|
19 Aug 01 - 04:39 PM (#531316) Subject: Music Journalism. a Rant, nuthin' more! From: Rick Fielding I'm trying to make a big succulent, steaming, hearty stew for dinner right now, so I'm just going to outline what really gets my shorts in a knot about this. If it's got some "legs" I'll come back and REALLY do a useless rant. Now that "Roots" music (uggh how I hate that word) has not only reached the masses, but actually appears to be a corporate money maker, I'm getting used to seeing mainstream magazines (and newspapers) featuring articles on stuff that I've cared dearly for over many years. The New Yorker article on Ralph Stanley is just the latest, and is certainly no better or worse than anything else. It's simply WAYYYYY over due! The amount of inaccuracies in many of these articles is staggering. In fact I wonder if any other genre is as poorly edited and fact checked as ALTERNATIVE music. I simply can't picture an article on Corvettes, or philately, or Nuclear waste, or The Bush Twins, escaping with the kind of blatantly wrong information being stated as fact when it comes to music. Even though it's a mainstream magazine (or newspaper or TV documentary etc.) why can't they get someone from INSIDE the music to either write it or at least seriously edit it? I suspect this DOES happen in other areas, where they write about a subject dear to your heart, and you sit there opened mouthed saying "WHAT are they talkin' about?" but it just seems that traditional folk music forms REALLY suffer. Rant off. Rick |
|
19 Aug 01 - 04:52 PM (#531319) Subject: RE: Music Journalism. a Rant, nuthin' more! From: Midchuck I concur that it's way overdue. But I think it's quite a lot better than most. Perhaps the most dramatic moment in all the Stanley Brothers' hundreds of recordings occurs in the chorus of "Rank Strangers." After Carter sings the verse, Ralph enters with the words "Everybody I met/ Seemed to be a rank stranger" in a voice that stabs like an icepick. He raised the tension in the Stanley Brothers' music to the nearly unbearable: singing above Carter's melody, he would hang on a dissonant note in anticipation of the chord that was about to arrive. Over time, these harmonies became wilder, more edgy and attention-getting - a separate drama that didn't cozy up to the melody but defied it before an ultimate reconciliation. I think the guy said it well. Peter. |
|
19 Aug 01 - 05:27 PM (#531330) Subject: RE: Music Journalism. a Rant, nuthin' more! From: Mark Clark I'm not sure I think the mainstream media are singling out our music as a subject that doesn't require accuracy. They treat every subject (and reader) with the same disdain. I suspect publishers and editors have realized that very few consumers care about facts, they really care about conversation and images. Take a look at Mudcat threads; a small number are factual discussions of interest to folk musicians, the majority are just a framework for conversation. I don't mean to say that's necessarily bad, it's just human nature. Everyone is a performer today. News programs turn more and more to entertainment and staging footage that might be too expensive to capture as it happens. Political commentators give us so much fecal material it's almost impossible to learn anything factual about the process. Churches are full of preachers who seem to lack even a rudimentary understanding of theology. Even prestigious scientific journals have fallen victim to manipulations of fact by the companies that sponsor research. If we happen to have special knowledge in an area being discussed, we catch the fabrications. Most of the time though we just listen to or read the prattle that's placed before us with no convenient way to examine its veracity. Most of us assign value to input that reinforces our beliefs and reject input that challenges them. Why else would the “science channel” run programs on UFOs and “unexplained phenomena?” If you know of any media source that is scrupulous about presenting verified facts in a balanced format with intellectual integrity, please let me know about it. I'd like to see this for myself. - Mark |
|
19 Aug 01 - 06:11 PM (#531364) Subject: RE: Music Journalism. a Rant, nuthin' more! From: The Shambles 'A little knowledge is a dangerous thing'.
A journalist will have a series empty spaces to fill in their magazine/paper. Many people reading it will probably know more about the subject matter than the writer does.
