The Album Review Club - Week #141 - (page 1860) - JPEG Raw - Gary Clark Jr.

[FogBlueInSanFran]

I've never in my life taken stock of what someone who is paid to listen to an album writes about it.

Who cares? Trust your own judgement.

Well, that's too bad, because you've probably missed out on some music you'd really like.

Criticism isn't prescriptive FFS. A critic isn't telling me what to think and feel. Critics are guides in a sea of product because they listen to more music than I have time for -- that's their job.

As such, by definition, they've heard more music that they've thought was either good or bad than I have. They're experienced.

They're also humans. If I read a critic's synopsis of something he/she really likes, and I listen, I either like it or don't. If I agree often enough over many years, than that becomes a "good critic" for me because I agree with him/her often after the fact, and they've turned me onto regular pleasurable experiences I wouldn't otherwise have had.

A good critic also educates me, and helps me understand context and motivation, and writes in an entertaining way, whether I agree with said critic or not.

That the critic I love and trust most disliked OKC was a validation of how I felt, not the other way around.

Anyhow it's not like these were somehow undiscovered. I already detested "Creep" and "High and Dry" before OKC.

 

[FogBlueInSanFran]

I disagree with both of these comments - in the main.

I agree that in terms of how much you enjoy an album, you shouldn't give a damn what others think, especially somebody who you don't even know.

However, nobody exists in a vaccum - I find it interesting to see what other people have to say about the music I like. Not as some form of validation, but to see where there is agreement and if there are things they can point out that I may have missed.

As for music critics, they play a vital role. Nobody has time to listen to everything ever released, so why not let somebody do the filtering for you? Plus, by not reading reviews, you miss out on some witty critical putdowns.

Over many years here interacting with Brits, their serial distrust of "the press" and "punditry" is striking. It's also something that's only recently come to my shores, whereas it's been a staple to media-hate over there for years, so I understand the perspective they have.

 

[Coatigan]

Well, that's too bad, because you've probably missed out on some music you'd really like.

Criticism isn't prescriptive FFS. A critic isn't telling me what to think and feel. Critics are guides in a sea of product because they listen to more music than I have time for -- that's their job.

As such, by definition, they've heard more music that they've thought was either good or bad than I have. They're experienced.

They're also humans. If I read a critic's synopsis of something he/she really likes, and I listen, I either like it or don't. If I agree often enough over many years, than that becomes a "good critic" for me because I agree with him/her often after the fact.

A good critic also educates me, and helps me understand context and motivation, and writes in an entertaining way, whether I agree with said critic or not.

The best critic works or analysis, imo, are the ones that put into words that you maybe wouldn't use, something you already think/feel. The ones that resonate, stick with you, are quotable, and pop back into your head when you are listening to the material. Rob does it well imo, adding such wee nuggets into his reviews of someone else capturing what he felt. Spires generates a few creative ones of his own imo.

One such that stuck with me for example described 'overwhelming mutual empathy in the room when they played live, creating a sense of a crowd and band with their arms around one another.' They are not particularly complex words or metaphors that I myself couldn't have come up with, they are not beautiful deep poetry. It isn't even that peculiar or niche an observation. But it nails what I felt, gives someone else a bit of context.

There is a place for reading others' takes on music, juat as much as there is a place for talking about music, sharing views and experiences.

Which incidentally is why most of us are actually on this thread, right?

 

[Coatigan]

Over many years here interacting with Brits, their serial distrust of "the press" and "punditry" is striking. It's also something that's only recently come to my shores, whereas it's been a staple to media-hate over there for years, so I understand the perspective they have.

I don't think those two things are interchangeable with music/film/book or art in general reviews and critic pieces. Quite different things.

 

[FogBlueInSanFran]

I don't think those two things are interchangeable with music/film/book or art in general reviews and critic pieces. Quite different things.

How about football punditry? :)

 

[FogBlueInSanFran]

However, nobody exists in a vacuum

The rather amusing irony of this statement is that Thom Yorke comes pretty close on this record to suggesting otherwise.

 

[Saddleworth2]

Not when hands down the best music critic in the business panned it.

Do you mean your good self?
Just asking for clarity :-)

 

[Coatigan]

How about football punditry? :)

For the best part, an issue of quality, rather than the concept. Here at least. And often pre-set affiliation.

 

[RobMCFC]

The rather amusing irony of this statement is that Thom Yorke comes pretty close on this record to suggesting otherwise.

First one-and-a-half-listens in and so far it seems that everybody is right.

I was making a few notes on first listen (the advantage of working in front of a computer at home) and I'm quite pleased with a piece of irony I came up with for one of the tracks, which I'll save for my review :)

Just to note that it wasn't a terrible experience at all and there was certainly some stuff to like.

 

[supercity88]

And my problem is that I find scant evidence in many of the songs (save one) to support this conclusion, and yet the world has spun this unfocused lack of specificity into some universal narrative. This is the Great Mistake About OK Computer. “It doesn’t appear to be about any one person, so it must be about all of us!” as opposed to MY conclusion “It’s not about any specific one person because the artist either doesn’t really feel these things or isn’t very good at expressing them.”

It's about a dystopian world, based on the situation at the time and I'd argue is still as relevant today in its themes as it was when it landed - which isn't often the case with an album. It's a complicated take, but it seems as though you're writing it off on the basis Yorke wanted to be a musician and comes from an affluent background as opposed to just listening to it. You're aiming your gun on the basis we've all read reviews and believed the hype, when you have read them alongside the bands bio and decided to use it against them.

It's also got to be commended that they didn't produce the Bends Part 2. Which is what they were told to do for commercial success. They fucked that off and did what they wanted to. Experimented, broke some rules and produced a brilliant album - albeit I preferred the Bends still.

Do you dismiss Erling Haaland as a footballer because he is the son of a former pro and has access to the best training? Some footballers can turn up and play, it's in them. Some footballers have to work their arse off. I wouldn't have found David Silva any less beautiful if I found out he'd had a private coach from the age he could walk.