After college I easily managed to avoid the only-listen-to-what-I-liked-in-high-school-or-maybe-college thing. Yep, the fever was strong. I also got interested in record review anthologies (just in case I missed something, I suppose)...and the first one I bought was The New Rolling Stone Record Guide. While the book exposed me yet again to tons of music (feeding that never-ending musical bloodlust) it also drove home the fact that some writers can be just plain nasty.
This is something that's always bugged me. I'm not talking about saying, for example, that the latest Lou Reed album is sub par. No, that might actually be useful (or at least interesting) information. The nasty review is the one that basically says "I Hate This Band...I've always hated This Band...their fans Suck...and, by the way, their latest record sucks too". Wow. So impressive. Here's an example from the afore-mentioned Rolling Stone Guide. It's a short 'review' of all of Jonathan Edwards records, each of which gets the dreaded 'black box' rating.
That 'review' was written by Dave Marsh. The guy definitely has an encyclopedic knowledge of rock history, so I do have some respect for him. But...that is some nasty writing. Oh yea, the 'black box' rating is defined as: "Worthless: records that need never (or should never) have been created. Reserved for the most bathetic bathwater".
The most unctuously dumb of all the hippie singer/songwriters. His hit, "Sunshine" (on a now-deleted Atco LP), sells what he usually does - peace and bliss in the country, contempt for anyone who's not following along. It's the best of a truly miserable body of work.
Sorry, that kind of writing just isn't for me. It seems like a pointless task to review a style of material that you've never liked. Heck, even if I don't particularly like a genre, it's more fun (and interesting) to try to relate to it. There just might be something good in there.
Ok, now that I've spouted off about why I'm such a fricken' egalitarian, Zen Buddhist-type reviewer, let's try a 'practical' example. I've had a couple of CD's sitting around here for a while that I just don't know what to do with. They come from the world of smooth jazz...definitely not my thing.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Tom Johnson
King Crimson guitarist Robert Fripp has said many things on this subject, as he has been the target of many nasty reviews from people who obviously hated the music he was creating (and any music in that genre, King Crimson or not.)
But what really bothers me most is, these people are getting paid to do what I happily do for free. I love listening and reviewing music. Given the chance to do it professionally, I'd jump at it, probably even if it paid less than I make now. When I read these sour reviews, I wonder why these people are even bothering - they're so negative in general about music that it seems they don't like anything. Most of all, I come away knowing that that critic isn't any good - I should be able to read a review and regardless of the critic's actual rating of the album should be able to discern whether it's something I'd like or not. That, to me, is the biggest part of reviewing - you have to make it certain what your biases are, so readers can adjust their views and their own biases too.
2 - Dawn
Well Mr. Saleski we are kindred spirits. I was a liner notes person and read every single word printed on any music I bought. I was orgasmically delighted whenever I would recognize a producer's name or a featured artist. That's what drove me to stalk Eric.
As for Dave Marsh, if I recall (and Eric can correct me if I am wrong) he is a short prick of man with more attitude that ability. In essence, he sucks, his taste in music occasionally sucks, and his fans suck.
But what doesn't suck, is The Enclopedia of Record Producers
with half written by the greatest living music writer in the world - Eric Olsen.
(was a that a gratuitous plug or what?)
3 - JR
I once saw an interview with Dave Marsh where he said that Elvis Costello deserved to get punched out for what he said about Ray Charles. I thought that was an interesting comment coming from someone who's spent years making statements that infuriate people.
4 - The Theory
I enjoy writing the random negative review the same as I enjoy writing the random positive review. But I'm not going to just dip into a random genre i've never enjoyed before and pick a cd to rip apart. However, if I'm familiar with the genre and enjoy music that genre outputs and as a result, come across a cd which, in effect, sucks (especially if it's one which often gets praised), I'll tell it as it is.
For instance my Figure Four review... http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/08/06/123409.php
5 - Mark Saleski
the Elvis Costello thing (this might not be entirely accurate)....was that he was in a bar (and drunk) and refered to Ray Charles as a "blind, ignorant nigger".
Stephen Stills and Bonnie Bramlett were there....and i think Bramlett decked him.
6 - Mark Saleski
But what doesn't suck, is The Enclopedia of Record Producers
with half written by the greatest living music writer in the world - Eric Olsen
i just found a copy of that a coupla weeks ago. it's even signed by eric and you. (unless there's another Dawn Olsen)
7 - Eric Olsen
it's her
8 - Eric Olsen
what I want to know is who the signed copy is written to - that person is an asshole
9 - Mark Saleski
the photographer (i think) signed it too...if that gives you any clues.
i can't really see why somebody would get rid of the book (of course, i can't convince myself to get rid of any books)
10 - Rodney Welch
Mark -- What a great article! I could relate to every single thing you said, almost. Me, I have no problem with writing nasty reviews; I've written my share. And I have to say, Dave Marsh has been one of those critical constellations in my life of rock appreciation. I read the Rolling Stone Record Guide -- the first one, with the red cover -- over and over. I well remember that Jonathan Edwards slam, but my favorite was the one that summed up the Osmonds in just a few short, merciless words. I think I can almost quote it from memory:
The only people I know of who actually deserved Andy Williams. Sometimes I wish they'd go skiing -- and meet his wife.
(For you youngsters out there, Andy Williams was a popular TV entertainer of the 1960s and 1970s who got the Osmonds their start. He was married to the singer Claudine Longet; after their divorce, she had a long-running affair with the famous skiier Spider Sabich, whom she also shot and killed. She always said the gun went off accidentally, and the jury eventually bought her story.)
Anyway, I read the first edition cover to cover, I'm sure, bought many records on the basis of its five-star reviews, and found myself ashamed for owning the ones with the little black box. Yes, I'm afraid, Rolling Stone kind of controlled my impressionable taste somewhat.
