Rolling Music Writers' Thread

sorry, maybe the first paragraph was misleading -- I'm saying it seems disappointing how often we assume the point is to accomplish something, or joke about how people aren't going to get anywhere with what they're doing, instead of considering that someone home-recording dubstep might be like someone's grandfather playing a little guitar on the porch (i.e., just part of a lifelong relationship with music)

Well, I mean, when I write x intended for an audience, isn't it...normal to assume we're "accomplishing" something? Not being flippant, just confused by your terms, nabisco.

"interesting that the internet's leveling effect on the record business might bring it all back home."

yeah! this is what i find exciting! i see this where i am. people just putting on a show for their friends/town/family and they don't really care if it goes beyond that. it's just fun. i think this is a great side-effect. i'm all for yokelism.

as for writing, remember what Dr. Johnson said: "No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money."

(saw this where i used to live too. but that was an actual island and community sings had never gone out of style there. my wife's great-aunt still played her edison cylinders on sunday afternoons! people knew the lyrics to stephen foster songs!)

I don't use this place to spam (as much as it is sometimes a temptation)

pity.

what you got to lose...respect among peers ?

and uh...where do you go to spam then ?

xpost - Ha, I must just be making this sound needlessly complicated.

I'm referring to the idea of "failed musicians" (or, hell, "failed" lots of things), and the way people occasionally pick on that -- almost as if they believe it's silly to even try anything unless it's going to work out for you, and make you a "real"/professional version of whatever you do.

But of course if you happen to love something, like music, it makes perfect sense that you'd enjoy playing it, writing it, talking about it, writing about it, etc. Not because you're staking your life on "succeeding"(though maybe you'd really like to!), but just because you love and enjoy it. Maybe you find some success, or maybe you just sing in your church choir or write a little blog, but either way it's part of your ongoing relationship with music. So the idea of "failing" at it is a little tricky to project onto anyone.

(Plus I don't know how you judge. I record stuff at home, for fun, and I doubt strangers would want to hear much of it, but I'm not a "failed musician," right? Because I'm not trying. And yet if I got a band together, recorded and released a record, got good reviews, toured, sold several thousand copies, and then people stopped liking us and we broke up and I went back to my current job and recording for fun in my bedroom, I'd be a "failed musician." Even if I had loads of fun and wasn't expecting anything more than that.)

yeah, i get you. this is america, unfortunately. i don't know about the rest of the world.

americans have weird ideas about "doing things".

As the first person to use the word "failed musician" in this convo, I would like to clarify that I DID mean it in the sense of people who think they can eke out a living playing music and certainly not some dude playing dubstep in his backyard

like a failed business owner.

I know, I know, not trying to argue with you -- I think people are weird about that in a larger way, though

I just got the following email blast from one of my editors, which he said was sent to him by his boss:

"is there any way to get word out to freelancers that nobody gives a shit about record-company stuff? it's way boring stuff that nobody but music snobs care about. while we're at it, can we also let writers know that readers don't care what pitchfork or anybody else has to say about a band? if they wanted to know, they'd read them. we're supposed to be authoritative critics with our own opinions. leave those references to other publications out of stories."

― Born In A Test Tube, Raised In A Cage (unperson), Wednesday, June 9, 2010 1:21 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

this is awesome, wish i worked for whoever said that

I wish more music writers had a blog or a Twitter feed where they just linked to everything they wrote, because there are some people, especially freelancers, who write for a bunch of venues and it'd be so much more convenient for me as a fan of their writing instead of a fan of publication X to follow their work.

(Sidebars on blogs don't really count, because there's no solid way to be notified when new stuff goes up.)

WERD..ksh

even if they linked to their 'whatever' off the pseudonym profile here at ilx.

more than some pithy popmatters good advice survey, i'd like to read something more stylistic and substantial.

a digital issuu portfolio maybe ?

yeah i do that and i'm always surprised more writers don't -- pretty much the main reason i HAVE a blog is to link to my freelance work and as a place to throw stuff i feel like writing but don't have a freelance outlet for

^got linky ?

I tried having a blog to link to my various writings but updating it was pretty tedious and boring after, like, a week

well, you write a LOT

mine is here btw

shot !

