<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Blogcritics Author: Kris Kerzman</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/</link>
<description>A sinister cabal of superior bloggers on music, books, film, popular culture, politics, and technology - updated continuously.</description>
<language>en</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2005-2007 by the authors</copyright>
<lastBuildDate>Mon, 3 May 2004 00:21:19 EDT</lastBuildDate>
<docs>http://backend.userland.com/rss</docs>
<generator>Blogcritics.org custom software</generator>

<item>
<title>Announcement: Short-content feeds</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/</link>
<author>Phillip Winn</author><description>Sunday, August 26, 2007, marks the switch of all Blogcritics.org article feeds from full-content to short-content. This is the result of several converging factors, and is unfortunately a permanent decision (as permanent as any decision can be on the web, that is). We are aware of all of the reasons that this is a Bad Idea, and we are aware that some of you will be quite upset about having to click on something to read the free content, and we&#039;re sorry. Unfortunately, despite great effort, full-content feeds are not currently economically viable.

Two other factors are involved: full-content feeds have resulted in an unprecedented level of content theft, with BC content appearing on many websites, usually spam sites, without attribution or permission. This duplicate content causes a cascading set of problems, not the least of which is that search engines generally aren&#039;t favorable to duplicate content, and don&#039;t always guess correctly. Finally, our RSS advertising partner is strongly in favor of short-content feeds.

We hope that you&#039;ll continue to subscribe to BC via RSS, and when an article grabs your eye, it&#039;s only a click away, still free on the BC website. Thank you for your understanding.</description>
<category>Administration</category><guid isPermaLink="false">0@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 26 Aug 2007 12:00:00 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>The Low Flying Owls - &lt;i&gt;Elixir Vitae&lt;/i&gt;</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/05/03/002119.php</link>
<author>Kris Kerzman</author><description>Elixir Vitae, the Stinky Records debut by the Low Flying Owls, has an ideal dialectical relationship to two wonderful places and sounds: Californian psychedelia and British gloominess. The band effortlessly melds The Bends-era guitars with SoCal swagger to forge a sound that is thought-provoking and energetic. The album kicks off with &quot;Glad to Be Alive,&quot; which itself kicks off with what sounds like a nod to Cliff Burton. The song picks up a P.J. Harvey drive as lead singer Jared Southard builds almost to a screech: &quot;Where has my faith gone/Lost in the wind/So glad to be alive.&quot; I&#039;m a sucker for rock instrumentals, and these guys pull one off (&quot;Babies Made&quot;) that works great with low lighting and brandy. Or flashlights and Ecstasy. One of the two. &quot;Swingin&#039; Sam&quot; has the same feel as &quot;Babies&quot; and showcases the band&#039;s main melancholic sounds, but also has a Jefferson Airplane-approved breakdown and a fun main guitar riff. Even though it&#039;s hard to use the word &quot;fun&quot; to describe the Low Flying Owls, they have riffs reminiscent of Elvis Costello and the Attractions or even Green Day. I should warn you though; any relationship to pop, living or dead, is purely coincidental. Especially LFO. Overall, the Owls are as heavy, dark and thick as a good porter. Their main themes of fear, escapism and disquiet coupled with fuzz-laden production give this whole album a self-absorbed brooding feel. Warm, but not too inviting. Not that this is new or shocking, but the Owls pull it off in a snappy fashion with the right balance of energy and lethargy. For fans of Travis and The Verve that like the occasional Buzzsaw Lite riff, the Low Flying Owls have pulled off a deft and crafty album. Give them a listen here. I also got to check these guys out at Ralph&#039;s Corner Bar in Moorhead, Minn., about a week ago. I have to admit that they don&#039;t have the same dynamic punch live. Most of the trippiness was lost in a midlevel wash presumably the fault of the sound guy. Or a faulty sound check. As I sipped my third Summit IPA, I was mostly impressed by drummer Sam Coe&#039;s tom work and the shimmying of bassist Mike Bruce, who also accepts the prize for Scariest Looking Low Flying Owl. But he&#039;s a nice scary. Going back and listening to their album, I&#039;m also impressed with the amount of the mood from their album that they were able to transplant into a 45-minute set. Their song choices showed their breadth well, even if the keys and melody guitar were criminally low in the mix. Luckily, I was close enough to hear off of the monitors. They were a bit standoffish on stage and had a bit of a brush-off vibe going, but that&#039;s to be expected. These guys aren&#039;t a jam band or a dance band. They&#039;re busting out complex emotions and a matured sense of their place in the scheme of music. They&#039;re a grownup band, kids. I also got the chance to talk for a few minutes with Coe. I talked to him about their current tour and the experience of being in rural Minnesota. Nice chap, although a bit moody. To be expected, I guess. They&#039;re a moody band. 
