charles m. young (1951-2014)

charles, as he was known in his bylines, or chuck, as he was known in life, was a giant, one of the greatest rock and roll writers who ever held a pen. he was one of the first, if not the first, rockcrit i read who i agreed with not in a "hmmm, that's really interesting" kind of way, but in a "HOLY SHIT! YES!!!!!" kind of way. he was very funny. ridiculously smart. a master of longform. and he just completely understood. i had the great honor of working with him, albeit briefly, early in my career, and it was such an easy and wonderful experience. all editors should be more like him. i'm assuming/hoping other people here spent more quality time with him and/or were inspired by his work.

a nice obit from rolling stone, where he worked in the 1970s:

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/charles-m-young-rock-journalist-who-championed-punk-dies-at-63-20140819

I put a post up earlier today on the obituary thread. His first Sex Pistols cover story had a big influence on me, although I probably didn't read it till a high-school friend gave me some of his older brother's Rolling Stones in 1979. The piece you link to has a link to all his Rolling Stone work, but I don't know, I think they might be missing something--I thought he wrote about the Sex Pistols in Texas, too, a few months later, where he expressed disappointment that self-satisfaction had crept in. Maybe it was a different writer.

He conducted one of the best/most revealing Who interviews I've ever read, which was also the only one of the numerous pieces for the 1989 tour to call them out on their use of corporate sponsorship. R.I.P.

trees: chuck was one of very few who I would have sought to be my mentor. But mentoring as such tends to function when the mentor works well inside institutions and with, y'know, other people. Either was decidedly not true in Chuck's case. He told anyone who listened that being edited was physically painful for him; it was like a parody of a writer complaining about editors. I often thought that being the golden boy for Rolling Stone in the late 70s kinda spoiled him. He never could make the transition to doing anything other than writing long, in depth profiles or reviews where he said exactly what he wanted to say.

forest: as I mentioned to FCC last night, CMY seems to have also never transitioned to large recognition as his peers like XGau, Marsh and Bangs. I daresay he was much much less careerist than the surviving two aforesaid. but also, despite being far far too precious re: his prose, his whole thing wasn't about "I AM RIGHT ABOUT SLEATER-KINNEY" or Dead prez or van morrison or whatever. XGau and Marsh are less interested in other's interiors than their own. I think a lot of ILM-people and rock crit devotees admire Xgau and marsh cuz they too would like a perch where they can proclaim that they are in fact correct.

Chuck was passionate about movement politics, leading up to Occupy NY, which he told me was the most gratifying event in his life since 1972 and interviewing Chomsky in 1992, and AA: like many if not most people, he lost enthusiasm for newer iterations of popular music. But when he was called back by RS to interview Jerry Lee Lewis, the Eagles, Solomon Burke or Ray Davies, he was there to plumb his subjects depths, not his own.

once again, I wrote the below in 2008 (I also largely wrote the RS obit FCC enclosed)…

http://www.idolator.com/392421/rolling-stone-flies-with-the-eagles

mentoring as such tends to function when the mentor works well inside institutions and with, y'know, other people. Either was decidedly not true in Chuck's case.

surprised to hear this actually, though this does explain his disappearing from the masthead of musician (and, therefore, from my life), which i always assumed was a case of being fired though i never knew for sure. but i'm surprised because i was a nobody and he was immediately friendly and encouraging to me, and i liked being edited by him.

as to why he never achieved the fame of his peers, yeah, that's a good argument, vm. really like that post.

RIP. When Trouser Press folded Musician took over my the rest of my subscription.

Young's 1989 Who interview in Musician: http://beta.thewho.net/sites/default/files/1989_07_01%20musician.pdf

Initially I was kind of horrified but then I realized it was actually a pretty hip, well-written magazine and Chuck, as I will now refer to him, was a big part of that. Always in the back of my mind wondered what had happened to him and why he wasn't in the pantheon of rock critics and if maybe he had fooled the youthful James Redd. Glad to see his was also appreciated by some others like you guys.

Damn, I always enjoyed his writing where it was to be found (RS, Musician, liner notes) and remember looking forward to his book about the Butthole Surfers (which was said to be forthcoming years ago and never materialized)

RIP

Always checked for his byline in Musician, great writer. R.I.P.

Very nice remembrance from David Felton.

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/features/charles-m-young-a-rolling-stone-colleague-remembers-20140821

I find the end-days of Young and Paul Nelson very scary--although it does sound like Young had lots of support the last year.

Thought of Paul Nelson as well, being another almost forgotten rock critic, although Nelson's end was a lot sadder, I think.

Wonder if Chuck went to AA meetings with Roger Ebert?

http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/08/29/charles-m-chuck-young-1951-2014/

Another obit

this quote from the counterpunch obit is a nice exclamation point on veronica moser's memories above:

“Wait, let me get this straight: a newspaper that has no editor? It sounds like a dream come true! Sign me up!”

and i assume the anecdote about him trying to strangle jann wenner at an office party makes him a hero to ... pretty much all humans.