"[Band] should just break up": valid journalist hyperbole or complete fucking outrage?

If a review is nothing but childest put downs, versus examining circumstances regarding a band's existence whereas "breaking up" is a strategy suggested out of love for the band, one can see how wildly varied the context can be.

See, I'm of two minds!

I KNOW I AM, DAMMIT.

Personally I think the only bands who should break up are the ones I hate, so regrettably I'm on the put-down side of things. I dunno, I guess I'm always happy to see bands I love continuing on, but if the individual members can't stand each other anymore, then they should definitely call it a day for their sanity. But I'm not them, so how would I know?

There is no morality of music writing.

Like me, Amy's in her mid-20s. So we're experiencing the very first wave of bands we loved in high school becoming completely fucking embarrassing in the same way we saw the Rolling Stones, Cheap Trick, Heart, Kiss, et al do when we were kids. I can understand the reaction since I want to keep those warm fuzzies intact when so many alternaboom bands are becoming bullshit nostalgia acts (Helmet, Pixies, Weezer, oh so many more)

Sub-problem there, though, is that rock bands like to be human (because they're humans), and like to be treated as decently as we treat fellow humans (because they're humans) -- but at the same time, a lot of what we want from them, and a lot of what they're trying to sell us, is a sense of something that's not quite human, or anyway more mysterious and less vulnerable and more idealized humans than the ones we keep as friends. We want just one side of them, at its absolute best -- apart from massive fandom, we become such best friends with them that we're interested in their failings and their bad ideas and just happy to hear them making some music.

however, I also haven't bought any of their records since "A Thousand Leaves" (which I sold back, it was kinda boring), so I can't say they're spoiling my memories of their earlier material if I'm not hearing the newer stuff. I just like them being around as "elder statesmen" - keepin the scene aliiiiiiiiiive

and to think of its harrowing origins, what with journo-illuminati on their backs and all

Haha, the only image I have in my head now is Thurston Moore and Steve Malkmus in huge blouses Mick-Jagger-ing around a studio to a rocked out cover of a "Dancing In The Streets" music video.

Nah, Kriscafulci.

Sure, I'm still putting my money on a critical reassessment and revival of Big Audio Dynamite in 2007 or 2008, but -- fuck -- I mean, let's not assume the bubonic plague has started already. That's just cruel.

Not coincidentally, that's the next to last TMBG album I bought. Though I wasn't thinking they should break up - I just stopped following them. I think They Might Be Giants are an odd exception to the rule of many bands, in that their audience always seems to be young kids/teens/early 20-somethings, and when one generation grows too old, a new one jumps in. I got too old, I guess. The songs on the last album I bought (Mink Car) sounded like rehashes of older stuff, but for some 15 year old, they might sound like the best thing they ever heard. If they break up or not, I don't care, I just moved on.

Angels and Airwaves are the first step.

Everyone remembers them in the 80s as the seminal Minions And Currents.

I disagree. Bands should prioritize obsessing over music reviews and threaten libel and write angry letters when certain publications don't jibe with them.

it's probably going too far.

The reason I responded so negatively to the comment regarding the Feelies, is that like many others, I think the Feelies best work was ahead of them.

http://www.straight.com/images/MUS_M.I.A._1972.jpg

I'm sure some well-established rock bands, especially Sonic Youth, seem pretty immune to good or bad reviews at this point. And yeah, many bands do fall into this category.

But surely you mean "certain fans of bands" moreso than "bands" here...?

yeah, that's what I mean. there's the problem of interpretation. for example... do you actually mean "factual" or do you really mean "sincere?" and what rhetirocal device are you refering to? how does one recognize it? do I need an instruction booklet in order to read a music review or do I just have to be "cool" enough to "get it?"

It's just comprehension, isn't it? The reason I contrast it to a factual statement is that people offended by a rhetorical statement will come back with "of course the band shouldn't split up, they have lots of fans/it's a free country/they're doing what they love" when the original line, 9 times out of 10, is just an emphatic version of "I think what this band does now sucks".

I don't think it's wrong or rude, just stupid. Why tell someone how to spend their time, or how to make a living? It's sort of sad to think of no-talent pasty-faced crtics taking themselves so seriously.

That was while watching the Stone Roses at Reading Festival.

See this is what I was getting at above. The critic isn't telling someone how to spend their time, they're just saying they think their music sucks.

But hey, write what you want. Like Dan, I was calling for Sonic Youth to break up in '88 so Amy's a bit late to the ballgame. At this point they could release a double-album once a month, who cares if the stack of shit is 10 feet or 50 feet high? At the very least, SY have used their fame consistently as a bully pulpit to expose obscure musicians to a larger audience, which is more than you can say about other past-their-prime institutions.

For example, you could say that R.E.M. should break up because of the failure of Around the Sun, which casts a shadow on its previous work, particularly the WB releases. On the other hand, I'm far too much of an optimist to really think R.E.M. should break up. I keep hoping they'll spend about $500 on their next album, record in a barn, and surpass Murmur, but I'm not holding my breath.

-- mark grout (mark.grou...), June 22nd, 2006.

i was there too :(

so... in other words, it's pure pretentious drivel? and mean spirited at that!

for example, I could say you should stop posting on this message board because your last post really stunk.

I mean god, just think about all the great stuff out there that never would've happened if people were too afraid to try because there was a chance they would fail. of course there's a chance you're going to fail! there is no reward without risk. otherwise you are just going through the motions.