You know that wannabe rock journalist kid modeled after Cameron Crowe in the hit movie Almost Famous? That was me. Seriously, I nearly cried watching that movie because it so directly mirrored my own experience growing up as a teenager who wanted nothing more in life than a career writing about the music that I so dearly loved.
Because as much as I loved growing up listening to the music of Dylan, the Beatles, the Stones, and the rest, it's possible I may have loved reading about it even more.
Growing up as a kid in the counterculture of the sixties, there was of course no shortage of available magazines and newspapers devoted to the subjects of rock and roll and the ongoing cultural revolution it spawned. Rolling Stone, in the original folded-over newsprint version was widely acknowledged as the kingpin of the lot — but there were others. Eye Magazine and Crawdaddy! were two of the first that caught my eye.
But I think the first rock magazine that I truly identified with was Circus. The magazine actually started out in the early sixties as Hullaballo. But, as with so many other things during the sixties, they soon felt the need to change their name in order to distance themselves from the teenybopper bands they once specialized in covering, and cultivate a hipper image. Circus Magazine's specialty really wasn't so much the writing as it was the pictures, which were often published in full color two-page spreads on high quality glossy paper.
Still, it was Circus where I first discovered the real art of writing about music. Specifically, they had this writer named Ed Naha who did a column that I want to say was called "Rock-A-Rama." Naha's specialty was basically skewering then current records by writing the shortest reviews humanly possible, and making them read funny as hell.
I'm not 100 percent sure on this, but I'm pretty certain that it was Naha who penned the now famous review of prog-rock supergroup GTR that simply read SHT. I'm equally certain that Naha was the inspiration for the scene in the movie This Is Spinal Tap where that band's album "Shark Sandwich" is reviewed as "Shit Sandwich." The last I heard, Naha had gone on to some renown as a critic of psychotronic horror movies.
What I soon learned however, was that the real jackpot for funny, irreverent rock criticism was Creem Magazine. Creem covered the big names like Zeppelin, Bowie, and the Stones just like everybody else of course. But they also championed the more fringe elements of rock and roll at the time, giving ample coverage to people like The Stooges, The MC5, The Dictators, and The New York Dolls. Where the feel of Circus could best be described as slick L.A., Creem was more like equal parts greasy Detroit, and seedy New York.
.jpg?t=20120527181101)
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - JC Mosquito
A strong essay on the essentials of rock criticism that outlines the basic minimum requirements: try to separate the subjective from the objective, and be informed. Unfortunately, nowadays there's those out there who think it's just about your own feelings and opinion. Frankly, people gotta learn - no one gives a rat's ass about your opinion - does your writing make its point? is the ONLY point in good journalism.
Creem: I still have a box of back issues dated from about '75 - '85 that I dig out periodically - great writing, and funny as all get out - you've got to love when the Letters to the Editor column responds to pointless mail from its readership with equally pointless non-sequiturs like, "Go sit on a Sno-cone."
(BTW, the GTR review was actually "GTR:SHT"!)
Sk.
2 - Christopher Rose
I don't agree with Glen's point nor your support for it, Skeeter. Indeed, I'm actually rather puzzled as to how glen can claim to love the approach of the late great Lester Bangs and then recommend the dull as dishwater "objective" approach.
For a start, nobody can actually be objective and to claim to be so whilst not even coming close is one of the most brazen acts of bullshit of all time.
Great cultural writing is ALL about somebody's opinion and their ability as a writer to raise the personal onto a greater plain of relevance and generality, which is what Bangs and others did so well.
To deaden the passion of great art by writing about it in the poncey pseudo-nerd speak of a critic is to entirely miss the point of what art is all about
3 - Glen Boyd
Skeet,
I know that the GTR was actually SHT. An editor changed it to SHIT, which I will at some point today go in and correct. What naters most is that you and other people who read this will, you know "get it," which you obviously do.
Thanx for the comment.
-Glen
4 - Brian aka Guppusmaximus
Mr. Rose...You are 100% Correct Sir!!
I have tried to come at writing from the musician's stand point because I am a drummer(semi singer) first & foremost. So, I think the reason why so many sh!tty bands are eating up the airwaves is due to the fact that not alot of so-called "Journalists" have the balls to point out that they suck without the fear of losing their credibility. I'm a firm believer that if you are going to write about something that stirs up passion in people you might as well throw your f*cking heart & soul into it!!
