Because I'm too busy giving the book its final tweaks to write posts of my own. Here are notes on a feminist hip-hop conference.
Part 1
Part 2
(Besides book-tweaking, I got an interview tomorrow morning with a criminologist to talk about serial killer groupies, and then I gotta watch the Suicide Girls DVD so I can write about it for a sorta-porn magazine, and then I gotta go back to worshipping the new Jaguares album. Which you should be doing, too. Some record stores are still open as I type this. Go buy it. No fucking around.)
Tuesday, May 31, 2005
ALMOST HALFWAY THERE, SO...
Hey, it's about to be June. So here's a partial list of my Album(s) of the Year candidates, so far.
High On Fire, Blessed Black Wings
Fantomas, Suspended Animation
Jaguares, Cronicas De Un Laberinto (comes out today, go get it!)
Nine Inch Nails, With Teeth
Meshuggah, Catch Thirty Three (comes out today, go get it!)
Mike Jones, Who Is Mike Jones?
Burnt Sugar, If You Can't Dazzle Them With Your Brilliance Then Baffle Them With Your Blisluth
Marc Ribot, Spiritual Unity
The Mars Volta, Frances The Mute
Reissues:
Art Ensemble of Chicago, Certain Blacks and Phase One
Frank Wright, Uhura Na Umoja and The Complete ESP-Disk Recordings (that'd be Frank Wright Trio and Your Prayer)
Archie Shepp, Black Gipsy
Alan Shorter, Tes Esat
Clifford Thornton, The Panther And The Lash
I'm sure I've forgotten things, but all these should be in every home with a functioning CD player.
High On Fire, Blessed Black Wings
Fantomas, Suspended Animation
Jaguares, Cronicas De Un Laberinto (comes out today, go get it!)
Nine Inch Nails, With Teeth
Meshuggah, Catch Thirty Three (comes out today, go get it!)
Mike Jones, Who Is Mike Jones?
Burnt Sugar, If You Can't Dazzle Them With Your Brilliance Then Baffle Them With Your Blisluth
Marc Ribot, Spiritual Unity
The Mars Volta, Frances The Mute
Reissues:
Art Ensemble of Chicago, Certain Blacks and Phase One
Frank Wright, Uhura Na Umoja and The Complete ESP-Disk Recordings (that'd be Frank Wright Trio and Your Prayer)
Archie Shepp, Black Gipsy
Alan Shorter, Tes Esat
Clifford Thornton, The Panther And The Lash
I'm sure I've forgotten things, but all these should be in every home with a functioning CD player.
NOT MY BUSINESS, REALLY, BUT...
...I've got a blog, so I get to comment on shit what don't really concern me if 'n' when I damn well feel like it. So shall we?
Anthony Miccio wrote a review of the Ying Yang Twins' single "Wait" in the Village Voice. Two female critics, Jessica Hopper and Julianne Shepherd, responded, not all that kindly, to his thoughts. Anthony attempted a rebuttal. (There's also a discussion about the song, and now the foofaraw, on ILM. My comments appear at the tail end of it.)
Here's what I think: Seems to me that (in Shepherd's view, though I actually think Hopper's critique is stronger) the review connects with the ILM/Voice mindset that (can seem like it) combines what blount called "the old 'art has no duty to anything/one but itself' jig" with a snickering, boys' club embrace of sexual ultra-machismo as rebellious fun (rather than implied threat, which is how lots of women, not just overeducated campus-speech-code-happy women, view it).
My take on all this is that it's all about relative public profile. I don't think "Wait" is exactly misogynist, in that it doesn't express hatred or loathing for women. It is a call for rough sex, and said rough sex may not be as consensual as a few half-phrases are clearly intended to convince the (critical) prosecution that it is. So it's a song written by half-literate knuckle-draggers who are happy to be that because that's what's made them their money. And (I'm trusting the rest of the discussion thread on this, because I don't actually own the Twins' album) this is not the first time they've trampled into potentially misogynist territory, and indeed some earlier examples seem to be worse. In this case, I think it's the creepy whispering (with its obscene-phone-call/stalker implications), not the lyrics on their own, that's making (some) women shudder. If these same lyrics were delivered in the usual crunk bark, I don't think the outcry would be as loud.