When it comes to folk music journalists, they tend to fall into the trap of feeling they have to do it the same way as rock, clasical or jazz journalists do. So you have fashions, genres and trends instead of just people making music. Those people are then fitted into the genres created, the ones that don't fit well are usually just forgotten.
Very little of what is written is actually about the music, as that is more difficult than just writing, not very accuratly, about the people that make it. I gave up trying to read FROOTS, long ago, as it just made me angry...End of rant. |
|
19 Aug 01 - 06:14 PM (#531369) Subject: RE: Music Journalism. a Rant, nuthin' more! From: Pinetop Slim The graf cited by Midchuck is a rarity in music journalism (about which, in general, I'm all in favor of a RANT) in that it's clear what the writer is trying to say and actually gives me some feel for the Stanley Brothers music. In six or seven years of looking through the press kits for acts appearing at a coffee house where I volunteer, I'm yet to see anything comparable. The performers' biogs are OK, but about their music rarely is anything meaningful said. A string of adjectives, maybe, or the "reminds the listener of (fill in the blank)" and too often the incredible hybridization "it is as if the soul of (fill in the blank) joined with the rhythm of (f.i.b.) and the lyrical sensitivity of (f.i.b.)." About the lack of fact-checking, I sympathize, but I can't get my shorts in a bunch over it when maybe 10 percent of the postings here at Cat are disputes over song authorship, origination etc. The folk process is bound to yield a lot of misinformation posing as fact. Who writes well about music? Some names and examples of their work would be valuable to practicing or would-be music critics, reviewers and feature writers. |
|
19 Aug 01 - 06:27 PM (#531374) Subject: RE: Music Journalism. a Rant, nuthin' more! From: Gareth Shambles,
from time to time I have to write up "Press releases", political leaflets, election addresses and space filler for the local rag - believe me it aint easy. Even if the reporter on the local rag ( one or two individuals (vide "The Borchester Echo") is a folk fan he has to write to interest his/her audiance, as a whole This means lowest possible denominator - KISS = Keep it simple, stupid! A question, can any folk magazine have a big enough circulation to employ an excellent journalist, full time on folk matters ? just my charge of explosives into the fishing pond of life, - :-) Gareth. |
|
19 Aug 01 - 07:26 PM (#531404) Subject: RE: Music Journalism. a Rant, nuthin' more! From: Dicho (Frank Staplin) Gareth has put it clearly and simply. Oversimplification, distortion, emphasis of minor (but mind-catching ) facts are a natural product of journalism in mass media news. No one will read a detailed, accurate article- they want a print bite or a sound bite. This applies to any aspect of the news. Reporting of legal issues is perhaps worst of all. Be glad that something is being said, whether classed as "roots", "alternative" or whatever- it may stir someone's interest and cause them to look deeper into the subject. I suspect that some shallow, inaccurate articles were what first stirred my interest in something that wasn't top 50 or whatever. |
|
19 Aug 01 - 07:56 PM (#531426) Subject: RE: Music Journalism. a Rant, nuthin' more! From: paddymac The occasional rant is good for our individual mental health, but I'm more interested in what Rick's putting into his stew pot. A really vibrant rant could seriously damage a person's culinary judgment and taste. What went into your creation, Rick? Let us know: how'd it turn out? |
|
19 Aug 01 - 10:24 PM (#531509) Subject: RE: Music Journalism. a Rant, nuthin' more! From: Rick Fielding OK, look, normally I'm pretty easy going. I laugh a lot, I try to make good dinners for Heather, and I make sure the cats don't get locked out all night even if I have to stand at the back door rattling 'Kitty treats' at 2 am.....but Peter...an example of what I'm talking about (if you quoted it right) is them calling the song "Rank StrangerS". The title is "Rank Stranger"..Singular, not plural. Makes a big difference to the meaning of the song. I know, I know, I know, I'm being soooo picky, but when you see stuff like that ALL through most articles, it can get on your nerves if you're as obsessive as I am. One quick proofread by