Music Critics: Separating the Shine from the Shit with the right mix of Profession & Passion
I am enjoying Ray Lamontagne‘s new album, “God Willin’ & The Creek Don’t Rise“, a lot. I am down with Ray’s sound, and as a fellow New Hampshirite, I’m down with Ray’s scene as well. I’ve seen him live three times. I saw him in London back in September 2009 just a few days after I movedhere. I met him during the day outside the Royal Albert Hall. I walked up to buy my ticket at about three in the afternoon and Ray was by the stage door. He was cool enough to shoot the bull with me for a handful of minutes.
Like I said, I am enjoying Ray’s new album a lot. What I am not enjoying are the review’s on Ray’s album. It is not that I disagree with the reviews themselves (opinions are good), rather it is the way the album is being reviewed (formulaic blah is bad).
It appears to me that Ray is experimenting with this album rather than worrying about how many he sells. He got small on this album. He jettisoned his long time producer Ethan Johns and had a go at spinning the producer knobs. He recorded the album in five days at his home studio. He chose to bring in a band and give them playbill credit on the album. Yes, I think Ray is all about curiosity and learning rather than critical acclaim?
I watched a short video interview with Ray from PBS (sorry, the embed wouldn’t work). At 2:50 in the video, he talks about his role as a producer. What I love about the statement he makes is how excited he is about the prospect of learning from this album. I love this because he is putting his music artist leotard on and stretching himself…testing his boundaries…finding his driving wheel.
The critic community is mixed on this one. Some praise Ray for forgoing the production hand-holding from Ethan Johns (he did wonderful job helping to shape Ray’s sound on Ray’s first three albums). Some say he should have kept John’s on. Not a lot of the focus is on the inent behind the choice to self-produce. The criticism asks wether he should or shouldn’t have done this and how the album underachieved or came up short. Most of the reviews I have read are criticizing the product without considering the intent?
Music critic. Hmm, let’s think about that for minute. Music critic. Go ahead, take a sip off of your beer, lean back and think about that…music critic.
Alright, where were we? Ah yes…music critic.
First of all, let’s start with the word “critic” itself. I don’t like it. I think it implies a negative. If we are to use Uncle Webster as our guide, the definition’s parts add up to a sum that leans towards the negative (captious, trivial or harsh judgments; faultfinder). The neutral parts, “evaluates” and “analyzes”, they at the very least imply an objective point of view. I think an objective point of view is important when writing about the artist or artist’s music, specifically.
I don’t really think that music critics enjoy faultfinding. Actually, I think that critics, the good ones, approach their work with an objective ear and without the jaundice of critique for critique’s sake. The last part is my issue with critics…everybody’s a critic. It’s true. There is so much average, critical writing out there that you have no idea how to separate the shine from the shit.
Secondly, the “shine and the shit”…everybody’s a critic. Anyone with a keyboard and blogging platform can wax un-poetically on album releases. Hey, I’m a punter with a keyboard, too (though I don’t write straight album reviews) and I enjoy expressing and enjoy people who express themselves via blogging, etc. Where I think it goes pear-shaped is when the punters think that critique means picking a side…negative or positive…thumbs up or thumbs down…2.5 stars or 4.5 stars…just to be relevant.
Opinionated is one thing, choosing sides is another. When people do this, I believe the tendency is to look for a negative, or an angle, to show what is missing or lacking or where the artists fucked up with a zig rather than using a zag. Having a strong opinion or taking a stance is great, it makes for good reading. The trick is not critiquing for critique’s sake.
Still with me? If you are still reading this long windbag post, you have the right to be asking…”does he have a fucking point to this or is he just trying to sound like an intellect”. The answer to both parts respectively is yes and no. So, here you go…I enjoy album reviews most when they present a blend of the objective and subjective.
In my opinion, the best blend of these two worlds…objective (profession) and subjective (passion)…is a review that kicks an outcome biased by the need to point thumbs north or south to the curb and focuses on telling us what it is and how it feels. If I am reading one of your reviews for the first time and you are being objective about the music, you keep me on the page. If you can hit me in the gut, if you can connect with me as a music fan, if you can write something so damn honest that I start nodding my heads saying, “fuck yeah”, then you keep me as a follower.
I want to read reviews that tell me about the music…objectively. Tell me about the songs and the structure and sounds and the instruments and the songwriting…talk about this objectively. In my album review utopia, this would become the part of the review that focuses on the music on it’s merits.
After that I want to know about the subjective experience with this music. As a music fan, I want to know that your relationship with the music is or artist is…how you were affected. This is why I would follow you and continue to read your reviews. This is the part where we start to separate the shine from the shit.
I don’t think it is fair to cast critics as full of shit or faultfinders. I like your work, critics…honestly. I like people who review music for a profession and because of their passion for music. I don’t like it when the professionals mail it in or err towards faultfinding. I am not a fan of the punters who act like half-assed critics. They write reviews biased by the already loud and sloppy public opinion. Write reviews as a passionate music fans talking about a connection with and not a correction of other people’s work.
Focus on the blending of profession and passion and I will read everything you write.
Any thought on this. Am I full of shit? Maybe I am being pedantic…preferring reviews to critiques. Do you read reviews? If so, what “pros” do you read? What are some of your fave punters/blogger album review-ers? Does anyone do a good job at “the blend” without resorting to stars and thumbs?
My music mate, Kip is a huge fan of Robert Chrisgau (I’m with you, Kipster). I’m a Lester Bangs man, myself (check out his purging of the mind and soul on Van Morrison’s “Astral Weeks”. Whew.). I like David Fricke and Rob Sheffield, too.
_____
I found this funny. On Ray’s site, one of the posts said, “It’s official. Critics love ‘God Willin’ & The Creek Don’t Rise’. The posting went on to say:
As Ray LaMontagne & The Pariah Dog’s sit happily atop the iTunes and Amazon album charts, we are happy to share even more positive reviews for the amazing new album God Willin’ & The Creek Don’t Rise. From trade magazines like American Songwriter to regular newspapers like the Daily News, critics can’t stop praising the new album. Take a look at each review below!
Now, if they didn’t include American Songwriter ( a site I very much enjoy reading and frequent often), I would have thought they were being tongue-in-cheek. Have a read of the review by American Songwriter and see what I mean). Who on Ray’s team posted this?
Here are all of the reviews that are posted on Ray’s site.