AND, if you are going to make some music that may stir up passion then don't take the easy way out and be prepared for someone to absolutely hate it!! But, then again that critic better have a great f*cking ear for music!!!
5 - Temple Stark
Rock critics hate most of today's music, and most of yesterday's music and hardly any of the day before's music. However, if you just say you hate X.Y, and Z and even if you explain why it doesn't do you much good.
And mor eoften than not when you try and gore someone popular just for the sake of being a dick, well it pretty much always comes across that way.
A rock critics, who makes his or her living being so, must necessarily listen to music they like and don't like. In one way there is obvious subjectivity and if you're credible then that matters. Still, at some point there has to be the objective moment where the review says this is the digital rambling of retards, BUT fans of retards rambling will view this as one of the best.
As a slight aside, if someone always reviews music they love, well it quickly becomes just a quick wankfest, the opposite side of the "I need attention" coin.
If Lester Bangs believed his shit than he is worthy, otherwise he wasn't doing his job. I believe he believed most everything he wrote. However, I read none of it in "real time" so never got the full flavor of cultural impact. He's fostered a lot of pretenders.
6 - Dave Lifton
Great piece, Glen. It was JD Considine in his Short Takes feature in Musician magazine, not Ed Naha, that gave GTR that review. Another classic of his that I remember was his review of Cher's Love Hurts album, which was reviewed with, simply, "Not this much."
7 - Dave Kaufman
I really enjoyed this piece. The writer who wrote SHT was J.D. Considine who wrote a column called Short Takes for Musician magazine. He would brilliantly skewer subpar recordings with very few words. In reviewing a recording by Cher "Love Hurts", Considine wrote "not this much". I loved that column except when one of my heroes was a target. In one of their last issues, Musician published a collection of his best slams and it was hilarious.
I think your experiences resonate with many of us. I would add Trouser Press and Musician to your list, though they appeared later and had more serious pretensions than Cream or Circus.
FWIW I never did quite get Lester Bangs. I know his work more from the Psychotic Reactions and Carburetor Dung anthology. His best work was clearly brilliant. The review of Van Morrison's Astral Weeks clearly stands out. But I often found him to be too incoherent.
8 - Brian aka Guppusmaximus
I can also agree with Mr. Shark but unfortunately,nowadays, alot of reviewers don't really have a face nor history to build credibility with me.Especially if you waste $3-$5 on a magazine that is mainly ads and covers the sh!t that you already know about. Sure, you can review material that you don't like but where do you begin in reference to the stuff that you know holds up.(Not to be so general)
I guess, ultimately,I get what this article really points to... Where are the "solid" rock critics? Who are they & what did you do with them, Glen?!
9 - daryl d
Glen, it would be nice if you practiced what you preached. Aren't professional
critics supposed to be critics rather than members of a fan club.
10 - Ray Ellis
Summers here get hot and humid. We end up with these annoying little bugs--I guess they're gnats of some sort--that hover in your apartment at the most inopportune time. You don't even notice them otherwise-- they're usually invisible. But sure enough-- You're having a conversation with a guest, and there the little bugger is, hovering at the edge of your wine glass, maybe sipping from it--I don't know. and it doesn't matter.
The thing is, you just crush it between your fingers as it floats in the air in some sort of lame attempt at flying, and go about your conversation.
The gnat is forgotten in an instant.
Funny how life works in such allegorical ways.
11 - Brian aka Guppusmaximus
*WTF* I hope Daryl's lame comment doesn't dumb down my attempt at humor seeing how that that little knock came right after.
I was just kidding but as for Daryl, he needs to learn how to write before making judgment on others.
12 - daryl d
Well, perhaps we can learn from writers like JD Considine and David Marsh. They were excellent critics who were able to judge music objectively. David Marsh sometimes sounded like a Springsteen fanboy, but criticized him as well at times. We don't have that anymore. Publicists and managers pay off music critics to write a good review or in some cases, a bad review of a competing artist's work. Where is Considine these days? I loved when he wrote for Rolling Stone in the late eighties.