The second edition of the Record Guide had a blue cover -- it was even nastier than the first. Where the first had a variety of voices, the new one, with Marsh as sole editor, seemed mostly to only have his voice; even when he didn't write the review, you sensed his nastiness creeping in. Several positive reviews from the first edition got downgraded; where Linda Ronstadt came off okay in the red book, Marsh saw to it she got nailed viciously in the second.
I thought Marsh was often very sharp, but in perspective I think he had his head way too far up Springsteen's ass -- his books on the Boss are the essence of hyperbole -- and once he had it in for someone, he found it hard to step back. I recently read his piece on Neil Young in the Rolling Stone Encyclopedia of Rock and Roll; he was completely out of step, I thought, missing the point totally on On the Beach, which he found unlistenable(!) But -- and this is what made the article so fascinating -- he was clearly wrestling as he wrote that piece with the fact that Young had done some stellar work. It was as if he wanted, more than anything, to slag Young's career, but his own intellectual honesty (and he did, does, have it) wouldn't let him. What he wound up writing is a mixed review of extraordinary proportions, in which Young comes off as a minor star who has somehow made lots and lots and lots of great records.
I miss that kind of criticism. Maybe it's just nostalgia on my part, but the Rolling Stone reviewing back then was so fiery and provocative. I still read the magazine, but it's not the same.
11 - Craig Lyndall
"what I want to know is who the signed copy is written to - that person is an asshole"
Unless they died and someone sold the book. ;-)
As far as reviews go, it drives me nuts when a review isn't productive. The acidic hatred-filled review from the Dave Marsh doesn't serve it's purpose in my mind. Reviews need to be opinionated, but without some perspective other than "I hate this damn album" you can't really communicate anything useful to a potential listener.
12 - Mark Saleski
when i was in college i used to go to the microfilm room and spend hours reading old Rolling Stone issues.
...which was when i found out that they used to give away a free roachclip with every subscription. the ad for it was great. there was a picture, above the name/address cutout box, holding the clip.
the text at the top of the page said: "Dig It".
hilarious.
13 - The Theory
Maybe the person who had the book realized the great potential for a book like that and gave it to a charity to sell for big bucks.
14 - Rodney Welch
Marsh's reviews were hate-filled usually when there was a genuine object to hate; otherwise he veered between contemptuous, scornful, arrogant and blind adoration.
Here's the longest interview with Dave Marsh ever written. Still very much his old self, I see: "I'm trying to write from the point of view of an informed, intelligent, and at this stage I would guess it's fair to say 'expert,' audience member..."
15 - Mark Saleski
i have to admit that i loved his books on Springsteen (the early one) and The Who...mostly for all those great details.
but they were a little too fawning...even for me, a huge springsteen fan.
(who's still bummed he didn't go to a Rising 2nd half show....because they brought back Rosalita)
16 - Rodney Welch
One learns a lot about Springsteen from Marsh, no doubt -- in fact, I'm certain it was Marsh who turned me on to him in the first place. But the years have not been kind to a lot of his undigested enthusiasm for Springsteen; he became less a critic than an architect of the whole Bloated Boss Myth.
17 - visualsimplicity
How coincidental. I was just talking to a friend about nasty reviews the other day. I always wondered why reviewers even wrote reviews on artists they despised and didn't understand, the end product would rarely ever be helpful to anyone who wanted to know more about the music. It's a lot of, "It's just crap" with no explanation and lots of fancy/hip/wise-cracking words. In the end, it provides me with no information on the music and I'm still left with, "should I get the album?" Oh and the same goes for those reviews that worship an artist.
18 - Eric Olsen
I like the Marsh Springsteen books, and I think his Heart of Rock and Soul singles guide is seminal, but he is set in his ways and knows where his bread is buttered just like everyone else.
19 - Tim Hall
I love the parody of the "Nasty Review" in the film "This is Spinal Tap", where their 'Shark Sandwich' album got a two word review 'Shit Sandwich'
And then there's Melissa Mills' legendary review of the first Uriah Heep album.
I think the 'Nasty Review' is as much the fault of the editor as it is of the reviewer. Why else does he give an album for review to someone he knows will hate it?
20 - Rodney Welch
If you want to be an informed listener, read several reviews, not just one.
21 - JR
Why do you think I'm here?
22 - Taloran
I was never a Rolling Stone reader - I never cared much what others thought of the music I liked, and less what they thought of the music I hated.
I'll admit it - I still like the Jonathan Edwards album with "Sunshine" and "Shanty" on it. Yes, it's trite, breezy pop with a hippyish mentality, but it's fun.
And to counter Mark's final line in his original post, my first jazz album was George Benson's "Breezin'". Just as poppy and upbeat as Feels So Good. We all have to start somewhere. ;-)
23 - Mark Saleski
i just bought a copy of "Jonathan Edwards" on vinyl a couple of weeks ago.
"Sunshine", "Shanty" and "Everybody Know Her" are fun songs.
when we were in college we loved this line from "Shanty":
"...fill it, light it, shut up & close the door..."
24 - Taloran
"Emma" is nice too.
25 - Temple A. Stark
Jonathan Edwards well of course he was a stupid hippie.
I mean that's a terrible hippy name. /scarcasm.
As a reader I rarely read reviews to help me change my mind. I usually already know what I want. i read reviews to see if the writer has got to the essence of the artist or has some special insight.
And when I don't like the author/group/ whatever it can be a fun read. So yeah - a mixture of reviews is best.
And this post was well-written especially the description of the feeling of new music in your lap.
[I avoided the cheap shot of trashing this post. I was tempted, but then it wouldn't be true]