At least I know they&#039;re being honest. </description>
<category>Music</category><guid isPermaLink="false">15318@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 3 May 2004 00:21:19 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>&quot;Unclassified&quot; by Robert Randolph and the Family Band</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/04/14/182551.php</link>
<author>Kris Kerzman</author><description>The debut studio album by Robert Randolph and the Family Band had a lot to live up to. The band&#039;s official debut, &quot;Live at the Wetlands,&quot; was a stomping good time with its extended funk/gospel jams and unquenchable spirit. Randolph&#039;s pedal steel coupled with an earth shattering rhythm section and B-3 made for such an infectious mix it&#039;s no surprise that the jam community, with its sensibility toward all things groovy and unexpected, catapulted the Family Band to a prominent spot in today&#039;s music.&quot;Unclassified&quot; is the perfect studio companion to &quot;Wetlands&quot;. Not only does the power and rhythm remain intact from the Family Band&#039;s experience on the road, but it showcases a delicate dynamic that doesn&#039;t come through in their lay-it-all-out performance ethic. &quot;Soul Refreshing,&quot; in particular, couples a refreshing acoustic groove with Randolph&#039;s clear vocals and heartfelt lyrics. Even though laying down a more subdued groove, drummer Marcus Randolph, bassist Danyel Morgan and keyboardist John Ginty provide a razor-sharp backdrop worthy of the best in Motown. &quot;Smile&quot; makes a crafty shift to a long distance love song wrapped in R &amp; B melodies, a dash of bluegrass instrumentality and performances by Lenesha Randolph and Ricky Fowler. But it&#039;s the uptempo groove that is this band&#039;s bread and butter. &quot;Squeeze&quot; gallops and bobs the head. &quot;Going in the Right Direction&quot; enforces the drive of high-octane gospel groove that this banded was founded upon and its redemptive lyrics recall the joy and exuberance that come with the sunshine after the dark night of the soul. Not that you need to catch onto any of this to enjoy this album. Whether it&#039;s the occasional disco feel, the slap and pop bass or the rattling double-time hoedown snare, this band will do whatever it takes to trigger the boogey gene. The pulse of &quot;Calypso&quot; slides right in for a slinky groove for those with more exotic tastes. One point of contention: Ginty&#039;s keyboard work often takes a backseat to the rest of the rhythm section. Granted, his organ swells are the perfect complement to Randolph&#039;s frantic fretwork, but this guy can solo, too. Just a small gripe cultivated by long hours of wishing Page McConnell would get turned up at Phish shows.Still, this is the funkiest album that&#039;s come out of anywhere in a long time. Rejuvenation for those tired of MMW&#039;s heady tendencies and salvation for those out for a Saturday-night stomp, this album better move you.</description>
<category>Music</category><guid isPermaLink="false">14729@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 14 Apr 2004 18:25:51 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>My enemy, my hero</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/03/20/035240.php</link>
<author>Kris Kerzman</author><description>Last week, a coworker of mine bemoaned the recent Martha Stewart ruling. She said, in a sense, that even if Martha was guilty of these things, she didn&#039;t mind. &quot;She does so much good and makes people love their homes,&quot; she said. 
I turned to her and simply said, &quot;convicted felon.&quot;But then I backpedaled. I said, &quot;of course, I love James Brown, and he&#039;s a dirty, dirty (as in Ol&#039; Dirty Bastard) man.&quot; And, that&#039;s true. I love James Brown. I could kick it to The Godfather all day long. Shake my ass and whatnot. But, he&#039;s got quite the checkered past. He went to prison for attempted assault, threatening to kill his wife and leading the cops on an O.J.-like chase. He&#039;s also been arrested for drugs and had to pony up almost $5 million in unpaid taxes, in addition to being linked to payola.
