Earlier today I was perusing an infuriating article on the journalistic shithole that MSN often is, by the bloody un-marvellous Tom Townshend. The article in question was basically a list of overrated artists and groups in the music biz, which to my mind was just plain shit. Certainly, some of the additions to the list that he proffered are quite rightly more than a bit overrated (Duffy and The Verve, for example), but his method of criticism was truly awful. Too much opinion expressed as fact always gets on my nerves, but Townshend also changes his tack so much as to why something is overrated that it is disorientating to the reader as to whether such artists are really overrated or not. His critique of Morrissey is a good example here. Townshend fawns over Morrissey’s earlier work before going on to proclaim his later musical contributions as only ok. Not shit. OK. This may be, but in what way does that relate to his overrated-ness exactly? It would appear that Townshend doesn’t really know, and hence he cobbles together an accusatory finger firstly at Morrissey being a bit of a twat (a feature that has always been evident), and secondly that he has to employ session musicians to “massacre [his] greatest hits” as he is no longer in The Smiths.
Townshend additionally makes some awfully abusive comments re some artists, Tom Jones in particular. The essentials behind why Townshend feels Jones is overrated is for the base reason that he is a bit old. Criticising him for his “arthritic fingers” and grey hair has no relation to the quality of his music. Townshend further slags off Jones for his supposed shit voice. Are we listening to the same person? Tom Jones has still got a fantastic set of pipes, especially, if you will insist on bringing age into the equation, as he is 69. Personally it feels a bit like Townshend isn’t actually capable of perceiving music as fun and entertaining. Anyone who saw Tom Jones at Glastonbury this year could hardly say he is not a fantastic showman. The songs may not be deep, meaningful or fraught with some synthetic teenage-esque angst, but they are enjoyable, generation-spanning fun. It isn’t like the music industry is flooded with Tom Joneses nowadays, which isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but there is certainly still room for him. But anyway, I could rip an arse destroying hole through this Partridge of an article, (which can incidentally be found at http://entertainment.uk.msn.com/music/galleries/gallery.aspx?cp-documentid=149239470), but as highly cathartic as it would be for me, it may be a bit boring for everyone else.
Unfortunately however, this article is just one example in a long line of shit music journalism I have encountered in the past few weeks. I do not typically frequent loads of music mags, as I feel they don’t really offer anything more than a predetermined, dull mixture of simultaneously devout criticism and brown nosing. The NME appear the worst for sure, typically offering the dawdlings of fickle, self-righteous, skinny, unsatisfying “young” men for easily influenced yet equally fickle younger men. But personally I find the yawn commencing, beard-facilitating, moaning old men of The Word, MojoUncut even worse. These time warp inducing mouldy old farts seem to find anything that doesn’t sound like it fell out of Bob Dylan or The Beatles’ backside an unfathomable load of rubbish. and
All this makes me feel quite bad. As a (essentially amateur) music critic (of sorts), I feel annoyed at the stagnancy of the music press, and their frequent inability to write well and actually about music itself. I also worry that in time I will turn into the same type of jaded bastard, with a completely discernable lack of talent, (if indeed, I am not already). Obviously any type of professional criticism is essentially down to opinion, but simply stating that something is shit purely because you don’t like it is for cheap, classless simpletons. I may express my opinion, but I always try to take an objective view of the music as my taste may not suit the target audience or target context. Take Radiohead, for example. I cannot stand Radiohead for the most part (although I must admit, I did quite like The Bends), but I can see their obvious musical ability and appeal. It would be foolish and short-sighted of me to criticise them purely on my personal feelings toward them and their music, when it obviously has significant music merit and purpose. Even their miserable bloody lyrics have value in certain depressive, melodramatic contexts.
From my perspective therefore, there are some key writing mistakes that are made by many a shit music journalist. They are as follows:
1. Expressing opinion as fact. This is a key mistake, as critics are essentially being paid for their opinion. But unless opinion expressed as fact is done with lashings of irony, it is not cool. Don’t be an arrogant twat-bag. You and your opinion are not the fucking zenith.
2. Confusing your dislike of the artist with how good the music is. Another cheap trick, often used by people who can’t actually write about music itself. There are a lot of doochbag musicians out there who make bloody good music, and whilst their personal opinions or antics may piss you off to high heaven, they are not their music. Certainly talk about them, as it adds an extra dimension to the writing, but do not make musicians music.
3. Making sweeping statements without providing evidence or alternative. This is the worst and is typically done in columns. For example, there is a lot of talk in the music press about how bland music is at the moment. Personally I don’t see it, and so I am further annoyed by the fact that no explanation is given as to why the writer feels music is currently bland. Give examples, of why it is bland and what is better. Don’t just shit all over it, if something isn’t good enough don’t just complain – try and help fix it!
Ultimately I feel that the lack of proficient music critics out there is because music is a very personal thing, and one will always find it difficult to please everyone. But what we are stuck with at the moment is self-appointed popular music historians who really do think a bit too much of themselves, and take themselves too seriously, instead of people who can actually write about music. Certainly, writing about music is a very difficult thing to do, especially for a popular audience, and the inclusion of tit bits on the band in relation to the music is therefore of some importance. Magazines like The Wire discuss the music itself, for example, in a true, detailed and fascinating way, but it is also a way that is not easily navigable for your average Lily Allen fan. But there is no excuse for shit writing. Making obvious, shoddy mistakes in style, along with a weak, self-fulfilling argument just isn’t good enough anymore. The music press has been demising in sales and importance for years, probably because people are fed up of coming across typical critics; that is to say overly-disappointed, pedantic, sanctimonious, arrogant cunts. Give me job instead of them; I’m much better, I promise! X
