Musiccrit Mindfuck

Rashomon!

They both sound like people I'd prefer to avoid in future.

Argh! These two gents deserve each other.

For what it's worth, Matthew the Musician raises some good points and illustrates them eloquently. I'd be curious to see how the Critic would respond.

Still, saying that "rock critiscism" is a waste of time, space, ink, oxygen, type-writer ribbon, etc. etc. is an old complaint.

Matthew the Musician is right of course - the linked review relied on tired ideas and came across as contemptuous and lazy. The problem is that instead of then saying - "What a bad review this was I will call out the critic concerned" - he says - "This review is bad therefore all critics are scum."

He's also wrong about how mass taste works, I think - he can trace the first oscillation (in fashion/out-of-fashion) but then he doesn't appreciate the way irony or nostalgia or contrarianism or respect works to keep the pendulum swinging. It's not critics who do this, either - actually Jeff The Critic's review looks a bit OUT of touch because it doesn't acknowledge that hair metal isn't 'uncool' anymore, even by deploring the trend for its revival.

Sour grapes, pure and simple. Maybe the lyrics were quoted wrong, but I sure got a good idea of what the music sounded like from the review. Not to say the the review is the finest piece of writing or anything.

Matthew: I'll provide a link to this review at the end of this article, by which time I'll have convinced you that critics and their reviews are completely worthless and you won't want to read it anyway. Uh, wrong.

Matthew again: Let's dissect the average critic. What motivates a person to be a music critic? Well, usually this person likes to think that they are an authority on music. In reality, the critic is usually failed at whatever he is criticizing. Nothing like dragging out hoary old cliches to try to combat hoary old cliches, eh? Really, whether or not the review misquoted the lyrics, this really just sounds like music-critic-hurt-me-so-I'll-cry-in-public- about-how-unfair-it-all-is. Learn to take yer lumps now, Matthew, cause some people just ain't gonna like your music, whether they're taking prevailing trends into account or not. Learning to ignore them and just get on with your music will make people respect your dedication to your music all the more, especially if the style ain't so fashionable.

When you read a music review, be it scathing or praising, you pollute your mind with someone else's agenda, ideals, and often misinformation.

Egad -- this zen psycho promotes nothing less than a complete moratorium on the exchange of opinions, from here to eternity! "The rose is not red, the willow is not green!" We'd best avoid saying his band is any good -- wouldn't want to pollute anyone's mind with our agenda, when they can always look to the rose/willow/music, man. Oh, but wait: that would just mean that our minds were polluted by ... ah, something someone wrote about music on the internet!

The beautiful thing about criticism is that you can't criticize it without doing it yourself.

Also: why have small-time musicians invariably never heard the old "publicity is publicity" saw? It's as if there are rockers in every other major city firing off pissy emails to little web zines ... Would Matthew the Musician really prefer his music never to be tainted by criticism again? If so, I hope he's ready to do some serious touring.

Egad. How would this guy react to Starostin?

M. Doughty wrote a similar (more vengeful, more pitious, more better) type of critique a while back for the New York Press, except he doesn't dismiss critics as failed MUSICIANS, but as failed WRITERS. But, you know, a couple bad apples, blah blah blah, and there are plenty of folks perfectly willing to bet their life savings on the world being flat.

If only critics had that much sway over individual taste - people might actually buy that Dylan album! It'd be so much easier if some Higher Power (a Governing Body of some sort) could just establish a Concrete Critical Standard for all useless writer twerps to follow, and all the bitter fucks writing about people more talented than their bitter fuck selves could simply go down the checklist, mail in a caption praising the music being discussed, and make everyone involved happy.

(My lunch & I are currently at loggerheads - excuse me whilst I vent.)

What a bunch of babies. I can't believe so many people get their panties in a twist because some dork at a computer doesn't like their music. I'm an editorial cartoonist and I get shit all the time but I don't bitch about it. Jesus Christ.

What's also funny is that in the upper left corner on Matthew J's page is a link to an article titled "Growing Thicker Skin."

As I understand it, Splendid decide what to review based solely on the submissions they receive. This means that in all likelihood Matthew J. sent the cd in himself because he wanted it to be reviewed, hoping that the critic would then tell him that he was as great as he imagined himself to be. When the critic expressed his opinion and it differed from Matthew's opinion of himself, he then took it upon himself to make the novel declaration that all critics are useless. Of course, we could assume that Matthew J. Didn't actually send in the cd himself, but this only makes the response slightly less pathetic.

As to the review, I agree that it's pretty useless, especially given the fact that Splendid included a picture of the cover art, which was warning enough.