Mr. Benepe said that was not true, and that the precise counts show that the old numbers simply were in the realm of fantasy. “The truth is that those historical crowds, you couldn’t accommodate that many people if you crammed them into every open space in Central Park — Great Lawn, North Meadow, Sheep Meadow,” he said.
Somehow my copy of Simon & Garfunkel’s Concert in Central Park on cd feels less special now.
“The guitars, the production; all these bands sound like they’re made in the same studio with the same producer. It’s such a ball-less, soulless, generic whitewashed indie sound. You could probably take a member from each band and throw them together in a new group and no one would be able to tell the difference. They’re completely interchangeable.”
John Niven, author of Kill Your Friends quoted in yesterday’s Independent article Does the World Need Another Indie Band?
I’ve let on that I have issues with britpop. I also have huge problems with the term “indie” and try to avoid using it at all costs. The complaint in this Independent article isn’t new. Fluxblog tried to make it recently, too. I really should do a post about all this if only to get it all straight in my head.
…rocked the whole place on Friday. No place was left unrocked.
I know, I checked.
(video after the jump)
I’ve championed Dr. Uwe Boll’s right to keep making bad movies before so, in that sense, I’m firmly in his corner. But whatever your feelings about Uwe Boll are I suggest you give a listen to this Q & A session with him arranged by the Creative Screenwriting Magazine. In it, among other things, Boll talks about using cats as silencers, Michael Bay, his boxing match with his critics and about how he finances his movies.
It’s a treat.
“I don’t know about it. But I’m not having hip hop at Glastonbury. It’s wrong.”
– Noel Gallagher
Indeed. What was it about Noel Gallagher and others not wanting Jay-Z to perform at Glastonbury? I don’t think it was the low ticket sales that were the real reason for all the Jay-Z bashing that went on.
What was the real reason? For my money, it was the politics of mid-nineties britpop influencing the debate in 2008 still. Martin Cloonan wrote in State of the nation: “Englishness,” Pop and Politics in the Mid-1990s:
“Britpop” was not discussed in transcultural, global terms; rather, it was discussed in the language of petty nationalism and xenophobia. While the artists involved often pressed ambivalence, their work was discussed in nationalistic terms. Triumphalism accompanied artistic achievement.
Englishness was in and, Cloonan writes, “the artists who… [were] held to encompass a form of Englishness… [were] overwhelmingly white, male, and working in the rock/pop idiom where lyrics are important.” Add to this the worshipping of the past and the rejection of new electronic forms of music such as techno. Again Cloonan:
It was precisely at the time that techno and raves–music which is bound up in modern technology–came to dominance that the stirrings of the mid-1990s preoccupation with Englishness arose. The dominant types of pop Englishness have defined themselves precisely in opposition to modernist movements.
If we think about all this then it’s easy to see how Jay-Z is antithetical to everything britpop stood for. And when Noel Gallagher, one of the biggest figures in britpop, waded in on the debate whether Jay-Z is wrong for Glastonbury or not, he, in my mind, brought with him all the ugly implications britpop carried with it.
As Jay-Z said, it is ridiculous in 2008.
That’s why seeing Jay-Z on stage at Glastonbury with a guitar and singing Wonderwall was one of the most brilliant things I’ve watched in a while on YouTube. It was like him taking one of the holy cows of britpop and using it to stab the small-mindedness of the movement through it’s heart
Sadly, I don’t think it’ll stay dead.
References:
Cloonan, M. (1997) “State of the Nation: “Englishness”, Pop and Politics in the Mid-1990’s”, Popular Music and Society, 21:2, Summer 1997, pp.47-70.
The life of a songwriter who has technically mastered her craft can be a thankless existence. In any other line of work proficiency and consistent excellence are admired. But, ironically, if you are a creative artist those very same qualities can work against you and brand you as predictable. In pop music mere excellence without reinvention is seldom enough.
During her solo career Aimee Mann has released nothing but technically proficient and consistently excellent albums. Even her few missteps have been flawed in a way one easily forgives her and still appreciates the overall artistry (I’m mostly thinking about The Forgotten Arm album here). The downside is that after five albums of excellence we are tempted to start demanding something more. In other words, we know the songwriting on a new Aimee Mann album will be excellent (it always is) but will it be any different?
With the new Smilers album the answer to that question is a resounding no. The album has all the markings of a classic Aimee Mann record. It has melodies that slowly burrow themselves into your subconsciousness; lyrics that are at the same time literary and simple (”You love me like a dollar bill / You roll me up and trade me in.”) and a cast of broken, deeply flawed and hurt characters. We’ve seen it all before. And yet, after all I’ve written above, that doesn’t really matter.