At the same time, I think the (commercial/pop-cultural) success of the song is helping draw fire, too. The women linked complain that whiteboy critics who embrace this song, and crunk in general, shrug off its offensive aspects partly out of fear of being called racist. Since I've seen it happen many times online (and even in Spin - one of their articles about the 2 Live Crew court case was called "Fear Of A Black Penis," implying that Florida sheriffs/prosecutors were tiny-dicked white men intimidated/threatened by Luther Campbell's pythonlike manhood, and jeez no of course there's nothing racist/patronizing about that bit of projection), I buy that. But I think that if the song wasn't a hit, nobody would give a shit. Exhibit A: Nelly. The outcry over his "Tip Drill" video was relatively short-lived, because "Tip Drill" was not a hit. (Was it even a single in the traditional released-to-radio sense?) Exhibit B (and here's where we leave race behind, sorta): Cannibal Corpse. What do Julianne and Jessica think about "Fucked With A Knife" and/or "Entrails Ripped From A Virgin's Cunt"? Nothing, I suspect. Because Cannibal Corpse play to a fairly small audience/scene, relatively speaking (actually, they probably sell just as many records as the Twins, or damn close, or did at their peak), and (oops, here comes race again) that audience/scene has no hipster cred with whiteboy critics the way crunk (black, culturally "other") does.
Anthony Miccio wrote a review of the Ying Yang Twins' single "Wait" in the Village Voice. Two female critics, Jessica Hopper and Julianne Shepherd, responded, not all that kindly, to his thoughts. Anthony attempted a rebuttal. (There's also a discussion about the song, and now the foofaraw, on ILM. My comments appear at the tail end of it.)
Here's what I think: Seems to me that (in Shepherd's view, though I actually think Hopper's critique is stronger) the review connects with the ILM/Voice mindset that (can seem like it) combines what blount called "the old 'art has no duty to anything/one but itself' jig" with a snickering, boys' club embrace of sexual ultra-machismo as rebellious fun (rather than implied threat, which is how lots of women, not just overeducated campus-speech-code-happy women, view it).
My take on all this is that it's all about relative public profile. I don't think "Wait" is exactly misogynist, in that it doesn't express hatred or loathing for women. It is a call for rough sex, and said rough sex may not be as consensual as a few half-phrases are clearly intended to convince the (critical) prosecution that it is. So it's a song written by half-literate knuckle-draggers who are happy to be that because that's what's made them their money. And (I'm trusting the rest of the discussion thread on this, because I don't actually own the Twins' album) this is not the first time they've trampled into potentially misogynist territory, and indeed some earlier examples seem to be worse. In this case, I think it's the creepy whispering (with its obscene-phone-call/stalker implications), not the lyrics on their own, that's making (some) women shudder. If these same lyrics were delivered in the usual crunk bark, I don't think the outcry would be as loud.
At the same time, I think the (commercial/pop-cultural) success of the song is helping draw fire, too. The women linked complain that whiteboy critics who embrace this song, and crunk in general, shrug off its offensive aspects partly out of fear of being called racist. Since I've seen it happen many times online (and even in Spin - one of their articles about the 2 Live Crew court case was called "Fear Of A Black Penis," implying that Florida sheriffs/prosecutors were tiny-dicked white men intimidated/threatened by Luther Campbell's pythonlike manhood, and jeez no of course there's nothing racist/patronizing about that bit of projection), I buy that. But I think that if the song wasn't a hit, nobody would give a shit. Exhibit A: Nelly. The outcry over his "Tip Drill" video was relatively short-lived, because "Tip Drill" was not a hit. (Was it even a single in the traditional released-to-radio sense?) Exhibit B (and here's where we leave race behind, sorta): Cannibal Corpse. What do Julianne and Jessica think about "Fucked With A Knife" and/or "Entrails Ripped From A Virgin's Cunt"? Nothing, I suspect. Because Cannibal Corpse play to a fairly small audience/scene, relatively speaking (actually, they probably sell just as many records as the Twins, or damn close, or did at their peak), and (oops, here comes race again) that audience/scene has no hipster cred with whiteboy critics the way crunk (black, culturally "other") does.
Saturday, May 28, 2005
STOKING FIRES, MOVING UNITS
Let’s see if we can’t unpack the layers of dumbness in this story.
First, you’ve got MTV demanding that Nine Inch Nails not perform in front of a big picture of President Bush during the Movie Awards show next week. Because such a gesture would – what? Cause the band, and the network, to be arrested and charged with treason? Get their broadcast license yanked? Probably not.
You wanna know what would happen?
1. Brent Bozell would go on Hannity & Colmes or Scarborough Country (or maybe both) and complain about MTV’s anti-Bush bias.