13 - Ray Ellis
Apparently, the aforementioned gnat has either hustled into that dark place where gnats lie waitng, or I've learned much from studying the Tao. Either way, we press on.
I rather enjoyed the article, Glen. We could share a lot of war stories about the good old days. I won't drop names, though. Besides, I cant remember those backstage groupies' names--though the 4AM Denny's coffee and Grand Slams still hang crystal clear in my terminally hung-over memories.
Gotta go with Christopher, though, in his assessment of objectivity vs. objectivity.When you get down to it, 99.9% of what we review is going to be remembered two weeks after we write about it.Sure, there will be diehard fans who rake us over the coals for what we said, and there might be a very small group who might actually be influenced by our words of wisdom, but mostly, we're just pissing in the wind.
So what do we do? We can get all scholarly and really piss off everybody, or--and here's the important part--we can put ourselves right in the middle of the action, and talk about how a particular piece impacted us personally, for better or worse.
I prefer the latter approach. Saleski and the Duke are masters of it.The worst that can happen when you go at it that way is you leave ill-informed readers shaking, or even better, foaming at the mouth. Either way, you had fun, and that means you won.
After all, it's only rock and roll (but I like it.)
14 - Dave Kaufman
Considine has become a jazz writer for the Toronto Globe and Mail. He moved there about 5 or 6 years ago.
I don't think any critic is able to judge music or anything else (completely objectively) objectively. The important thing is to not let your prejudices and biases completely cloud your judgment as some have done. A good writer balances their enthusiasm for the artist or work with a sense of perspective.
15 - Ray Ellis
Assuming all that you say is true, Daryl, I'd say it's high time you hit the books. Oh, and get a dictionary, too--or at least a thesaurus. You keep using words like "fanboy" when you don't know what they mean.
16 - daryl d
Ah, Ray, obsessed with me as usual. I can post a bigger picture of me in there if you like. Then, you can study my belt more to see if the cellphone holder is so 90's. What did ya think about the belt I was wearing? I do have pictures of me in shorts if you like.
17 - Douglas Mays
You wrote for the Rocket!? I probably have read your works then...
rock on,
DM
18 - Ray Ellis
Where in these pages have I ever mentioned your cellphone? But now that you mention it, it is a fashion faux pas.
19 - daryl d
Yeah I agree it is a fashion faux pas but the picture I posted of myself is so small that I was shocked you noticed. I'm not offended at all really. That's why I'm willing to post a different picture where I'm wearing shorts.
20 - Ray Ellis
I don't believe in scaring dogs for no good reason. Tell me something, though--what audience exactly are you trying to reach?
21 - Glen Boyd
I'm glad to hear that JD is still kicking, albeit in Toronto. I was sure that it was Naha who wrote that review -- shows ya how much I know I guess. But Naha was definiyely the first guy to write reviews in that short, abrupt, and dismissive style.
Now as to all of this other nonsense, can we just get back to talking about the article. Good grief! LOL...
-Glen
22 - daryl d
Ah Ray, don't worry. Plenty of gals find me attractive as do some guys. I have no problem with it. I'm very open minded about stuff like that.
23 - Ray Ellis
I'd love to, Glen. Sadly, it's becoming screamingly apparent that the inmates have taken over the asylum.
24 - Glen Boyd
I had a lot of fun writing this as it took me down a few of those side streets along the path towards Memory Lane. And I appreciate all of the responses today, weird as a few of them got.
To the commenters who mentioned Trouser Press and Musician Magazine, I also have fond memories reading both of them. I'm actually a little surprised at myself that I had forgotten about JD Considine as I used to really enjoy reading his stuff as well. The only reason I didn't reference those magazines in my article is because they came along much later at a time when I was already a "professional" writer. But I did enjoy them both. Musician could be a little pompous at times, but I've been accused of that myself. TP was a great resource for those off the beaten path sort of bands, and Ira Robbins was another guy whose work I loved reading.
Anyway, thanks to all for the comments. Think I'll go crank up some Berlin now and try to get inspired...
-Glen
25 - Ray Ellis
Here's a major trip down memory lane. Remember when Hit Parader published chord charts and extolled the Lovin' Spoonful?