 February 2004 03:31 (twenty-two years ago)

which is what, exactly?

― Matos W.K. (M Matos), Wednesday, 18 February 2004 03:32 (twenty-two years ago)

taking Meltzer to task

― Paul (scifisoul), Wednesday, 18 February 2004 03:37 (twenty-two years ago)

i'm with geeta. i like meltzer's style a lot (at least after he actually learned to write) but his puerile obnoxiousness really grates on me.

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Wednesday, 18 February 2004 17:46 (twenty-two years ago)

surely meltzer's early forays into post-rock writing were more successful than bangs'. can ANYONE make a case for the late-period stuff in the marcus anthology? his attempted fiction and projected books are embarrassing to read against his musical stuff. this comes from a lesterhead and footstep-follower. the morthland anthology was much better, reminding us that bangs was a superior music-qua-music writer than the meltz. and even there, bangs' much maligned RS work in 1969-73 is arguably better in terms of music and uh, literature. too bad it'll never be anthologized: stuff like "the carpenters and the creeps" from 71 would blow y'all's minds.

― soniclifer, Wednesday, 18 February 2004 17:48 (twenty-two years ago)

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