The essay in question however is just a train wreck.
Eh, it's just kind of a loose thinkpiece.
I think that most people expressing outrage that it appeared in the New Yorker are not very familiar with that publication, and seem to have confused it with the New York Times--there are other just as loosely reasoned pieces in the very same issue.
Faux,
I have to disagree with you here: sure, it's a think piece but it is, by far, the broadest one that Sasha has ever written for the New Yorker. It's also a thinly veiled combination of manifesto and "big idea" take on 20th century American music. As such, I don't think it can/should be read as "just some shit he's thinking about" and more to the point, it absolutely opens up the piece for a critique of those said ideas.
That Sasha has written--but compare to Adam Gopnik's piece on abridged books and directors' film cuts or David Denby's piece on contemporary movie stardom from the same issue. And don't confuse me pointing out that people are approaching it with the wrong set of expectations for a suggestion that any of those three pieces should be beyond critique.
In fact "a critique of those said ideas" is exactly what I am encouraging people to engage in in this thread... rather than variously declaring Sasha an "idiot," "out of touch with reality" or his ideas to be simply "dumb".
Let's hear it, my indie rock dudes--you've thus far all been put to shame by Breihan and Harvilla, which you really should be embarassed by.
In fact "a critique of those said ideas" is exactly what I am encouraging people to engage in in this thread... rather than variously declaring Sasha an "idiot," "out of touch with reality" or his ideas to be simply "dumb".
Let's hear it, my indie rock dudes--you've thus far all been put to shame by Breihan and Harvilla, which you really should be embarassed by.
To fully tear into just how dumb I think this shit is, I'd have to suffer through it again, but basically to me he seems to be upset that in the 90's the popular style of "indie rock" moved away from white man slap bass with horn stabs and on to folkier pastures and he blames Brian Wilson, Pavement, Wilco, etc for it. At one point I think he dismisses Brian Wilson as being only "tenuously connected to black music". I disagree, but even so, why does that make him less valid an influence to have? And blaming a band like Pavement for bringing the whiteness is just silly. He is leaving out decades of relevant music... I can only imagine it's because he either doesn't care or doesn't understand. Instead he's telling us that some white dudes with guitars just showed up out of nowhere in the Mayflower in 1989 with a dedication to crushing Meters-like rhythm.
He also writes off "rock bands" with a country influence... yet doesn't really explain why... It's certainly as relevant as anything to American music in the 20th century. This is stuff that once again he seems to basically just dislike, so he dismisses it and precedes to be asshurt that no one wants to sound like the Minutemen anymore. His only attempt to justify these opinions that he passes off as truths must be somewhere in every other paragraph where he talks about how much realer bands who want to copy James Brown are. Or where he carts out the age old tale of the magical meeting of Mick & Keith over some Muddy Waters records. I mean, I am not disagreeing with him that rock music sucks nowadays because it does, I just think his answer to why is lame and wrong.
In fact "a critique of those said ideas" is exactly what I am encouraging people to engage in in this thread... rather than variously declaring Sasha an "idiot," "out of touch with reality" or his ideas to be simply "dumb".
Let's hear it, my indie rock dudes--you've thus far all been put to shame by Breihan and Harvilla, which you really should be embarassed by.
To fully tear into just how dumb I think this shit is, I'd have to suffer through it again, but basically to me he seems to be upset that in the 90's the popular style of "indie rock" moved away from white man slap bass with horn stabs and on to folkier pastures and he blames Brian Wilson, Pavement, Wilco, etc for it. At one point I think he dismisses Brian Wilson as being only "tenuously connected to black music". I disagree, but even so, why does that make him less valid an influence to have? And blaming a band like Pavement for bringing the whiteness is just silly. He is leaving out decades of relevant music... I can only imagine it's because he either doesn't care or doesn't understand. Instead he's telling us that some white dudes with guitars just showed up out of nowhere in the Mayflower in 1989 with a dedication to crushing Meters-like rhythm.
He also writes off "rock bands" with a country influence... yet doesn't really explain why... It's certainly as relevant as anything to American music in the 20th century. This is stuff that once again he seems to basically just dislike, so he dismisses it and precedes to be asshurt that no one wants to sound like the Minutemen anymore. His only attempt to justify these opinions that he passes off as truths must be somewhere in every other paragraph where he talks about how much realer bands who want to copy James Brown are. Or where he carts out the age old tale of the magical meeting of Mick & Keith over some Muddy Waters records. I mean, I am not disagreeing with him that rock music sucks nowadays because it does, I just think his answer to why is lame and wrong.
That's better, although I think you are reading a value judgment into what he's saying that may not be there. Is he lamenting the lack of a Black influence in contemporary indie rock (which is not the same thing as saying that it doesn't resonate with him personally)? Or is he theorizing about why it might be so? I mean, he offers his own band as an example, so I don't think he's entirely hostile to white dudes that decline to wear Black influences on their sleeves because of the potential awkwardness of doing so.
