Dubstepforum.com

knell wrote:Honestly though, i don't understand music reviews/journalism in general... who honestly thinks that some people have a better objective view of a song/album's quality as opposed to random people on the street?

People have been telling me that Bon Dylan and the Beatles have written the best songs of all time, when I disagree.. who's right/wrong?

Can a journalist write an article that includes every perspective of a piece of music? Do they write from the perspective of every socio-economic standpoint? Every point of intoxication? Do they take into account a person's mindset when they hear a certain genre? If they've been abused? Whether they like the color blue?

Really, why should I listen to one persons opinion over another just because it's more readily available? That goes for anything, not just music.


This is a rant against most music opinion pieces, not the arbitrary summary in question in the OP.

Well, you'd be right about Dylan, but wrong about the Beatles.

Criticism is vital in the arts. Art, unlike just about everything else humans do is consciousness expanding, and arts criticism can greatly help expand understanding of art work. There are critics that fancy themselves opinion makers, trend makers, whatever, that is for people who follow, and there are enough of them, it is inevitable, that whole situation is a lost cause so who gives a fuck, but real and true criticism is itself a creative act that expands consciousness.

It is silly to ask was the criticism written from every perspective. No true critic would attempt to do such a thing, or claim to do such a thing. But exploring one, or a handful of perspectives can give a reader a whole new way of approaching a piece, or an idea.

knell wrote:Really, why should I listen to one persons opinion over another just because it's more readily available? That goes for anything, not just music.

You don't have to listen to anyone's opinions if you don't want to, but if you encounter someone's opinion and it broadens your perspective, opens your mind, and allows you to enjoy new things, what is the problem with that? It just so happens that some people have a talent for doing that, so their opinions become more readily available, it doesn't make the opinion more or less valid for you, for your own understanding. Your consideration and rejection of the opinion is even a positive event in that it increases your understanding of the underlying idea or work. To put it in an arena you might be more comfortable in, the opinion of a critic is just a hypothesis, something that can be tested and evaluated, by you, for your own benefit.

nowaysj wrote:

knell wrote:Honestly though, i don't understand music reviews/journalism in general... who honestly thinks that some people have a better objective view of a song/album's quality as opposed to random people on the street?

People have been telling me that Bon Dylan and the Beatles have written the best songs of all time, when I disagree.. who's right/wrong?

Can a journalist write an article that includes every perspective of a piece of music? Do they write from the perspective of every socio-economic standpoint? Every point of intoxication? Do they take into account a person's mindset when they hear a certain genre? If they've been abused? Whether they like the color blue?

Really, why should I listen to one persons opinion over another just because it's more readily available? That goes for anything, not just music.


This is a rant against most music opinion pieces, not the arbitrary summary in question in the OP.

Well, you'd be right about Dylan, but wrong about the Beatles.

I know you're not hating on Dylan son!

I am, don't get me started. One thing I couldn't agree about with my pops. Yeah, give the the Stones, Beatles, Fleetwood Mac, Joni Mitchell, I'll take all of it, but I'll pass on the Dylan, total faker.

For your troubles:

You know I'll admit this about Dylan.. other people do his songs better than he does.. but man are his songs damn good.

nowaysj wrote:It just so happens that some people have a talent for doing that

i disagree on this point.

nowaysj wrote:No true critic would attempt to do such a thing

i find the idea of a true critic laughable, as strange as that sounds.

nowaysj wrote:But exploring one, or a handful of perspectives can give a reader a whole new way of approaching a piece, or an idea.

I can do all of the above by myself, but maybe that's the introvert in me.. i really dont need others to tell me why a song should touch me, lyrically or otherwise

murky21 wrote:i thought it was really well written to be honest - you could replace about 25% of the threads in main forum with just this single article

+1

Most of the comments in this thread are so petulant. The fact that you lot are slagging off this piece BECAUSE it is on Pitchfork is just... too dumb for words.

Big up Blackdown/Martin, really enjoy your columns.

Shirka wrote:

murky21 wrote:i thought it was really well written to be honest - you could replace about 25% of the threads in main forum with just this single article

+1

Most of the comments in this thread are so petulant. The fact that you lot are slagging off this piece BECAUSE it is on Pitchfork is just... too dumb for words.

Big up Blackdown/Martin, really enjoy your columns.

I ain't slagging it off because it is on Pitchfork, I just think music journalism is a wee bit shit.

apmje wrote:
I ain't slagging it off because it is on Pitchfork, I just think music journalism is a wee bit shit.

Sorry, I retract 'you lot'. I meant to say 'most of you'.

I can understand why you would think it was shit, but there are some talented music journalists.

I am sure there are...I just don't really pay attention to them.

My opinion matters most to me.

nowaysj wrote:

knell wrote:Honestly though, i don't understand music reviews/journalism in general... who honestly thinks that some people have a better objective view of a song/album's quality as opposed to random people on the street?

People have been telling me that Bon Dylan and the Beatles have written the best songs of all time, when I disagree.. who's right/wrong?

