A Paler Shade of White---Sasha Frere-Jones Podcast and New Yorker article Criticizing Indie Rock for Failing to Incorporate African-American Influences

the difference is that I don't have to listen to and opine about Arcade Fire for a living

I doubt SFJ does, either. There's plenty of zeitgeisty music that he doesn't write about, and I'm sure the New Yorker isn't twisting his arm to write about the Arcade Fire. Pretty much all critics have the freedom to cover whatever the hell they want, unless they want to be a Christgau type who weighs in on everything. Hey, Arcade Fire might not be funky, but I wouldn't know because I don't listen to the shit sewer rat may taste like pumpkin pie, but I'd never know 'cause I wouldn't eat the filthy motherfucker.

but WHEN did sewer rat STOP tasting like pumpkin pie?

I'm pretty sure SFJ's editor ain't Norman Mailer so I doubt "whither juju?" was a top-down order

Yeah, but SFJ actually does like Arcade Fire and has said so; he just wants them to be better/different than they are. Is that really an unreasonable request to make of your favorite bands/artists/etc.?

xxp

Yes. Yes it is.

why?

Here's what bothers me about the article--like, in writing workshop one thing you're not supposed to do when critiquing someone else's writing is be all: "Well, if I was writing the story, I would do this and then I would change this around and make these characters do this."

SFJ seems to be saying something like: man, if I was in the Arcade Fire, I'd do it like this, I'd play the songs like this, with funkiness and syncopation. And that's not really the point of criticism, is it?

Yeah, but SFJ actually does like Arcade Fire and has said so; he just wants them to be better/different than they are. Is that really an unreasonable request to make of your favorite bands/artists/etc.?

Nope. I can't separate fanboy OMIGOD THEY'RE SO AWESOME instincts from what they do that's not-so-awesome. I remember Rob Sheffield's adulatory David Bowie entry in the big SPIN book on alternative rock which made such a big deal about Bowie's terrible voice.

SFJ seems to be saying something like: man, if I was in the Arcade Fire, I'd do it like this, I'd play the songs like this, with funkiness and syncopation. And that's not really the point of criticism, is it?

This is undefinable territory – how is this quantifiable? We'd have to overhear what he tells his analyst.

Mr. Que OTM. Criticizing an artist you like for, say, having a new album that isn't as good as the old stuff, or stating why, or even just admitting their faults while praising them, is a cornerstone of music crit. Picking at a band you like for not having qualities they never possessed at any point in their brief 2-album career is a little batty.

I don't get that from what he said at all. To me it seems like he just went to one too many indie-schmindie rock shows and was sick to death of all the monotonous rhythms and lack of beats inherent in the style(s). Which is not to say that his piece is anywhere near perfect, or as good as it could have/should(?) have been, but he does make some valid points therein.

xxxp (again...!@#$##$#@W)

so maybe he should stop going to indie rock shows

really the thing that rubs the wrong way the most is if he wants to get things that he could get from hip hop and dance, why is he listening to indie?

i know i'm repeating myself but this just seems blindingly obvious

deej OTM. if he's at an indie show and is sick of what he is hearing, he should go home, not expect the band to change!

To be fair, he is a music writer with a pretty broad swath of musical territory to cover - he can't really just "go home"

no actually, he can.

Yeah, but just to play save-a-SFJ a bit and try to interpret him charitably: isn't he trying to say: "hey, I like the Arcade Fire, good songs, good shows, and I recognize that what they're doing is a big deal right now, but wouldn't it be better if what was a big deal was less white?" I don't think it's ultimately a request for the Arcade Fire to change their act, but for a new, more culturally mixed thing to be a big deal...as he thinks it was in the past.

I know a lot of you are saying, "so what if the Arcade Fire is a big deal? Find something else if you don't like it" but whether it's because he's a critic, or he just wants to be part of what's a big deal, I think he doesn't want to move on.

as someone said upthread, he doesn't *have* to write about the Arcade Fire. It's not like David Remnick is all, "Dude, I've got some leads on this Dan Deacon guy I need you to track down for me."

The article isn't just about The Arcade Fire - I don't even feel like we're talking about the article anymore.

But he really LIKES indie, he just wants it to be better! (Oh for shame...)

xxp

Not less white, more swingin' (there is a difference, ya know).

xp

I mean I think he gets a lot wrong, but he's trying to get at some general sense of something lacking or missing in indie rock. He doesn't do a very good job of it - in fact the Slate response piece does a much better job of nailing what SFJ couldn't. But I still think he has reason as the kind of music critic he is to try to tackle that kind of problem. "If you don't like it, don't listen to it," is valid, but taken to extremes it doesn't leave much room for criticism.

Absolutely. (The Slate piece was great enough to convince me to buy his Celine book, btw.)