anyone who actually KNEW bluegrass would eliminate 90% of the errors. I read an article on Ralph recently (not the New Yorker) that talked about "from the start, their recordings featured Ralph's haunting tenor singing....." Any Stanley Brothers nerd knows how many tenor singers the band had before Ralph started to find his voice. There has seldom been (if any) a mainstream article that talked with any authority on Carter's skill and roll, 'cause he's long dead, and never recorded with Emmy Lou or Alison Krauss. It's a shame, 'cause he was more than the equal of Ralph as a skilled singer. His dynamics were amazing. All I can do, is ask anyone to think whether a bunch of slight (or major) inaccuracies in something written about "you" would be annoying. I'm afraid I'm one of those people who's assimilated trad bluegrass culture to the extent that I take it far tooooo personally. Other than that I'm reasonably normal. Paddymac Stew recipe (changeable 'cause I improvise EVERYTHING!) Stewing beef, Cut up turnip, carrots, cut up potatoes, Ginger root, minced garlic, onion flakes, water. Throw in pressure cooker. Cook for twenty minutes. Toss into big pot. add more water and half can consomme soup. several cherry tomatoes from garden. Bit of oregano, basil, salt and lots of cracked black pepper. Mix cup of "biskwik" (or Martha White's self risin' flour if you're being true to Bluegrass) with 2/3 cup water and pinch of salt. Spoon in dumplings. Turn stew on to medium. Go write "silly rant" on Mudcat. Eat stew.......verrry good......fall asleep. Cheers, I feel better now. Rick |
|
19 Aug 01 - 10:41 PM (#531517) Subject: RE: Music Journalism. a Rant, nuthin' more! From: Peg I came up with this recipe living in England one January... A few freshly made herby sausages, an onion, a few potatoes, red wine, carrots Saute sliced onion in butter; add sliced sausage and brown. Lower heat, pour in cup of red wine. Let sausages simmer in wine for a minute. Pour in two cups stock or water, and add carrots and potatoes, cut into chunks. Simmer until vegetables are tender. Yum. Serve with good bread and the (good) red wine you opened to cook with.
|
|
19 Aug 01 - 11:52 PM (#531557) Subject: RE: Music Journalism. a Rant, nuthin' more! From: paddymac Rick (and Peg too) - Thanks! I'll save both recipes until the weather turns cool. We're only two weeks awayf from the onset of the collegiate football season, but probably 2-2 1/2 months from good stew weather here in north Florida. Rick, your creation is a lot like my own basic stew, but I've never tried adding ginger root. The turnip root is a fun addition here in the south, as most folks taste it, but have no idea what it is. In the midwest, where I grew up, folks eat turnip roots, but in the south, they eat the greens. Might be 'cause the roots tend to get sort of mealy down here. Danm, I'm sal;ivating just thing about adding some ginger. It ought to go well with the other stuff. I don't know a better complimentary pair (well, at least in the foods realm) than good stew and fresh home-made bread. |
|
20 Aug 01 - 12:00 AM (#531559) Subject: RE: Music Journalism. a Rant, nuthin' more! From: RWilhelm The same thing happens with the periodic "blues revivals" where buying one key album makes one an expert. The good news is when the masses move on to the next thing, a few people stay behind and dig deeper. |
|
20 Aug 01 - 12:09 AM (#531563) Subject: RE: Music Journalism. a Rant, nuthin' more! From: AliUK Shambles, your example of FROOTS as a lost cause for representing people who are interested in or participate in producing traditionally influenced music ( of every nationality) was right on the nose. I gave up reading Folk Roots ( I hate the new name) when I moved out here to Brazil eight years ago. I had read it since its Southern Rag days. By '93 I was becoming ever more distressed at its philosophies and coverage. I was recently back in the UK for a few months and decided to pick up a copy, which I duly read from cover to cover ( without the old gusto I must say), then picked up the following months, which stayed at the bottom of the pile of bathroom reading until I left Britain and came back home. I never got past the first article. As a "mainstream"voice for traditionally based music, it sucks. Ian Anderson seems to have become even more megamaniacle than he ever was and I can't even begin to guess who actually buys the thing. But it is symptomatic of the dumbing down of music journalism worldwide, though the Jazz (music) mags seem to keep it going pretty well. Local paper coverage et.al. is understandable, but from a specialist magazine the sort of Kerrang/NME journalism that seems prevelant in the FOLK ROOTS writing is really crass. |
