|
Inside Hardrock Haven:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
H R H - R E V I E W S
A Sorta Critical Analysis of the Art
of Critiquing by a Critic
Comments: Do music reviews do anyone any good? I mean, who knows why I listen to what I listen to more than me? Do I need someone's word, who I've never met, in order to whip out the cash and actually add to our bleak economy? If Rolling Stone says, "The new Velvet Revolver breaks new ground as the dust settles over the remains of Guns N' Roses and Stone Temple Pilot …" (which I'm sure they did even though I'll never read Rolling Stone) do I believe them? And does it make me want to buy the CD because of their examination? If I had to name the Top 5 CDs
I'd have to listen to for eternity, or because I'm Catholic and doomed
to spend an eon or two in Purgatory, it'd go something like this:
Now, this admission firmly seals my fate as a "hair metal guy." (And the omission of Stryper emphasizes my inability to be "of sound mind.") Ratt and Dokken were the first bands to rip me away from Eddie Money, Journey, Men at Work, Men Without Hats, Billy Joel, Eddie Grant, Huey Lewis and the News, and the rest of the pop rock scene. Once I snagged Dokken, there really wasn't much of a reason to listen to Cindy Lauper anymore, right? And I write reviews. (And, start sentences with "and," which is purportedly a shibboleth.) The problem with most reviewers, including myself, is that we think we know what we are talking about. We think that when we write sentences like, "This is Takara saying goodbye to the past while embracing their future, and if the view through their windshield looks anything like the view in their rear-view mirror, Takara has a lot more gas in their tank," it MEANS something. But, if someone is on the fence to buy a Takara CD (and they should, buy it, that is,) are my words the impetus for said purchase? Possibly … maybe. So what the hell good are reviews? To figure out that conundrum, or at least, dissect it, you need to deconstruct the "who" in the question "who writes reviews." The knock on book reviewers historically is only failed authors review books. Well, that statement is mostly true. So, those reviewers are innately bitter, or worse, centered on how the book review is written instead of what the book review covers. They fall in love with their own words in a masturbatory sense, instead of the words of the author. This quandary intrinsically avoids music reviewers, because a review, in and of itself, is not music. This is a fundamental distinction: the art form of reviewing music does not equal the art form of creating music. That's why book reviews inherently suck ass, and music reviews frankly kick ass. You can't argue with logic. Talk to someone who reviews books, (including myself), and we'll immediately semi-boast about our previous fiction sales. We feel the need to legitimize our right to write about writing. I myself sold exactly two pieces of fiction and one piece of nonfiction in my writing career. Google "Derric Miller Todd's Whore" and you'll get my first sale. I even was reviewed in Tangent Magazine. The words, "Strange stuff, indeed," are still a highlight reel in my existence. But, ask me about my musical career, and I'm brutally open. I don't make excuses. The fact that I can't play guitar, can't sing, and the only facet of a musician's career I can mirror is my embarrassing (although not to me) drinking ability, this doesn't dull my self-belief in the authenticity of my music reviews. I fucking love music, so therefore, I can fucking write music reviews. So basically, it comes down to this: music reviewers are just fans. Period. They are not professionals, regardless of how much money they make annually writing reviews. This is important. Fans drive the business. Fans buy the records. Fans nag their friends to listen to the new Merindine Atomiche just because they know their friend likes Slayer, and therefore, will love the aforementioned band. Fans crank music no one has ever heard at a party just to open their ears and consciousness to something new, something they believe in. Fans are rabid, inexorable, and in love. There is not much on this Earth you can believe in, but you can always believe in fans. Therefore, reason dictates you can believe in music reviewers. You can ultimately trust and you can wholeheartedly attribute honesty, if not scripture, to the reviews you read. You may not agree with what they write in reflection to who they write about, but you can be damned sure they mean what they say. Even if they are wrong, they mean it. In essence, music reviews are the only reviews worth reading. Previous Editorials
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Copyright © 2003 - 2007 Hardrock Haven aka John Kindred
| All Rights Reserved
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