In fact "a critique of those said ideas" is exactly what I am encouraging people to engage in in this thread... rather than variously declaring Sasha an "idiot," "out of touch with reality" or his ideas to be simply "dumb".
Let's hear it, my indie rock dudes--you've thus far all been put to shame by Breihan and Harvilla, which you really should be embarassed by.
To fully tear into just how dumb I think this shit is, I'd have to suffer through it again, but basically to me he seems to be upset that in the 90's the popular style of "indie rock" moved away from white man slap bass with horn stabs and on to folkier pastures and he blames Brian Wilson, Pavement, Wilco, etc for it. At one point I think he dismisses Brian Wilson as being only "tenuously connected to black music". I disagree, but even so, why does that make him less valid an influence to have? And blaming a band like Pavement for bringing the whiteness is just silly. He is leaving out decades of relevant music... I can only imagine it's because he either doesn't care or doesn't understand. Instead he's telling us that some white dudes with guitars just showed up out of nowhere in the Mayflower in 1989 with a dedication to crushing Meters-like rhythm.
He also writes off "rock bands" with a country influence... yet doesn't really explain why... It's certainly as relevant as anything to American music in the 20th century. This is stuff that once again he seems to basically just dislike, so he dismisses it and precedes to be asshurt that no one wants to sound like the Minutemen anymore. His only attempt to justify these opinions that he passes off as truths must be somewhere in every other paragraph where he talks about how much realer bands who want to copy James Brown are. Or where he carts out the age old tale of the magical meeting of Mick & Keith over some Muddy Waters records. I mean, I am not disagreeing with him that rock music sucks nowadays because it does, I just think his answer to why is lame and wrong.
That's better, although I think you are reading a value judgment into what he's saying that may not be there. Is he lamenting the lack of a Black influence in contemporary indie rock (which is not the same thing as saying that it doesn't resonate with him personally)? Or is he theorizing about why it might be so? I mean, he offers his own band as an example, so I don't think he's entirely hostile to white dudes that decline to wear Black influences on their sleeves because of the potential awkwardness of doing so.
Oh, I am absolutely reading things into it. It also occured to me as I wrote the above that I am probably as disconnected in my own way as he is.
Comments
you actually understand that?
That Sasha has written--but compare to Adam Gopnik's piece on abridged books and directors' film cuts or David Denby's piece on contemporary movie stardom from the same issue. And don't confuse me pointing out that people are approaching it with the wrong set of expectations for a suggestion that any of those three pieces should be beyond critique.
In fact "a critique of those said ideas" is exactly what I am encouraging people to engage in in this thread... rather than variously declaring Sasha an "idiot," "out of touch with reality" or his ideas to be simply "dumb".
Let's hear it, my indie rock dudes--you've thus far all been put to shame by Breihan and Harvilla, which you really should be embarassed by.
Dang, I just got hella burned.
To fully tear into just how dumb I think this shit is, I'd have to suffer through it again, but basically to me he seems to be upset that in the 90's the popular style of "indie rock" moved away from white man slap bass with horn stabs and on to folkier pastures and he blames Brian Wilson, Pavement, Wilco, etc for it. At one point I think he dismisses Brian Wilson as being only "tenuously connected to black music". I disagree, but even so, why does that make him less valid an influence to have? And blaming a band like Pavement for bringing the whiteness is just silly. He is leaving out decades of relevant music... I can only imagine it's because he either doesn't care or doesn't understand. Instead he's telling us that some white dudes with guitars just showed up out of nowhere in the Mayflower in 1989 with a dedication to crushing Meters-like rhythm.
He also writes off "rock bands" with a country influence... yet doesn't really explain why... It's certainly as relevant as anything to American music in the 20th century. This is stuff that once again he seems to basically just dislike, so he dismisses it and precedes to be asshurt that no one wants to sound like the Minutemen anymore. His only attempt to justify these opinions that he passes off as truths must be somewhere in every other paragraph where he talks about how much realer bands who want to copy James Brown are. Or where he carts out the age old tale of the magical meeting of Mick & Keith over some Muddy Waters records. I mean, I am not disagreeing with him that rock music sucks nowadays because it does, I just think his answer to why is lame and wrong.
That's better, although I think you are reading a value judgment into what he's saying that may not be there. Is he lamenting the lack of a Black influence in contemporary indie rock (which is not the same thing as saying that it doesn't resonate with him personally)? Or is he theorizing about why it might be so? I mean, he offers his own band as an example, so I don't think he's entirely hostile to white dudes that decline to wear Black influences on their sleeves because of the potential awkwardness of doing so.
The fonkay whiteman slap bass didn't electrify you?
Oh, I am absolutely reading things into it. It also occured to me as I wrote the above that I am probably as disconnected in my own way as he is.