|
20 Aug 01 - 10:30 AM (#531749) Subject: RE: Music Journalism. a Rant, nuthin' more! From: dick greenhaus Rick- Being (having been?) both a journalist and a folk musician, I can say with some authority that journalists are lazy, sloppy, and inaccurate. But they're probably, as a class, more reliable sources of information than folk musicians. |
|
20 Aug 01 - 10:55 AM (#531768) Subject: RE: Music Journalism. a Rant, nuthin' more! From: KingBrilliant We still buy Folk Roots whenever it has a decent cover CD. I remember reading it and enjoying it when we first bought it - but I have to struggle to find a page to get interested in now. The only way I read any of it is by leaving it in the bog for those literary moments... What went wrong? The last article I enjoyed was the one about Okinawa music. That one was good. Kris |
|
20 Aug 01 - 11:05 AM (#531774) Subject: RE: Music Journalism. a Rant, nuthin' more! From: GUEST,Bryan Bowers Part of the problem with journalists is that their information is only as accurate as their sources. A while back, an article in a small paper in Illinois gave me credit for writing "Hot Buttered Rum," a song I've recorded, but which was written by Tommy Thompson. I contacted the journalist to point out that it was Tommy's song, not mine. She said that she got the credit from the Digital Tradition database at the Mudcat Cafe. I came here to Mudcat and looked up the song. Sure enough, it said that I wrote the song. I posted the correct information and asked that Tommy be given the credit he is due. This is particularly important because Tommy is suffering from Alzheimer's Disease at much too young an age. That was many months ago. Today, I came back to Mudcat only to find that my request has been completely ignored. Mudcat is used by journalists as a source for information. So not complain about their inaccuracies when you are unwilling to clean up your own act. I'm afraid that Mudcat's refusal to correct this glaring mistake has left a very sour taste in my mouth. |
|
20 Aug 01 - 11:33 AM (#531799) Subject: RE: Music Journalism. a Rant, nuthin' more! From: Rick Fielding Dear Bryan. I, not Mudcat, made the complaint (a rather futile one I admit) and I have always endeavoured to check and re-check any credits that make it into the 'real' world. If I have info needed for a bio or liner note that seems to me to be conflicting, I would go to the source for confirmation, not the internet. Mudcat is a fun hobby for me, but it's made up primarily of folks' opinions. Any journalist that's used it as a final arbiter is taking a short cut, I think. Cheers Rick |
|
20 Aug 01 - 11:51 AM (#531810) Subject: RE: Music Journalism. a Rant, nuthin' more! From: wysiwyg PRESSURE COOKER?? You need a Dutch Oven! Come on over for a demo. Rick, eventually it will be YOU they are telling mistruths about. LOL! ~S~ |
|
20 Aug 01 - 01:28 PM (#531887) Subject: RE: Music Journalism. a Rant, nuthin' more! From: GUEST,TweedleDee Funny, this subject. In another thread here (Frank Harte and Donal Lunny), where someone mentioned that Frank Harte's liner notes have been criticized by a music journalist for historical inaccurcies, the response from one or two folks was something along the lines of "Who cares? Frank Harte rocks. How dare anyone criticize him!" I think those responses are fairly common from people who really don't have high standards, and think coming from an ethical perspective about the writing is ludicrous. Which seems to be most folk music consumers. There was a fairly substantial flame war over this very subject sometime in the last year over in rec.music.folk. Someone pointed out a mistake in a Rootsworld review, and people started flaming away at the person who dared mention it, and then had the audacity to go on ranting about the state of folk music journalism. So don't worry Rick, I don't think you are a lone voice in the wind. But sadly, I don't think there is much of a chorus backing you up, either. Agree with Dick...music journalists tend to be much more accurate than folk musicians, which is an even more frightening thought. I