2. Atrios and Tom Tomorrow and Kos would talk about how great it was to see Trent Reznor “standing up to” the President.
3. Bill O’Reilly would complain about MTV’s anti-Bush bias.
4. Eric Alterman would complain about O’Reilly’s and Hannity’s and Scarborough’s attempts to “censor” Reznor and MTV.
So Nine Inch Nails backs out of the show. And the following will happen:
1. Atrios and Kos will complain about MTV’s “cowardice.”
2. O’Reilly and Hannity will complain about Reznor’s anti-Bush bias.
3. Nine Inch Nails fans will clog music message boards with poorly-spelled and even more poorly typed tirades about MTV, Bush, and the greatness of Trent Reznor.
But here’s the thing: why?
Why did Reznor think it was a good idea to perform in front of a big picture of Bush? I don’t mean “good idea” in the sense of “important political gesture,” though we can get to that in a second. I mean “good idea” in the sense of “adds something to the song.” As near as I can tell, “The Hand That Feeds” (the latest NIN song, the one they were going to perform) has no political meaning, explicit or implicit. It’s just a typically Trent-y rant about dominance and submission. Could be about creeping fascism, could be about unrequited love, could be about dog ownership. He grabbed a cliché – biting the hand that feeds – and built himself a nice little industrial-disco-metal track. Good for him. But attaching it to George W. Bush, or attaching George W. Bush to it, seems wholly dubious. Pointless. Goading, in fact.
I don’t think Trent Reznor’s a very bright guy.
I like his music quite a bit; I think the new album is much better than The Fragile. (It’s about as good as The Fragile would have been if he’d kept just the good songs for that one, instead of putting out a bloated double disc.) But his lyrics are clichéd bullshit, overwrought and emotionally stunted at the same time. So it doesn’t surprise me that the idea of performing “The Hand That Feeds” in front of a big picture of George W. Bush seemed like a good one to him. But it isn’t a good idea. It’s a dumb idea, because I’d be willing to bet that lots of people, like me, never heard a political subtext in the song. They would have gone right on imagining the song to be apolitical until the moment Trent and the boys came out, and George flashed up there. And then they’d all have shut down their brains. Half of them would have begun mindlessly cheering this “radical” gesture, and half of them would have begun baying for Trent’s blood because of this “traitorous” gesture.
So from that moment on, you’ve got half your audience loving you for the wrong reason, and half your audience hating you for the wrong reason. And the actual song (which, again, is pretty good, if a little too indebted to The Rapture) might as well not be coming through the speakers at all. And before anybody starts telling me that polarizing the crowd that way is some kind of Stanley Milgram-esque psych-out that proves Reznor’s brilliance as a provocateur, I say bullshit. Because, again, I’ve read the guy’s lyrics. He’s a bonehead who’s a genius in the recording studio.
So the layers of dumbness at work here are:
1. Trent Reznor is dumb for a) wanting to perform a non-political song in front of a picture of the President on MTV, b) stomping away in a huff when MTV wouldn’t let him, and c) thinking this is any kind of meaningful gesture.
2. MTV is dumb for telling him not to use their airtime to make an ass of himself.
3. The lefty blogs are dumb for bitching out MTV over this.
That's all. Next idiot, step up.
First, you’ve got MTV demanding that Nine Inch Nails not perform in front of a big picture of President Bush during the Movie Awards show next week. Because such a gesture would – what? Cause the band, and the network, to be arrested and charged with treason? Get their broadcast license yanked? Probably not.
You wanna know what would happen?
1. Brent Bozell would go on Hannity & Colmes or Scarborough Country (or maybe both) and complain about MTV’s anti-Bush bias.
2. Atrios and Tom Tomorrow and Kos would talk about how great it was to see Trent Reznor “standing up to” the President.
3. Bill O’Reilly would complain about MTV’s anti-Bush bias.
4. Eric Alterman would complain about O’Reilly’s and Hannity’s and Scarborough’s attempts to “censor” Reznor and MTV.
So Nine Inch Nails backs out of the show. And the following will happen:
1. Atrios and Kos will complain about MTV’s “cowardice.”
2. O’Reilly and Hannity will complain about Reznor’s anti-Bush bias.
3. Nine Inch Nails fans will clog music message boards with poorly-spelled and even more poorly typed tirades about MTV, Bush, and the greatness of Trent Reznor.
But here’s the thing: why?
