Rockism, authenticity and selling magazines--Jamie Lidell on the cover of Wire and Lizz Wright on the cover of No Depression

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

I know there's already a thread where folks discuss the Wire(not enough grime; covering dub but not dancehall, etc.) but when I noticed at Tower, Wire magazine with Jamie Lidell on the cover, and No Depression, with onetime jazzy vocalist Lizz Wright on the cover, I thought this was worth noting on its own. Apparently Lidell's techno background has made his current Motown soul singing style worthy of a Wire cover in a way in which oh, Anthony Hamilton or R. Kelly (or reggae balladeer Beres Hammond)are apparently not worthy. While over at the onetime altcountry only No Depression, they've been reaching out a bit. First with articles on Mavis Staples, and Otis Taylor (both old-school soulful or bluesy enough to be 'real' to their audience) and now a cover story on Lizz Wright. Why jazzy vocalist Wright? Could it be she now proclaims her love for Jeff Buckley and Nick Drake, and covers Neil Young on her most recent cd. Hmmmm, is that what it takes for a young African-American woman singer to make their cover? Should we just be happy they're going slightly beyond their once narrow confines(and are more daring than their bland competition in Paste and Harp).

― steve K from dc, Tuesday, 26 July 2005 02:12 (twenty years ago)

There's a shortage of things to read about R. Kelly?

― Tumililingan (ex machina), Tuesday, 26 July 2005 02:18 (twenty years ago)

I think No Depression has a pretty good excuse in that it's a magazine about alt-country. So yeah, duh, they're not reviewing the new Missy. Wire has more 'splainin to do.

― Hurting (Hurting), Tuesday, 26 July 2005 02:19 (twenty years ago)

x-post.

Alright, then just substitute any African-American or Black Brit vocalist...Why is the Wire only interested in white techno guys doing music in the soul tradition? The article does address the issue slightly but not very definitively...(and I'm not sure that goofy picture of Lidell with 2 pairs of glasses on is going to sell many extra issues. Wire appealing to their same ol' core audience shockah).

I'm still waiting for No Depression to really sell out and put Gretchen Wilson (Or Missy !) on the cover. Lizz Wright's now on a Verve imprint label that once put out Laura Nyro, so that also makes her acceptable to their readers...

― steve k, Tuesday, 26 July 2005 02:29 (twenty years ago)

It seems like you're defining your parameters in such a way that you can tear down some sacred cows, bro!

― Tumililingan (ex machina), Tuesday, 26 July 2005 02:31 (twenty years ago)

I just want Wire and No Depression to widen their parameters to ILM, K. Sanneh,V. Voice and blog levels!

― Steve k, Tuesday, 26 July 2005 02:57 (twenty years ago)

Why don't you make a better music magazine smartguy?

― Tumililingan (ex machina), Tuesday, 26 July 2005 03:24 (twenty years ago)

ROCKISM THRED YAY : D

― gear (gear), Tuesday, 26 July 2005 03:25 (twenty years ago)

Gotta keep the "rockism" battles alive. I wonder if the Dissensus founder and Simon Reynolds who have been advocating a unique brand of 'rockism' lately, would agree with how Wire chooses their covers.

― Steve K (Steve K), Tuesday, 26 July 2005 03:55 (twenty years ago)

EUROPEAN DANCE MUSIC IN AMERICA: A TREATISE BY SIMON REYNOLDS

― Tumililingan (ex machina), Tuesday, 26 July 2005 04:02 (twenty years ago)

I wonder if many alt-country diehards had already heard of Lizz Wright? Maybe it is a interesting and daring cover choice?

I think the latest Fader has dual covers with a Damian Marley on 1 side and Jack White on the other. Tumilingan, that mag sometimes has a provocative and interesting mesh of music features(among the ads and fashion photos).

― Steve K (Steve K), Tuesday, 26 July 2005 04:08 (twenty years ago)

I was originally gonna write that Lizz Wright piece, but then they found another writer who, like, knew more about jazz and stuff.

fwiw, and I know there's not massive love for No Depression on ILM, but the magazine has always been a bit broader than "alt-country, whatever that is," and has moved more toward a sort of general rootsy-music focus. They even let me write a column about Bubba Sparxxx and Big & Rich a few issues back. It's not ever going to be about Missy, no, but I wouldn't rule out Gretchen. Just wait 'til she makes her bluegrass move.

― gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Tuesday, 26 July 2005 04:16 (twenty years ago)

I think that, with the wire, they're always going to take an interest in someone like lidell who starts out doing something in their idiom who then moves towards the mainstream (up to a point); or conversely someone who starts out "pop" and moves away. eg: wilco - I bet they weren't getting coverage in the wire for their first couple of albums, but then they get o'rourke to produce, fall out with label over "uncommercial" album, hire nels cline, start doing 10-minute neu! ripoffs and whaddya know, they're on the cover.

it's pretty obvious that they're just not interested in straight pop, there has to be an "avant" hook of sorts - I'd imagine their justification is that most pop gets enough coverage elsewhere. a bit of a snooty attitude really, but maybe fair enough considering the size of the magazine. I dunno.

― haitch (haitch), Tuesday, 26 July 2005 05:11 (twenty years ago)

brief answer: for "o'rourke" read "herbert." the wire likes to keep on the right side of its "friends."

― Marcello Carlin, Tuesday, 26 July 2005 05:16 (twenty years ago)

The hook with Wire is that they like to delve into subversive/avant music. That's just what they do. Never a cover story about nu-metal...but they did one for black metal/doom metal. Ludacris will never make the cover, but MF Doom has. That's fine with me. I'd rather they try to stick to one thing (or in this case, several, though somewhat linked) and do it well than try to be an end all be all of music publications. After all; do you really need another magazine talking about the new 50 Cent?

― Alan Conceicao (Alan Conceicao), Tuesday, 26 July 2005 05:16 (twenty years ago)

Lidell on the cover? I shall look out for this, he is quite stunningly hott.

― The Lex (The Lex), Tuesday, 26 July 2005 05:23 (twenty years ago)

It's disappointing Lex.

― Tim Finney (Tim Finney), Tuesday, 26 July 2005 06:55 (twenty years ago)

I don't want The Wire to spread out into ILM and blogosphere territories, cos I have ILM and the blogosphere for that, and I don't really want to start buying the magazine again.

― Tom (Groke), Tuesday, 26 July 2005 08:19 (twenty years ago)

Who the fuck is Jamie Lidell anyway? And why is he on the cover of an issue featuring an interview with Ornette Coleman?

― pdf (Phil Freeman), Tuesday, 26 July 2005 11:13 (twenty years ago)

I am told that Mr Lidell is apparently "fitter" than Mr Coleman.

― Marcello Carlin, Tuesday, 26 July 2005 11:25 (twenty years ago)

"The hook with Wire is that they like to delve into subversive/avant music."

It's just interesting how they define "subversive/avant." I don't believe Lidell was ever on the cover before he made his Motown move. On the other hand, if they had wanted to sell more issues based on his more accessible record, and "fitness," you woulda thought they'd have a better cover photo of him.

― steve-k, Tuesday, 26 July 2005 12:37 (twenty years ago)

in what alternate universe would R.Kelly ever be the subject of a Wire article? wtf?

― jed_ (jed), Tuesday, 26 July 2005 13:03 (twenty years ago)

Only if he gets Nurse With Wound to produce his next album.

― Marcello Carlin, Tuesday, 26 July 2005 13:04 (twenty years ago)

Same universe Michael Jackson was on the cover, I guess.

― Tom (Groke), Tuesday, 26 July 2005 13:10 (twenty years ago)

1991 is an alternative universe as far as The Wire goes.

― jed_ (jed), Tuesday, 26 July 2005 13:25 (twenty years ago)

Lex you can have my copy of that Wire if you like.

― Sociah T Azzahole (blueski), Tuesday, 26 July 2005 13:42 (twenty years ago)

Thinking about this recently, that the label you're on and how you are promoted has a lot to do with what sort of coverage you receive. If Lidell's album had been picked up by Columbia I doubt very much he'd be on the cover. But Warp is a different story. Same way this last Harold Budd album, being released on Sub Rosa, will get much more indie/underground press than if it had been released on a label known for New Age (not saying he is New Age but some of his earlier music has wound up in the New Age bins).

― Mark (MarkR), Tuesday, 26 July 2005 15:32 (twenty years ago)

I'd rather shag Ornette than Jamie Lidell. Just saying.

― Anti-Pope Consortium (noodle vague), Tuesday, 26 July 2005 16:05 (twenty years ago)

"the label you're on and how you're promoted has a lot to do with what coverage you receive" is correct. "how you're promoted" includes magazine ad dollars, either real or hoped for. that's not to say that all publishers sell all their covers (i never saw any jeweled antler spreads in the wire), but it does enter into the equation.

― dan (dan), Tuesday, 26 July 2005 16:45 (twenty years ago)

(the wire really doesn't belong in a discussion of putting artists on the cover in the hope of selling of an ad because they're less guilty of it than anyone.)

― dan (dan), Tuesday, 26 July 2005 16:58 (twenty years ago)

Highly ungraceful cover pic, I looked like a dork carrying it. Dorky mag anyway.

― blunt (blunt), Tuesday, 26 July 2005 18:10 (twenty years ago)

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