agree too with Bryan--there are a lot of people singing the praises of the DT to an uniformed media and public. It is a really inaccurate database (he says stepping into the asbestos suit), and no, I don't think there is any reasonable or unreasonable excuse for the shoddy way the DT site isn't maintained properly in terms of accuracy. And finally, I certainly agree with the assessment of fRoots and Ian Anderson being expressed here. AliUK--if you think his megalomania is bad on the pages of the mag, you should see him in the Usenet newsgroups. They treat him like God the Almighty and regularly tolerate/exonerate his excesses in uk.music.folk. It is pretty sickening, actually. Good thread here, Mr. Fielding sir.
|
|
20 Aug 01 - 02:48 PM (#531951) Subject: RE: Music Journalism. a Rant, nuthin' more! From: Don Firth I had a recent insight into the journalistic mindset. An investigative reported at a local newspaper (who, by doing an article about the situation, could probably prevent it from happening) was informed that as a result of a major screw-up in the court system, a disabled man and his wife were in danger of being thrown out of their home of twenty-three years. The reporter said, "so what's newsworthy about this?" "Well, my God, man, they're about to be thrown out into the street!" "When they are thrown out, then it will be newsworthy." The case is still pending. Other fields of music also suffer from incredible ignorance on the part of some writers. One tiny example: recently, if seems, many people (including some music critics, for Pete's sake) seem to think that all male opera singers are tenors. I recently heard Bryn Terfel, the young Welsh bass who is currently experiencing well-deserved success in the operatic world as "the young tenor, Bryn Terfel." Anyone who has heard Bryn Terfel (voice coming from somewhere near the region of his shoe-tops) knows, he ain't no tenor! In a lot of areas, if you don't already know something about the subject, you're dead meat. (Derivation of the word "expert:" Ex meaning "has been," and Spurt meaning "a little drip under pressure.") Don Firth |
|
20 Aug 01 - 03:51 PM (#531985) Subject: RE: Music Journalism. a Rant, nuthin' more! From: John MacKenzie Borchester Echo Gareth!! You'll have anybody outside England puzzled by that reference. { Do you think the plot line on Helen Archer is leading up to her coming out of the closet?} Anyway nearer my thread to thee. Music journos mostly fall into the same category as teachers, i.e. "Those who can do, those who can't write". As proof of this I close with two words. KARL DALLAS. Jock |
|
20 Aug 01 - 03:57 PM (#531987) Subject: RE: Music Journalism. a Rant, nuthin' more! From: Gareth Jock, Outside England ?? Arn't you stereo typing ??/ Gareth (from South Wales) |
|
20 Aug 01 - 04:38 PM (#532005) Subject: RE: Music Journalism. a Rant, nuthin' more! From: M.Ted First thing is, "music journalist" is not a job of high rank at most newspapers, not a lot of respect, and tons of stuff that needs to be writtten in a short time, with little appreciation, either from editors or from the subjects of the pieces-- Second,most music writers got the job because it was what the editor needed someone to write, not out of either special interest or special aptitude, so they often know nothing about music at all- Third, music journalists, like other journalists,usually just take press releases, CD notes, and what they are handed, make a few calls and a few internet searches, and write something that fits what their editor has asked for-- This means that more accurate the press release or press kit, the more accurate the press coverage-- Fourth is the object lesson--if you want good press, you need good PR, which is to say, you package up everything nice and hand it to the writer, then pray that they don't misquote--
|
|
20 Aug 01 - 05:20 PM (#532028) Subject: To Bryan Bowers From: GUEST,me no want no cookie no more To Bryan Bowers, The mistake in the Digital Tradition that you're so upset about has been brought to the attention of the Mudcat powers that be on numerous occasions over the past four years. Obviously, they just don't care. If they did, they'd have fixed it years before you noticed. It's rich that the citizens of Mudcatville have such a low opinion of journalists when so much of the information passed on this forum is incorrect and so much of the opinion is ill informed.