And part of what's so great about the Wilson piece is that he very casually manages to explain why What's Missing In Indie Rock is bound up with What's Missing In White Liberal Culture

See, groups like the Arcade Fire (a straw band if ever there was one) are supposed to be important -- they carry themselves that way, they have interesting instrumentation, they are obviously very smart, etc. Groups like this are supposed to dominate critical attention, and (lo and behold) they do. Doesn't matter if there are a lot of other indie bands who are bringing some kind of the funk; those bands don't register, critically. (And don't even think about acts like Kenna or that obscure group TV on the Radio, they are suddenly completely irrelevant.)

As has been pointed out here, SFJ has just ignored a lot of important things; as has also been pointed out, he has successfully trolled the world of people who write about music, who are mostly white people who write about mostly white bands. Will it matter? Probably not.

I dunno, I think it could matter in a small way.

haha I just claimed that LCD Soundsystem and other groups don't register critically. But if you look at their placement in polls maybe I'm right after all. I don't know about that.

from what I've read of the Celine book it sounds like an unintended response to the SFJ essay: how do we regard this paragon of Extreme Whiteness, etc.

also haha I am contributing to this thread wtf

At times Sasha's asking this band he likes to do something he can get from rap, and other times he's asking this band he likes and other indie-rock bands to sound like his beloved Clash circa Sandinista, or as Simon Reynolds blogged about--Liquid Liquid and others circa '81. Sasha's been on this kick for awhile--I referenced his EMP presentation above and Simon notes various items.

Sasha has been banging on about this as long I can remember. I interviewed him for the 1995 piece I did in the Wire on Post Rock in America, and there were complaints (astute, acerbic, righteous) about the lack of funk/groove/swing in Amerindie, pinings for the lost NYC polyracial/polyrhythmic mutantopia of the early Eighties (ESG, Liquid Liquid, etc). Then again I banged on about it, at a slightly different angle, two years before that. And really, people have been banging on about this almost as soon as the postpunk mutantopia came to an end circa 1985, banging on about it journalistically and music-rhetorically (Age of Chance covering "Kiss" frinstance). So the "in recent years indie's gotten awful white" angle is a little bit of false peg. Indie rock on both sides of the Atlantic has been, exceptions and occasional periodic rediscoveries that dancing is fun yknow, on this rhythmically inert, mumbly and pallid-tone vocalled tip since C86 took the Chic and the Al Green out of Orange Juice.

http://blissout.blogspot.com/

You know what song by white guys swings like a mofo: "Wicked World" by Black Sabbath. Popped up on my Ipod this morning at the gym.

In a sense, except there's a weird thing where most of the white brass band dudes in New Orleans play the music in a really white way, and seem to ignore the black version of the same culture that's all around them. It's like because they have that regional authenticity, they don't bother to delve into the music because they think they get it.

That's interesting, I'm not too familiar with that style of music, or the performers in it, but discussing the racial distinction there seems to have more merit than these arguments, because you have concrete examples of individuals playing the same written piece that vary in their interpretation, apparently between "black/white" styles. Once you get into composition, you're making a judgment call about someone's creative process that involves far more than turning the black switch on or off, to make your music more or less 'sexualized'. I think most people are right in saying the authors want the mystery back, or hope for integration of these styles, but swinging, backbeats, and these other conventions, which I am admittedly not familiar with, have a very heavy racial connotation, as well as a mood that might not jibe with the bands. I'm sure that point has been brought up, but god damn.

from what I've read of the Celine book it sounds like an unintended response to the SFJ essay: how do we regard this paragon of Extreme Whiteness

Identifying things as white is a slippery slope because white is the norm, so people don't self-identify as white, and if they do something is immediately amiss. African American music is easily identified because the musicians want to and explicitly contribute to their cultural/ethnic heritage, whereas whites are just doing what they do. I'm not saying I agree with that, or that there aren't white traits, but that race is a terrible mess and it seems like SFJ wants the musical elements he likes (which happen to be racialized) to be included in more music, but doesn't identify what they do to the music other than sexualizing, romanticizing, or generally invigorating it, the former two which are also variable as hell. Type type type, this is fun

Oh I just saw that new post, rediscover dancing and rhythm are black, I love the primordial groove! Physicality is not always on the minds of whites except for their body image neurosis, constant self assessment, thank god sometimes people remember black music and loosen up and dance. The only way people are going to be totally comfortable with this stuff is if it loses the connotation of race, history, what have you, but then you have desensitization. No romance there.

Type type type, this is fun

:-]

I really don't get what's so impressive about having "successfully trolled the world of people who write about music." Race is a hot button topic, the New Yorker is a high-profile mag. Dance in front of burning crucifixes and hump a black jesus on MTV and people will talk, doesn't mean you're saying anything profound or insightful.

who is going to give max r a job at the new yorker??

Elvis to thread!

Absolutely. (The Slate piece was great enough to convince me to buy his Celine book, btw.)

Can I get a link?

