Xgau takes music criticism to a new level

i enjoy reading his stuff in the same way i enjoy reading a lot of vintage critics, it's interesting to see his takes. like in the same way it was interesting to see Ebert or Kael's takes. some of his issues with women *could* be chalked up to "it was a different time then." at least he doesn't call them bimbos anymore.

What are his abysses? His early and consistent support for all sorts of r'n'b and hip hop (and pop) at least is what was unique and valuable to me. I don't understand preferring any of the other early guys, especially in a dismissive way. In many obvious ways he was ahead of the curve imo.

― gospodin simmel

Actually, in the long run he didn't care much about contemporary R&B, and I recoil from his (and Marcus') class-based suspicion of quiet storm and what Nelson George called retronuevo.

I can still read him, though.

in the long run he didn't care much about contemporary R&B

what "contemporary" is this

R&B after 1980. Points for embracing Jazmine Sullivan, though.

i guess i'll defer to someone who knows his work way better than i do

The Songstress [Beverly Glen, 1983]
In a time when the only black people with the guts to go for the soul are Mississippi recidivists and moldy oldies, this L.A. sophisticate has the audacity to pretend she can make pop music out of the shit. The violin and woodwind touches hark back to when soul had something to sell out with, the jazzy guitar comps look forward to when it'll storm the big rooms, the funky bottom bespeaks commitment, the hooky songwriting bespeaks smarts, and the voice sings. B+

then get to the next two Baker reviews

it's true that his opinions on anita baker do suck

I always hated both the concept and execution of the "Consumer Guide", but I will admit that my understanding of his writing changed pretty much _completely_ after hearing him read a 20-minute piece aloud at PopCon the first time. I think it's possible that brevity was actually the soullessness of his wit.

I guess what I'm saying is Xgau's taste and approach is the closest among that generation to a sort of taken for granted poptimism od today? Dude did serious writing on things like philly soul and disco and early hip hop and eurodance when that wasn't done. He was also early and important for the James Brown reappraisal. Sure, he hates metal and retronuevo and isn't big on electronic music but all of that makes sense given his likes. Feels weird to take all of that for granted or dismiss it. Especially on ilx where his aesthetic is a lot more at home than Bangs or Marcus or whoever. Anxiety of influence I guess.

"poptimism of today"

Yeah. It was sort of argued about ten years ago. Now it just is. Or am I wrong about that?

I mean, poptimism was always a no brainer sort of attitude for me and that came from reading Xgau.

I could say the same thing, except the exact opposite.

fine

insert appropriate "semi-poptimism" joke here

Remembering also Greil Marcus’ introduction to the reprint of The Aesthetics of Rock where he discusses the fact that Meltzer wrote about Tommy James and the Shondells on the same ground as Jefferson Airplane or whatever his example was and that this wasn’t otherwise done at the time (possibly even by ‘60s era Christgau).

I don't know about Tommy James, buy Christgau was raving about the Box Tops in 1969 ("Each new instrument, each pause, works to build tension and qualify meaning, yet final control seems to fall not to critical intelligence but to some crazy kind of rapacious commercial instinct, an instinct that might seem pretentious if it weren't so busy being delighted with itself--Phil Spector with economy, sort of.") and was not immune to the charms of "Yummy Yummy Yummy", but maybe this was a couple of years after Meltzer?

Also Richard Goldstein may have been doing it before any of them. When reading through Goldstein's Village Voice column, I was surprised that Christgau basically replicated its structure in his subsequent Rock and Roll column, right down to the little items at the end about what was playing the radio.

"It's so reassuring when the indie rumor mill isn't just licking its own asshole."

It's pretty awesome when you can start a review with that.

insofar as an indie rumor mill exists

sounds like maybe he had subliminal crusties on his mind

Haha, I'm going to guess Wet Leg

That quote was from 2002. I just thought it was great that a print editor could see that and say "looks good to me - print it!" Alternative weeklies were awesome.

(Also it was for Spoon)

Indie rumor mill always noted for its remarkable flexibility.

Well, with assholes involved, who wouldn't be?

Were people still combing over James Agee and Otis Ferguson's reviews in the '80s and '90s? Is this an internet/social media thing?

I think it's more common with pop music, but also Xgau made it easier with his website. I think he said this in a recent interview, because he has a website (and because of the accessible nature of capsule reviews), he's frequently cited in Wikipedia, and that's drawn a lot of traffic to his reviews. It wouldn't surprise me if his older reviews get far more views than any other established critic for those reasons. (Probably helps that his site doesn't bombard you with ads and videos like some publications will.)

I think Xgau/Fantano/Scaruffi/RYM doing lots and lots and lots of things with a quantifiable ratings scale and data appeals to people in the same lite-autism-spectrum way that someone might be obsessed with train schedules or whatever

Like it's prolly no coincidence both Xgau and Scaruffi made and maintained SEARCHABLE DATABASES FOR THEIR LIFE'S OPINIONS in the early internet

Yeah seems p obvious he wants people to comb through them.

There's that Pauline Kael Geocities site, but I don't know if it's searchable, and half the time your virus protection will block it. But we argue about her anyway.

Most of 5001 Nights at the Movies is searchable on Google Books.

To be fair, I think Tom Hull was the one who approached Xgau with the idea and voluntarily did it for him. (Hull also has his own site too.)

I know what you mean though - he seems to get a lot of questions laser-focused on grades rather than the reviews themselves. Xgau has downplayed the value of grades - for examples, when asked for clarity on star ratings, he just said "they're all B+'s" and he's said if he had to, he'd regrade a lot of things over time but he doesn't think it's worth it. You can see why RS got rid of the star rating, it really does take up far too much attention than the actual content of the review.

*for example

It still ticks me off that one of CMJ's last few owners tanked the entire database of old reviews. I used to really enjoy looking those up (and not just, er, the few that I wrote).

I have a vague recollection of Q Magazine making all of their reviews available online and later Rolling Stone hosting a lot of entries from their album guide online (and updating them with every new release). In both cases, it felt like they did that for only a year or two then took it all down.

The Voice keeps a lot of stuff online, but it's not perfect: this Mötley Crüe live review (warning: opening line contains a slur that was A-OK in 2009) doesn't carry my byline, so I had to search for it by band name.

Their links change! So I made my own archive of my Voice stuff years ago (also ones for stuff from other publications, having learned the hard way that older things can get flushed). Last year, I think, couldn't find anything of mine on the Voice site, but yesterday I checked again, and it was all there: mixed feelings about that now, since I've tweaked and improved some of the olde pieces in my own archives---
xpost bird, Rolling Stone still has some ancient works in there, like Paul Nelson's celebration of the Ramones debut: https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-album-reviews/ramones-206065/
in the three collections of Consumer Guide columns, xgau mentions re-listening, and sometimes he'll give the original grade and a new grade. Also, sometimes he indicates in a review of a later album that he's changed his mind about an earlier effort, that it sounds better or worse by comparison, or that he'd already gotten tired of it.

xpost

https://c.tenor.com/HBsu7mTmizgAAAAC/bill-hader-popcorn.gif

(warning: opening line contains a slur that was A-OK in 2009)

haha ok man

haha ok man

My editor — which was either Rob H. or Maura J. at the time — let it pass without blinking. We are none of us angels.

We R none of us angels

There's that Pauline Kael Geocities site, but I don't know if it's searchable, and half the time your virus protection will block it. But we argue about her anyway.

― clemenza, Tuesday, August 23, 2022 4:56 PM (three hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

"we" = 2.5 people

neverending discussion of this jerk off here (xgau not pauline kael) is such a blight

https://giphy.com/explore/who-gives-a-shit