|
|
20 Aug 01 - 05:36 PM (#532035) Subject: RE: Music Journalism. a Rant, nuthin' more! From: John MacKenzie No Gareth I'm afraid I can only type in Mono: Cheers Jock |
|
20 Aug 01 - 06:12 PM (#532060) Subject: RE: Music Journalism. a Rant, nuthin' more! From: Peter T. Hey Rick, the name is spelled Emmylou. Couldn't resist. I noticed that "Rank Strangers" thing -- and we are talking about the New Yorker which prides itself on never making a mistake. I just sighed and went on, put it down to natural human error from which none are free. But mistakes in the basic idea are different (like your reference to Ralph's singing history). That is when the whole credibility of the writer dies: if they can't figure this out, then what hope is there. I notice that the New York Times reporter (can't think of his name) who does Nashville has a pretty good track record. The article that is really scary in that issue is Nick Hornsby's on the current Top 10. It is a cliche to say that the next generation shocks the previous one, but I admit that this stuff is pretty grim. What can you make of a song called "Independent Woman" in the top 10, beating up on women, which goes: "Shut your motherfucking mouth and show us your tits?" (I apologise, I am just quoting the New Yorker (!)). Especially as these songs are what will be in my students' heads come September. They will be gone come October, replaced by new ones, but the trend is not upward.... yours, Peter T. |
|
20 Aug 01 - 07:20 PM (#532092) Subject: RE: Music Journalism. a Rant, nuthin' more! From: M.Ted PeterT, Perhaps it is a song that brings our into the open, at long last, that mindless, vicious, sexism that exists under a thin veneer of civility that many contemporary men carry arround. Back in the sixties (when it looked like it might be possible to uproot centuries of racism), I had black friends who liked to say things like, "When someone calls me a "Nigger" to my face, I respect that, because at least he is being upfront about where he's at. The people that disgust me are the ones who look me in the eye and call me, "Brother", and then go on with business as usual." In another way, that song is a good thing, because it is right there, in everybody's face, showing that yes, there is a vicious, abusive sexism, alive and well out there--and instead of quoting gov't statistics about glass ceilings and inequality of wages, all that is necessary is just to show them the New Yorker-- And yes, the lyrics bother me, but I am thankful that there are still people out there stupid enough to say what they really think, because they expose the people who try to tell us that things are fine as liars, and the strengthen the resolve of everybody who is fighting for change--(sorry, but I figured this is supposed to be a rant thread, and one rant is as good as another) |
|
21 Aug 01 - 04:25 AM (#532287) Subject: RE: Music Journalism. a Rant, nuthin' more! From: Wolfgang It is not surprising that anyone can spot errors easier on his or her field of knowledge. Ask just anybody on which field journalists (newspapers) are least reliable and you know what this person knows most about. When Velikovsky published his crackpot book trying to point out that certain historical facts could be explained by assuming that Venus had come very close to Earth in historical times, many people were astonished by the wealth of details in the book. One day, a physicist and a paleontologist met who both had read Velikovski's book. Both thought that the book was full of errors in one particular field of knowledge but were impressed by Velikowsky's scholarship on other fields. You may have guessed by now, that the paleotologist was impressed by Velikovsky's physical knowledge which the physicist thought to be close to nil and vice versa. Wolfgang |