Øivind Idsø wrote:
quoted 8 lines Arthur B. Purvis wrote:> Arthur B. Purvis wrote:
>
>> Another good example: The Wire would never be caught dead writing an
>> article on a band called "Skinny Puppy." Listen to the track Download on
>> Last Rights - lots of CD skipping, noise, etc. 4 years later or so - The
>> Wire discovers Oval (after their hype at the hands of Tortoise, however)
>> totally ignoring Skinny Puppy. They will always, because it isn't "arty"
>> enough.
Arthur, given that you've now shown that you're a former (if not present)
Industrialist and your definition of "dark" music tends to coincide rather
neatly with that style of music purveyed by certain brütish ambient Industrial
artists ... have you ever stopped to consider the fact that maybe the reason
that "The Wire" doesn't write about "Skinny Puppy" or the "Download" track in
particular is because back when "Last Rights" was finished (at the beginning
of November 1991) "The Wire" was covering shit like Pat Metheny?
It's true - issue #102, August 1992 (by which time I know "Last Rights" was
out) featured Trilok Girtu, Sons of Arqa, Joi, Pat Metheny, Steve Martland and
Jimmy Witherspoon. The following month's issue #103 featured such Industrial
artsy stalwarts as Mel Torme, Sinatra vs. Costello, Mike Westbrook, Schubert,
Elvis Presley and Television. Need I say more?
My point being that a magazine covers what it wants to cover at the time, based
on the interests of the editorialship and the writers. At the time of Skinny
Puppy's "Last Rights", "The Wire" was still run by people mostly interested in
Jazz & Improv. By the time of Oval's "Diskont 94", there were people on board
who were interested in modern Electronic music (there was a "Berlin Techno"
feature in #124, June 1994, for example). You can hardly skewer "The Wire" for
not covering Skinny Puppy 6 years after the fact!
quoted 2 lines I have to 'defend' The Wire, as I think it's one of very few magazines who> I have to 'defend' The Wire, as I think it's one of very few magazines who
> actually has something interesting to say about music [...]
I agree with Oeivind (even if he can't keep his posts within 80 columns (-: ).
"The Wire" writes about music I'm interested in. It writes about music that I
don't see written about in the other magazines I have access to. "The Wire"
also covers music that I'm not interested in (the Free Jazz/Improv scene that
is their historical/traditional oevre). I simply don't read those bits that
I'm not interested in. Works for me.
quoted 8 lines First of all, I think you are putting too much of an emphasis on The Wire's> First of all, I think you are putting too much of an emphasis on The Wire's
> conscious approach to picking out music you think is hype. A trivial fact: A
> magazine that has a certain amount of circulation (number of copies being
> printed) and a semi-large audience have to 'hype' something, in the sense
> that it's unavoidable that their (The Wire's) influence will rub off on their
> readers. The Wire puts Alec Empire on their cover, and of course some kind of
> attention will be paid to this guy (deservedly or undeservedly) ... if not
> there wouldn't be any point in running a magazine, right? Enter discourse.
More to the point, who else puts Alec Empire on the cover? Or Autechre? Or
Plaid? Or Juan Atkins? Or Rupert (Photek) Parkes? Or Patrick Pulsinger?
Props to "The Wire" for having the guts to do this. And to keep going, even
after years of pummelling in the letters section from the previous Free Jazz &
Improv readership who continue to whinge at them for covering Techno and modern
Electronic music to their dismay.
quoted 9 lines To the issue of The Wire being too arty: What the hell does word "arty" mean> To the issue of The Wire being too arty: What the hell does word "arty" mean
> anyway? It's being dropped everywhere; would you care to explain why *you*
> think The Wire chose Oval instead of Skinny Puppy to generate the CD-skipping
> hype (BTW, I like Oval quite a bit)? Your claim has a sort of semi-paranoid
> ring to it (although I'm sure you didn't mean for it to sound paranoid), and
> I'm curious as to what you might think the The Wire's motives are/were.
> Perhaps Skinny Puppy's version of CD-skipping just wasn't to be liked (I
> haven't heard the track(s) you're refering to - sorry), and Oval are simply
> doing it 'better' (whatever that means)?
I'm not exactly sure what Arthur was referring to (CD-skipping hype?), but
again I posit that it's simply the fact that their current staff is aware of
Oval, who exist in the here & now, and Puppy is from the previous era and one
shouldn't necessarily expect all the writers of "The Wire" to be aware of
every track ever released that uses CD skipping, especially if it was released
back in their Free Jazz era by an Industrial band!
Conversely, given that the Immerse people sprung to some degree from the old
Music From The Empty Quarter stable, I would be willing to bet that if *they*
were to talk about Oval and CD skipping, the Pups might get a look-see. It's
all in the background & interests of the writer(s).
quoted 4 lines Besides, your opinions on The Wire are just as stereotyped as the stereotypes> Besides, your opinions on The Wire are just as stereotyped as the stereotypes
> you claim The Wire are presenting, if you know what I mean. Come on ... Alec
> Empire "arty"? Plaid "arty"? Mouse On Mars "arty"? Patrick Pulsinger
> "arty"!?? No way. Art, perhaps, but not arty.
Exactly.
quoted 11 lines And, as I think about it, your average IDM listener seems to be taken up>> And, as I think about it, your average IDM listener seems to be taken up
>> with a need to look down on all things "Rock" as boring. That's fucking
>> retarded. Sure, 99% of Rock is utter shite. So is 99% of Techno. You
>> just have to LOOK, and by failing to look [...]
>
> I whole-heartedly agree. Any kind of ignoration (is that a word?) based on
> something as totalitarian as a concept (Adorno (he-he)) is use- and worthless.
> Forget about "Techno" and "Rock". What does it sound like? Any good? Are
> they using guitars!? Oh my God ... but ... what the ... it rules! (This
> could be the reaction of a person fixated on Techno upon hearing My Bloody
> Valentine for the first time).
But here's where I'll disagree with both of you.
Somebody that's as young as Arthur probably is ("young" in my almost-40
vernacular is "anyone under 30", for purposes of this discussion (-: ) can
easily come upon all of today's musical genres in a veritable Demolition Derby
of spacetime conflagration: translation, anything and everything can be "new"
to some extent when you are relatively young.
For me, however, my world lines are sufficiently long enough to have followed a
certain path. I first heard My Bloody Valentine well before I heard Techno
music. I've already been through my "99% is shit" phase. I like a *lot* more
than 1% of the Techno and related music I hear these days. While I'll stop
short of exclaiming "It's All Fuckin' Good!" I'm finding that my wider
acceptance of music these days is inspiring. I used to be a young, bitter,
cynical "There's my taste ... and bad taste" type, especially back in the
Industrial days. I got over it. I feel better now (-: ('Course, maybe I'm
just officially an Old Fart ... (-: )
But I've heard guitars/ bass/ drums style "Rock" music for over 30 years now.
And it bores me shitless. And I feel this is a valid opinion to have, a valid
framework to operate in, because it's filtered through my experiences. The
person who's 19 now and listens to, say, Goth might find it new to them and
exhilarating; the person who went through it first time 'round and was prancing
around to Sisters of Mercy and Siouxsie in '82 would undoubtedly find the same
exact music the 19 year old now likes to be hopelessly retro and outdated.
quoted 4 lines Besides, someone from Princeton talking about pretentiousness? It is to>>> Besides, someone from Princeton talking about pretentiousness? It is to
>>> laugh.
>>
>> Umm, fuck you, asshole.
Hahahaha ... hook, line and sinker.
- Greg