Here ya go:

http://www.slate.com/id/2176187/

Who said it was impressive? All that matters is that the article was successful in getting people to talk about it, despite the apparent lack of SFJ televised-black-Jesus-humpery.

And part of what's so great about the Wilson piece is that he very casually manages to explain why What's Missing In Indie Rock is bound up with What's Missing In White Liberal Culture

-- Hurting 2, Friday, October 19, 2007 10:41 AM (3 hours ago) Bookmark Link

[big hoos agree-ism]

I just saw Van Halen last night, and not only did they swing like crazy, the songs were clearly steeped in black music. So, if S F-J was really trying to say there should be more Van Halen in indie-rock, then yes, I totally agree with him.

Curmudgeon

Hugo, was the Clash with Lee Perry no longer the Clash; Talking Heads with Bernie Worrell, Nona Hendrix and others no longer the Talking Heads?

Yeah, you're right there. I was trying to make the point that the sort of music the Arcade Fire makes doesn't really call for a Sly & Robbie type rhythm section. Or even Spoon's rhythm section. But it was a poorly chosen and distracting analogy.

i'm listening to the new coheed and cambria album on myspace.

this makes arcade fire sound like the ohio players

I have about 8 million major complaints with SFJ's thinking here, which is incredibly sloppy for someone who's been banging this drum for years -- a lot of which complaints actually do boil down to one-line zings, like the vague sense that he's produced a large article on the theme of "why are blankets so blankety" instead of just buying a damn quilt instead.

That said, the only thing I really want to drop in here is something I was trying to get at when we had the thread on early-90s mainstream rock. If you want the source of the split he's talking about, it's so not the 1990s -- it's the 1980s period when that good ol' "miscegenated" 60s rock became profoundly corporatized and sparkly and eager to please, particularly in terms of the countless Huey Lewis types wandering around making strange theme-restaurant versions of rock'n'roll. From J Geils to H Lewis to G Thoroughgood to E Money to a lot of other 80s rock hits: these are guys most people would now consider very, very "white" playing music that was all about African-American forms. And it seems to me that as the 80s wore on, these were precisely the types of musicians independent rockers were most trying to steer clear of -- or the type of music, anyway, that strange 80s digital-keyboard endpoint of 60s rock and soul tropes. Like I said on the other thread, that sound kinda got as far as "Life is a Highway" and hasn't managed much since. And that, surely, is the moment rock started skewing away from certain audible African-American roots of rock; how it can somehow connect with new and current African-American sounds is an entirely separate issue.

Sorry to disappoint John D, but even typing that makes me feel like I'm giving this article too much credit. The whole thing is bizarrely dependent on SFJ defining terms the way he needs to: defining "indie" as white guitar bands, so you can go on to magically discover that it feels "white," even if other people are ripping off Baltimore club and the Blow are faking snap music; the dumb ethnomusicological feint of defining "Africa" as actually having to do with recent African-American rhythm+bass ideas, ones which are absent from the majority of music from the actual continent in question ... there is stuff in here to be talked about, for sure, but his writing itself seems like an exercise in defining terms and then having bold insights that they are precisely what you've defined them as.

isn't there a black guy in that band?
xpost

?

Nabisco OTM. Less microgenre-crit, more intellectual history.

J Geils ...these are guys most people would now consider very, very "white" playing music that was all about African-American forms.

Nabiscio, have you ever heard "Flamethrower"?? (Big hit on Electrifyin' Mojo's Midnight Funk Association show on WGPR-Detroit in 1981 -- right alongside Prince and Kurtis Blow and Grace Jones and Funkadelic and Kraftwerk and Yellow Magic Orchestra and Billy Squier.)

Thorogood/Money/Lewis all made excellent music in the '80s, too, but Geils "very white"?? Wow.

xhuxk, read a little closer. the GUYS are very, very "white." the MUSIC is "all about african-american forms."

Well, following up on Nabisco's post, Springsteen is nothing if not a compendium of '50s rock and '60s r&b/soul, plus folk. And yet I imagine S F-J would consider Springsteen and bands that sound like Springsteen quite "white." I suppose S F-J is playing close to the vest just what black music he considers black enough to support his thesis. Just post-"Chronic" hip-hop? Doesn't that overlook the inconvenient fact that the preceding 100 years or so of black music - from blues and jazz to James Brown and beyond - has already been pretty well integrated into nearly all forms of "white" music? Does a band need to slap its bass or dish out syncopated breakbeats to make that clearer, or can't it just be left, you know, implicit? Does it matter that, aside from the actual race of the performer, I'm not quite sure just what makes contemporary "black" music" black music? Following S F-J's dangerous line of reasoning, can a black act therefore be, um, too white?

The New Yorker is generally above publishing slopppy, ill-thought out blogs postings (like mine). I agree with the Slate response that a few more passes might have shaped the piece into something more donut than hole.

x-post "Flamethrower" was awesome. It was on the b-side of my "Freeze Frame" single. Reminded me of the Gap Band.