"so these reviews are really smart and well-written but can you rewrite them to make them funnier and lighter"

no FUCK YOU

seriously

i don't do jokes or humour in writing. can't do em. no idea where to start. LIVE WITH IT.

hmm

Is that a verbatim transcript of your reply Lex?

not yet

in about 5 minutes maybe

i know it seems like 75% of writers out there do nothing but try to chase down every last pun and laboured witticism out of life but that's just not me

Sure, but just because you don't do funny don't run down those who do. It's not just about puns and strained gags. Most of the best critics in any artform (Anthony Lane, Clive James, Kenneth Tynan) have humour in their writing.

oh there are some hilarious writers out there but the ratio of genuinely funny writers to writers who think they're funny but don't really progress beyond snide and sarcastic = roughly 1 : 10000. it's pretty telling that the closest i get to funny is when writing about something i hate or don't care about - there's no way i can be be funny about something i love, none at all.

lex, two questions before you send that email:

1) Are you getting paid for this review?
2) Does this mag/site specialize in light-hearted, witty commentary (ie, like a Blender or Complex or Vice) or is it something that can usually be a little dry?

1) yes
2) hmm it might like to think it does but i don't think i've ever laughed at it. and it's not like my copy is totally dry and humourless, it's quite casual, just without any snide, obvious, mocking jokes.

what pisses me off most is that they acknowledged that it's smart and well-written but they'd rather have lame, stupid humour.

I avoid puns & laboured witticisms as well but there's nothing wrong w/a little light irony or sarcasm imo. just something like an off-the-wall simile helps the reader get an idea of where you're at with the review.

Well if you're getting paid, I say suck it up and write the way your editor and his or her audience wants.

In this case I don't think it means putting in a bunch of bad puns, maybe just making it read a little more breezy and casual and conversational

Well if you're getting paid, I say suck it up and write the way your editor and his or her audience wants.

no offense man but fuck this. stick to yr guns, lex.

Yeah, editor sounds like a dipshit. I've edited the hell out of people, but I don't think "add more jokes" was ever what I asked for. And I'm somebody who's probably used irony, sarcasm, and bad puns a lot in my writing over the decades (sure they work, sometimes), but I'm kind of with Lex here anyway -- have always hated when I was told to be funny. Sorry, moron, but that's now how humor works, unless you want it to come out sounding really, really forced and stupid. (Which isn't to say that I wouldn't give in and give it a shot, sometimes, because I need a paycheck. Just wouldn't respect myself in the morning, if I did.)

solution: i am adding one sentence, to make a really lame joke about an artist's twitter account. that's all i got for them in terms of humour.

re: "conversational", my writing pretty much IS how i converse, minus the ums and ers and swearing. i could put the swearing back in if they want.

that would help i'm guessing

nah it wouldn't fly, i've had swears taken out before, even mild ones like "bullshit", also that time i tried to call la roux a cunt in print ;_;

are you sure you're not a laff riot?

xp meant "that's not how humor works...." etc.

Fwiw, I probably suggested specific jokes or puns or sarcastic lines for certain writers I was editing, but only if I thought it would fit into their personal voice. Why you'd want to add them to a writer who clearly didn't have a use for them is beyond me. ("Hey Gary Giddins -- you could really liven up this week's column on Roy Haynes and Max Roach with a couple poop jokes, don't you think?")

weirdly i'm pretty confident about my ability to make people laugh IRL, but just have no clue about how on earth to translate that to writing.

"Hey Gary Giddins -- you could really liven up this week's column on Roy Haynes and Max Roach with a couple poop jokes, don't you think?"

actual LOLs

dear any young cats who get all up-in-arms when you're asked to rewrite: the sooner you learn not to take it personally, the happier you're be and the better you'll write

when I think about the ok-at-best shit I used to go to bat for, I cringe

oh i am absolutely not one of those people who's precious about my writing, am happy to take on board actual worthwhile and specific suggestions, and 90% of the time don't care about subbing changes (which can backfire when i get so blasé that i don't check, and it turns out they've totally changed the meaning of something). being asked to be funny or light or humorous is just the one thing that raises my hackles. partly cuz i see so much LAZY "light" writing and it's infuriating to see editors still wanting to focus on that style.

in general getting up-in-arms over being asked to rewrite IS precious - nothing worse from an editor's (or reader's) POV than some greil marcus jr writing a record review that reads like finnegan's wake, hell it's bad enough when the real greil marcus does it. the point I want to make here is that some music writing in the wake of rob sheffield and blender has a "humorous" tone that sounds forced and phony IMHO - like an editor instructed the writer in the way the lex experienced. feel free to consider me humorless old geezer.

as sympathetic as i am to general hatred of forced breeziness i dont really see why my feelings should enter into what is essentially a business transaction

i mean i "see" why but i dont really "see"

max, this is art of pretend disingenuousness here

yeah yeah yeah

this is something i think about a lot, obviously. my feelings about my own 'integrity' w/r/t the things i write on a regular basis. so i am trying to see it all in a very businesslike way. so i can sleep at night.

I'm almost afraid to ask, but what on earth is "the art of pretend disingenuousness"