smoe.org mailing lists
ivan@stellysee.de
| From | "Gene Good" <javagene@hotmail.com> |
| Subject | Re: Ryan Adams Review; Response |
| Date | Tue, 27 Jan 2004 16:13:17 +0000 |
[Part 1 text/plain (2.8 kilobytes)]
(View Text in a separate window)
I can see where the connection rock needs could be lost on some of these
journalists.However,would not their age indicate a knowledge of the music
they are writing about.I read Jim Deregotis ,the author of this review.all
the time.I believe he is 40.While I don't always agree with him,I never
doubt his commitment or his passion for rock.He's written several books,one
a study of Lester Bangs.I do believe he is in touch with the changing trends
and well aware of the past.I also don't think he's out to "get" Ryan
Adams.In this particular case Ryan is showing just how insecure a "rock
star"he is.In fact he does his own review in that message and talks about
how great his songs are and innovative his shows are.Does a man who is
comfortable with his fame need to leave angry messages on critic's
machines?He is still riding that wave of accolades from the
British{Mojo,Uncut,Nme}where he was called nothing less than the second
coming.He thinks everything he does is valid because he is "the"rock star.
I am curious.The writers you mention-are they decent at their craft?
By the way I am stuck way in the middle on Ryan.I loved everything up to
and including "Gold".Then I saw an awful self indulgent show and have shied
away.I do see great reviews on his new stuff but am not sure if I am
interested or not.
>Reply-To: audities@smoe.org
>To: audities@smoe.org
>Subject: Re: Ryan Adams Review; Response
>Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 10:00:43 EST
>
>In a message dated 1/27/2004 9:02:21 AM Eastern Standard Time,
>audities-owner@smoe.org writes:
>
><< Thanks for sharing this clip...
>This just reconfirms what a whiny, paranoid
>little wanker Ryan Adams really is! Hilarious! >>
>
>
>True, though he does touch upon one quite valid point that I've observed in
>my time as part of an A&E section at a major newspaper...
>
>The MAJORITY of the rock critics at the major papers *don't* get it. They
>ARE
>often *too old* (At the Boston Globe, the chief pop/rock critic is over 50,
>the other main ones all over 40). I don't mean for this to sound ageist
>(it's
>not actually all about age), and obviously it isn't that they can't write,
>or
>even that they aren't quite good at what they're doing. But often at the
>huge
>papers they are almost too comfortable and far along in their careers to
>really
>connect with something as intentionally unwieldly as rock 'n roll. The
>types
>of unexpected rock journalism we got in the '70s (the type memorialized in
>"Almost Famous", for example) simply can't be found in larger papers
>anymore,
>because they demand lengthy apprenticeships. The Globe is often called the
>"Velvet coffin" for a reason... --Jason
_________________________________________________________________
Learn how to choose, serve, and enjoy wine at Wine @ MSN.
http://wine.msn.com/
For assistance, please contact
the smoe.org administrators.