It all comes down to how you consider a person a &quot;hero.&quot; By choosing to focus on certain aspects of a person&#039;s life, you can have drastically different opinions of them. Like Martha and my coworker or me and James Brown, you can choose to focus on the aspects that appeal to you. Like me and Martha, you can choose to focus on the fact that they are dirty, dirty people.This reminds us (as celebrity uh-ohs do time and time again) that no person, even when we sanctify them for the good they do, is entirely good. It&#039;s all an issue of emphasis. I empasize the fact that James Brown can shake your booty like no one else. My coworker emphasizes the fact that Martha Stewart can make a Thanksgiving centerpiece out of shit you find laying in the yard. It may seem funny, but I can understand that. It&#039;s easy to forget the bad things people can do when they grew famous doing things that are amazing. I can forget that B. B. King is a philanderer, I can forget that R. Kelly is a pedophile (well, I can&#039;t, but others can) and I can forget that James Brown waved a gun in people&#039;s faces. Am I saying that it&#039;s okay for celebs, even genius celebs, to do wrong since they&#039;ve done some extrodinary good? Hardly. What I&#039;m saying is that our perspective of a person like James Brown is dependent largely on their ability to appeal to something in us that is positive. In the case of James Brown, it&#039;s the ability to make us dance like idiots in our living rooms whenever &quot;Get Up (Feel Like a Sex Machine)&quot; comes on. It is rather difficult to displace that kind of joy brought to you by one person with something dubious that person has done. The two just don&#039;t compute in our minds. There&#039;s no way the voice coming out of the speaker could do something like that; it just doesn&#039;t compute. This probably isn&#039;t a healthy psychology in the long run. However, it works if we don&#039;t turn blindly from their wrongdoings. Rather, we frown on their mistakes but focus on the good stuff. Hey, it&#039;s either that or burn your copy of &quot;The Payback&quot; (and your copies of &quot;Living,&quot; to be fair).We shouldn&#039;t forgive James or Martha, but we can definitely forget their seedier exploits and choose to focus on the things that make them great. We shouldn&#039;t look past their crummy sides, but we can choose to see them for their better parts, remembering in the backs of our minds that they&#039;re just as sleazy as the rest of us.</description>
<category>Music</category><guid isPermaLink="false">13911@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Sat, 20 Mar 2004 03:52:40 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Buddy Guy&#039;s &quot;Sweet Tea&quot;</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/03/10/084218.php</link>
<author>Kris Kerzman</author><description>Miles Davis explained Buddy Guy pretty well. He said (in &quot;Miles,&quot; I believe) &quot;Buddy Guy is a motherfucker.&quot;Ain&#039;t that the truth. I ambled down to the local library (that&#039;s the Fargo Public Library in scenic downtown Fargo, ND) and checked out &quot;Sweet Tea,&quot; the album he put out a couple years ago. This album? 
It&#039;s a motherfucker.Buddy Guy took a brilliant career move with this album, taking some of the best cuts out the mouths of the babes at Fat Possum Records, particularly Junior Kimbrough. The result is amazing. Gone is the all-too-smooth rhythm section that has become a ho-hum plague and a vanilla backdrop for soaring guitars. In its place are dirty basses and down-the-hall drums dripping in slapback. THAT&#039;S where the blues should be, my friends. Buddy&#039;s guitars are also impeccable. Big surprise. Really, it is. No soaring solos, just the nitty gritty. Some really interesting micing and some great amp setups put this old pro into a totally different context. And the whole thing is just too badass. Almost too badass for words. I&#039;m not a huge Buddy Guy fan (motherfucker or no). Great guitars, of course, but not quite the Delta style that I came to love from folks like R. L. or Junior. But, to hear him pull this album off? My faith is restored in Buddy Guy, and then some. This album is everything that the blues should be these days. When the North Mississippi All Stars decide to be a blues band instead of a jam band, hopefully they&#039;ll go back to the same thing that Buddy&#039;s picking up on (I wasn&#039;t a huge fan of &quot;Polaris&quot;).&quot;Sweet Tea&quot; gets ***** of ***** from me. Give it a try!</description>
<category>Music</category><guid isPermaLink="false">13569@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2004 08:42:18 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Endtroducing...</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/03/10/011657.php</link>
<author>Kris Kerzman</author><description>Welcome to my typical little blog!
In another life, this blog was called Your Typical Music Blog. It was (or is, I guess; it ain&#039;t dead yet) a blog I wrote mostly for friends, primarily the musicheads. I love musicheads. I love people that love music just because it&#039;s music, not because it&#039;s a cool kind of music or something external to the act of listening to it. Like Stevie Wonder says in &quot;Sir Duke,&quot; &quot;Just because a record has a groove / don&#039;t make it in the groove.&quot;
That, in a way, is the feeling that I try to capture in this blog. I&#039;m just a guy who likes music and thinks about it a lot. I think about it so much, I&#039;m thinking of getting a doctorate in thinking about music. Officially, this means a doctorate in philosophy, specificall in aesthetics, with an emphasis in music. How pretentious can ya get?
What I typically do is pick up some music and plop down some thoughts about it. As I buy CD&#039;s, I do reviews about them. That kind of thing. In the future, I also intend to have some extended essays and some more sophisticated thoughts about genres of music, musicians and (especially) the interactions of music with the individual and with society. Hope you&#039;re down with it!</description>
<category>Music</category><guid isPermaLink="false">13567@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2004 01:16:57 EST</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>