Why did Reznor think it was a good idea to perform in front of a big picture of Bush? I don’t mean “good idea” in the sense of “important political gesture,” though we can get to that in a second. I mean “good idea” in the sense of “adds something to the song.” As near as I can tell, “The Hand That Feeds” (the latest NIN song, the one they were going to perform) has no political meaning, explicit or implicit. It’s just a typically Trent-y rant about dominance and submission. Could be about creeping fascism, could be about unrequited love, could be about dog ownership. He grabbed a cliché – biting the hand that feeds – and built himself a nice little industrial-disco-metal track. Good for him. But attaching it to George W. Bush, or attaching George W. Bush to it, seems wholly dubious. Pointless. Goading, in fact.
I don’t think Trent Reznor’s a very bright guy.
I like his music quite a bit; I think the new album is much better than The Fragile. (It’s about as good as The Fragile would have been if he’d kept just the good songs for that one, instead of putting out a bloated double disc.) But his lyrics are clichéd bullshit, overwrought and emotionally stunted at the same time. So it doesn’t surprise me that the idea of performing “The Hand That Feeds” in front of a big picture of George W. Bush seemed like a good one to him. But it isn’t a good idea. It’s a dumb idea, because I’d be willing to bet that lots of people, like me, never heard a political subtext in the song. They would have gone right on imagining the song to be apolitical until the moment Trent and the boys came out, and George flashed up there. And then they’d all have shut down their brains. Half of them would have begun mindlessly cheering this “radical” gesture, and half of them would have begun baying for Trent’s blood because of this “traitorous” gesture.
So from that moment on, you’ve got half your audience loving you for the wrong reason, and half your audience hating you for the wrong reason. And the actual song (which, again, is pretty good, if a little too indebted to The Rapture) might as well not be coming through the speakers at all. And before anybody starts telling me that polarizing the crowd that way is some kind of Stanley Milgram-esque psych-out that proves Reznor’s brilliance as a provocateur, I say bullshit. Because, again, I’ve read the guy’s lyrics. He’s a bonehead who’s a genius in the recording studio.
So the layers of dumbness at work here are:
1. Trent Reznor is dumb for a) wanting to perform a non-political song in front of a picture of the President on MTV, b) stomping away in a huff when MTV wouldn’t let him, and c) thinking this is any kind of meaningful gesture.
2. MTV is dumb for telling him not to use their airtime to make an ass of himself.
3. The lefty blogs are dumb for bitching out MTV over this.
That's all. Next idiot, step up.
Thursday, May 26, 2005
GET UP, STAND UP
Sasha Frere-Jones is absolutely right. I am happy to join him in his revolution, in my own small way.
(I have only been asked to four of the "listening sessions" he describes. The first was Tool's Lateralus, which I gave a 7 out of 10 because it sounded like it had been recorded concurrently with its predecessor, five years earlier. The third was Metallica's St. Anger, which I demolished in a 1000-word review that ran in about seventeen alt-weeklies. Somewhere in between, I heard the last Disturbed album at the lead singer's apartment in Chicago, while writing a cover story on them for Alternative Press. I got to listen to it two or three more times over the course of my weekend in Chicago, though, mostly while driving in one bandmember or another's SUV. It was, and remains, a very good album. And I heard Slipknot's Iowa at a "listening party" in some shitty bar in lower Manhattan. It was nearly inaudible over the jabber of two-dozen open-bar-exploiting rock hacks. The inaudibility turned out to be a good thing.)
I mostly review small, indie-label releases. It isn't like blowing off big-time publicists is a major part of my life. But from this day forward, as others before me have said, if called, I will not go.
(I have only been asked to four of the "listening sessions" he describes. The first was Tool's Lateralus, which I gave a 7 out of 10 because it sounded like it had been recorded concurrently with its predecessor, five years earlier. The third was Metallica's St. Anger, which I demolished in a 1000-word review that ran in about seventeen alt-weeklies. Somewhere in between, I heard the last Disturbed album at the lead singer's apartment in Chicago, while writing a cover story on them for Alternative Press. I got to listen to it two or three more times over the course of my weekend in Chicago, though, mostly while driving in one bandmember or another's SUV. It was, and remains, a very good album. And I heard Slipknot's Iowa at a "listening party" in some shitty bar in lower Manhattan. It was nearly inaudible over the jabber of two-dozen open-bar-exploiting rock hacks. The inaudibility turned out to be a good thing.)
I mostly review small, indie-label releases. It isn't like blowing off big-time publicists is a major part of my life. But from this day forward, as others before me have said, if called, I will not go.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)