Can a journalist write an article that includes every perspective of a piece of music? Do they write from the perspective of every socio-economic standpoint? Every point of intoxication? Do they take into account a person's mindset when they hear a certain genre? If they've been abused? Whether they like the color blue?

Really, why should I listen to one persons opinion over another just because it's more readily available? That goes for anything, not just music.


This is a rant against most music opinion pieces, not the arbitrary summary in question in the OP.

Well, you'd be right about Dylan, but wrong about the Beatles.

Criticism is vital in the arts. Art, unlike just about everything else humans do is consciousness expanding, and arts criticism can greatly help expand understanding of art work. There are critics that fancy themselves opinion makers, trend makers, whatever, that is for people who follow, and there are enough of them, it is inevitable, that whole situation is a lost cause so who gives a fuck, but real and true criticism is itself a creative act that expands consciousness.

It is silly to ask was the criticism written from every perspective. No true critic would attempt to do such a thing, or claim to do such a thing. But exploring one, or a handful of perspectives can give a reader a whole new way of approaching a piece, or an idea.

knell wrote:Really, why should I listen to one persons opinion over another just because it's more readily available? That goes for anything, not just music.

You don't have to listen to anyone's opinions if you don't want to, but if you encounter someone's opinion and it broadens your perspective, opens your mind, and allows you to enjoy new things, what is the problem with that? It just so happens that some people have a talent for doing that, so their opinions become more readily available, it doesn't make the opinion more or less valid for you, for your own understanding. Your consideration and rejection of the opinion is even a positive event in that it increases your understanding of the underlying idea or work. To put it in an arena you might be more comfortable in, the opinion of a critic is just a hypothesis, something that can be tested and evaluated, by you, for your own benefit.

This all day, cept the part about Dylan.

nowaysj wrote:I am, don't get me started. One thing I couldn't agree about with my pops. Yeah, give the the Stones, Beatles, Fleetwood Mac, Joni Mitchell, I'll take all of it, but I'll pass on the Dylan, total faker.

For your troubles:

So glad you linked that..

One of my favorite songs ever.

haha, ^ so far beyond the topic at hand!

o shit banhammer.

fu·tile   
[fyoot-l, fyoo-tahyl]
–adjective
1. incapable of producing any result; ineffective; useless; not successful: Attempting to force-feed the sick horse was futile.
2. trifling; frivolous; unimportant.

figures an article as shitty and pointless as this one is on pitchfork. wastesite. seriously, who gives a damn?

kingGhost wrote:figures an article as shitty and pointless as this one is on pitchfork. wastesite. seriously, who gives a damn?

. people are gonna read this kind of shit regardless of how good it is. What harm does it do to have someone who actually knows what he is talking about writing for a popular website?
i understand that you're already clued up on everything he's writing about. clearly the article is not for you but it does serve a point and attempts to provide multiple viewpoints on a murky subject that is frequently misreported on. jeeeezus.

it's just such a tired old topic and it's so pointless in the first place. only people who AREN'T clued in care.

A reasonable piece of writing which I didn't quite understand. Maybe it was overly ambitious or I don't know enough.
So thanks for this synopsis my dear:

Genevieve wrote:Essentially, what I got out of the article is that the London underground largely transcended what we would call 'genres' and it's all a mishmash of influences and styles.

If that is what it was about, then I agree.

Pitchfork reviews are absolute shit. Fortunately, this isn't a review and sums up the state of things very well, though it doesn't really establish what it's trying to say.

lol @ people dissing Blackdown

knell wrote:

nowaysj wrote:It just so happens that some people have a talent for doing that

i disagree on this point.

nowaysj wrote:No true critic would attempt to do such a thing

i find the idea of a true critic laughable, as strange as that sounds.

nowaysj wrote:But exploring one, or a handful of perspectives can give a reader a whole new way of approaching a piece, or an idea.

I can do all of the above by myself, but maybe that's the introvert in me.. i really dont need others to tell me why a song should touch me, lyrically or otherwise

you should read Hume's description of a true critic

in fact there's loads of great philosophical pieces about aesthetics (i took a finals piece on aesthetics at uni, it was one of the best modules ive done)

personally i think the very analysis of critics' work, makes worthwhile having critics alone

its such a cerebral activity, like noways said, analysing work, reading analysis, learning new things about aesthetic pieces and practice you never knew before

you saying its pointless is from the viewpoint of an experienced, maybe natural aesthetic appreciator, maybe you were lucky enough to be surrounded by art when you were younger, most people aren't and need guidance in some form or other, and most people find their feet through critics and find critics whose personal taste reflect their own - hence why they remain popular

its one argument to say that critics lead people's opinions

i think whats closer is to say popular critics reflect the popular opinion

the best critics are simply those whose work on pieces, is the most insightful, interesting, reflective, engaging

you dont necessarily have to agree with them but the perspective they bring to some aesthetics and art is almost an art form in itself

that said there's also a lot of tossers out there who spout out avalanche's of pretentious bull crap and smack of self importance

/irony