After leaving the major labels behing and founding her own SuperEgo records Aimee Mann’s songwriting, it seems, has become more and more literary. For sure, all of her records are full of songs that are basically little narratives (Fourth of July, I’ve had it, Ghost World) but after Bachelor no. 2 that aspect of her songwriting has slowly started to take over entire albums. The Lost in Space record only flirted with the idea. As a concept album The Forgotten Arm took the narrative as a songwriting device to its logical conclusion. Now, Smilers picks up from where The Forgotten Arm left off.
If we were to compare The Forgotten Arm to a novel then Smilers would be a short story collection. And in that sense Smilers is the superior album. The trouble with The Forgotten Arm was that it felt constricted by the limits of its concept. Smilers on the other hand is looser and more relaxed. The songs have no obligation to hang together and therefore the whole album is more accessible. One can dip in and out of it at will. I’m reluctant to call it her best work but it is certainly on bar with Bachelor no. 2 (I’m with Stupid still remains my favourite).
In their review of Smilers the Rolling Stone magazine called Mann the Raymond Carver of pop. The comparison is more than apt and, I suggest, for us to expect Mann to reinvent herself with every new album is missing the point. Just as we view the work of writers obsessed with certain themes and topics which they then explore without feeling the need to always reinvent themselves, we should also view every new Aimee Mann album. It’s not how the music industry usually works but, ever since Bachelor no. 2, one of most interesting thing about Mann has been the way she has managed to operate outside of those strict industry confines that demand constant change for relevance and, instead, been able to concentrate on perfecting her own musical preoccupations.
Aimee Mann on Morning Becomes Eclectic
Visit the official site
Previously you’ve seen Miss Schaal as a horse. Now you can see her as “an angry erotic sheep.” Hot!
What happens when you buy an album and it turns out to be a completely different from the album you thought you were buying. And I don’t mean qualitatively different but different as in by a completely different artist. An artist of whom you’ve never heard of and, after a listen, don’t much care for.
Let me introduce you to a version of Ágætis Byrjun by Sigur Ros sold in Germany in 2003 and, apparently, in my friendly neighbourhood second-hand record shop in 2008. What is so different about this Sigur Ros album is that it is not a Sigur Ros album at all. It totally looks like one but it is in fact the album “Boire” by Christophe Miossec.
So, what happens when you buy an album you’ve never really listened to all the way through but always wanted to and it starts off, lets say, suspiciously.
Well:
1. Denial
This is Sigur Ros? This has to be Sigur Ros. Oh, Sigur Ros, you’re so quirky.
2. Anger
OK. Let’s skip to Olsen olsen. What’s the track? 1,2…6,7,8. What the…?. This is not Olsen olsen. WHAT? You’re telling me there was a wrong pressing of the album sold in Germany? But I’m not even in Germany! You’re telling me that instead of the Sigur Ros album I thought I was buying I’m now stuck with some French chanteur? If it’s not Serge Gainsbourg I’m not interested. Merde!
3. Bargaining
Well, I bought the album legitimately. I paid money for it. Doesn’t this mean I now get to download it from wherever I can find it?
(No, it doesn’t mean that.)
4. Depression
What’s the point? We’re all going to die anyway.
5. Acceptance
It’s OK. Maybe I’ll exchange it; maybe it has some collector’s value. It’s fine. At least I got a blog post out of it.
Or, if your name is Walter Sobchak then this probably happens:
After Metallica revealed their “Revolutionary Pricing Tiers” for their Mission: Metallica experience the parallels between Microsoft and Metallica got scary.
Why am I calling Metallica the Microsoft of music. Well, firstly, both Microsoft and Metallica have had a troubled relationship with the internet. Recently for Microsoft, the Yahoo debacle has drawn attention to the company’s online failures. Historically, in 1995 Bill Gates all but ignored the internet when writing The Road Ahead. A year later in an ArtForum article R.U. Sirius (that’s a pen name, right?) wrote about Gates and the internet:
In 2000 Metallica had become one of the richest bands in the world doing exactly the same thing. Except then Metallica’s gorge rose to the level that they felt they had to sue Napster and name the people/fans who had used the service to share their music. Today, that move is seen by many as the biggest strategic mistake the music industry could have made in terms of its business in the digital age. As to Metallica, the hit to their reputation is still being felt. If you need proof go read this latest post about Metallica on Listening Post.
So, historically it could be argued that both Metallica and Microsoft have failed to “get” the internet. But that’s not what finally made me wake up to the parallel. It was those Mission: Metallica’s “revolutionary pricing tiers” that Idolator reported. Haven”t we seen this approach somewhere before?
Mission: Metallica Pricing Tiers <—> Windows Vista
(more on Listening Post)
Free membership Windows Vista Starter
Digital Album Windows Vista Home Basic
CD Album Windows Vista Home Premium
Platinum membership Windows Vista Business
(variable pricing) Windows Vista Enterprise
Mp3 Windows Vista Ultimate
Mp3 + CD
Mp3 + CD + Vinyl
Yep, Metallica sure ain’t no Radiohead or NIN - or Apple:
