Pitchfork's Chris Ott takes No Prisoners

evan, if ott was simply arguing that creative freedom is most easily found outside of channels where corporations have the most control, no one would be debating him

― da croupier, Thursday, December 5, 2013 2:57 PM (50 seconds ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Yeah I agree that isn't all he was arguing, though I was trying to clear up the phantom arguments he never made in the first place. Saw some stuff misinterpreted imo and wanted to redirect energy to the shitty points that actually deserve it.

i do wonder how this week would be different for this lil circle of critic and critic-adjacents would be different if the videos were just "i like it out here. just a man, his camera, his pride in his trade, and his thoughts on curve. no paycheck on the line. no editor telling me the elders of zion want me to be nicer to curve. i hope someday you'll join me, and the world will live as one."

good one

forgive the second "would be different" there, the perils of no editing

I actually watched one of his Vimeo things from start to finish because that was literally what he was doing. Chris Ott, sitting in a chair framed by a sullen Massachussetts winter background talking about Curve

Or was that what you were referencing

indeed it is

no editor telling me the elders of zion want me to be nicer to curve.

idk, do you have to do this? he's indulging in a whole lot of down-punching foolishness but not this particular socialism of fools.

it was a low blow and i apologize. but my point is that stuff is beautiful. he's got a decent visual sense for a vlogger and a decent on-screen persona, but no one watches it so he has to get closer to the camera and call out all the assholes tainting the love between a man and his shoegaze albums by writing listicles for money

"No, people were arguing with the idea that it is super easy to get another job, which isn't what he was saying"

no, but he was telling everyone who gets paid for music writing that in order to be morally correct they should get another job, as evidenced by his pulling himself up by his bootstraps and getting one of the most competitive entry-level jobs in the world. and if not, then... forfeit all their income in the name of moral correctness? I said this earlier but if you want to tell me how I can and cannot make money then at least offer me a paycheck so I can do what you say

re: the "elders" bit pretend i wrote "the advertising-pr-industrial complex" or something

no thanks

(man, why did i write that post here and not on my own tumblr? i coulda made something of myself, no hustle. oh well, it's all my employer's dime anyway. during daytime hours at least)

look, I don't know who you are, and I don't have any issue with you, and if I've said something wrong or bad or entitled or upset anyone, I truly apologize. this isn't sarcastic, it's sincere. but it just seems like as a writer, and as a writer who wants to do the right thing and not be a terrible person, one is at a loss

i think this dude's got some good ideas in the mix but now that he's found god he'd be better served delivering the word more like pope francis and less like reverend phelps.

Reminder that ILX is funded by ads and that stet drops the guillotine on anybody InBev tells him to

question: why are people so fascinated by / willing to engage with chris ott? hundreds of posts. days of twitter analysis. etc

beats workin i guess

because he's an extreme example of an familiar impulse and ideology, with sexism and bullying as garnish

real answers: what he's saying are ideas that are kind of 'in the air' about the industry, what he has said has been needlessly crude and offensive to a lot of people, what he's said are particularly bad answers to good questions.

xp yeah, that

that's like asking "why are the kardashians famous"

plus goes without saying he solved the serious k + bennies code

Well I'm not about to go start reading the Marvel Puzzle Quest Support Group thread

JOIN US

"No, people were arguing with the idea that it is super easy to get another job, which isn't what he was saying"

no, but he was telling everyone who gets paid for music writing that in order to be morally correct they should get another job, as evidenced by his pulling himself up by his bootstraps and getting one of the most competitive entry-level jobs in the world. and if not, then... forfeit all their income in the name of moral correctness? I said this earlier but if you want to tell me how I can and cannot make money then at least offer me a paycheck so I can do what you say

― katherine, Thursday, December 5, 2013 3:12 PM (5 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Actually, I'm honestly asking here cause I don't remember exactly how he put it- did he say "You're morally scum unless you get another job" or "don't delude yourself into thinking you're DIY or punk if you have this fabricated corporate force using you"? Because the freshest thing in my mind is that interview with him upthread which I think was closer to the latter. And it seemed to imply a "don't let yourself be used" angle.

hey did you guys hear they dropped the punisher cover today

issue 1233?

"Q: What else are you supposed to do? Especially for young people right now. I know tons of writers who are freelancers making so little money, or they're just flat-out unemployed.

A: Get a job. That’s what I did. I got a job.

Q: What about the people who believed they’d some day end up as a full-time writer, then a big shot editor, and they’d fulfill everything they’d ever dreamed of?

A: They’re fucking deluded. I didn’t think that when I was 22, so that’s why I didn’t try to do it. I got a job as an administrative assistant at a book publisher, making twenty-two grand. Everything else has been the sweat of my labor in my career."

We all better rally the wagons and write Tumblr posts and agonize over Twitter and get Impose to do an interview because some guy who hasn't logged a legitimate clip since 2006 made a video with 3,547 views.

That video only got 3,457 views but every one of those viewers would later compromise their purity by writing a blurb promoting Deafheaven for InBev ad bucks funneled through a venture capitalist firm

Katherine, I guess I interpreted it as they're deluded if they don't want to compromise their writing for the sake of ad revenue and demographic targeting and whatever else would manipulate your ability to write freely and get paid that kind of money.

did he say "You're morally scum unless you get another job" or "don't delude yourself into thinking you're DIY or punk if you have this fabricated corporate force using you"?

4:25 of the vid, re: people writing for these companies, "I completely hold you in contempt"

someday all this tribal warfare may cease

http://m.apnews.com/ap/pm_5067/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=1Gk7456P

Took a while to get to the point where people are posting about this guy to ask why people are posting about him.

I interpreted it as "you're deluded if you had dreams of having a successful career and wanted to achieve your dreams. I certainly didn't when I was 22. Instead I got a assistant job at a publishing house [ed. note. lol] and pulled myself up by my bootstraps."

I know he wouldn't put it this nicely but I still think the core point was: You're going to have to play that game or you're going to have a really hard time being successful as a pro writer.

da croupier- Ah yes, thanks. I don't know. Feel like the interview is a slight back pedaling after being challenged for the shit in the video. Only slight.

I just don't see that as his core point, or maybe that'd be his core point minus the moralizing.

I blame Bill Hicks for all of this

To clarify: obviously there are people who are successful full time writers, he wouldn't deny that. So I think the context he's driving at is that if your dreams involve not having your opinions edited to cater to your sponsors that dream is really tough to achieve in this day and age.

xp Hicks is at least partially responsible for the still ongoing appeal of the angry white dude.

...and be a successful full time writer of course.

xp

oddly enough, bill hicks specifically dismissed young actors trying to make a buck (and irs victims like willie nelson) from his "fuck you for doing advertising" bit, saving his contempt for folks like jay leno who didn't need the money. though i'm sure he'd also be grumpy about folks eager to shill.

he'd be way more likely to call out "hey can we get a photo of you guys holding our beer" social media vultures (probably from a "fuck off and let me drink in peace" perspective) more than journalists who talk about cool shit in major pubs

I'm just thinking of that general idea that you can make a really facile, naive critique of advertising, deliver it as a macho angry rant, and people will look at you as some kind of countercultural rebel bravely speaking truth to power and sticking it to the man.

oh i get it, just noting that ott's stance is even less practical and sympathetic than hicks

plus, season to taste with a dash or two of misogyny and homophobia

xp to myself, forgot important part of the recipe

I suck at baking- all my pompadours come out flat and crusty and bitter.

oddly enough, bill hicks specifically dismissed young actors trying to make a buck (and irs victims like willie nelson) from his "fuck you for doing advertising" bit, saving his contempt for folks like jay leno who didn't need the money. though i'm sure he'd also be grumpy about folks eager to shill.

― da croupier, Thursday, December 5, 2013 2:54 PM (6 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

i was just thinking of this, trying to extrapolate the ott critique, such as it is, to other artforms.

should the jobbing actor or writer not take the sitcom gig? that's about as direct and ad-funded and pr-besotted medium there is. are movies better? those are funded by the previous season's receipts at least, right.

maybe stick to classical, an even more sharply draining pool, funded (as far as i can tell) by the state and the remaining few rich people who give a shit about it. perfect!

Despite certain parts of his philosophy that have some vague appeal, I don't see Bill Hicks as a person anyone should aspire to be like. Honestly, it's perplexing that he's become the icon that he has.