[NewMusic] Perfume of a Critic's Burning Flesh

[Matt Davignon]

I think without criticism, reviews would be pretty boring.... and I
also think the purpose of them is to give a verbal description of what
the readers of whatever publication might think when hearing the
record. I wouldn't have much interest in them if they simply rehashed
the data in the liner notes.

The positive thing about the phrase "moronic clatter" is that it's
descriptive enough so that people who *are* fans of the music might
read it, and understand it as a reference to a style of drumming they
enjoy.

I got a clearly negative review (pasted below) a while back. Clearly
it's from someone who's not used to hearing music without riffs and
rhythms. Somehow it made the positive reviews not feel like automatic
non-confrontational praise. Another review criticized the music by
calling it 'naive'. I actually felt pretty good about that one - naive
was one of the directions I had been aiming for.

Matt Davignon - Soft Wet Fish

If pushed to place Soft Wet Fish in a genre, your best bet might be
"Experimental Electronic Ambient." To its credit, the record
challenges the listener and their boundaries. But, you'd be
hard-pressed to associate a track title on this album to its
respective track. The whole album sounds exactly the same. The only
way to listen to the album is in its entirety, and you probably won't
find yourself doing it again. Finding any structure, such as a rhythm,
or even considering the album music, is a challenge. However, it's not
hard to listen to if you simply think of it as a musical experience,
instead of actual music. Don't expect to show off your favorite track
to your friends, but do expect to hear something "different".
Honestly, unless you want to expand your musical experience, or chalk
this record up to pseudo-intellectual fodder, you can pretty much
judge the quality of Soft Wet Fish by its title.


Matt

On Dec 5, 2007 5:18 PM, David Slusser <slusser at pixar.com> wrote:
> Are you trying to get a rise out of me?
> Does association with the PornOrchestra
> sully my reputation as a perfect gentleman?
> I only come for the music (which was
> exemplary at our last ATA show).
>
> Writing about music is a vain exercise
> in both senses of the word.  The "moronic
> clatter" in this instance belonged instead
> to the reviewer.  When people see themselves
> as critics, do they feel the obligation to
> criticize?  I prefer simple reportage, and if
> the writer is informed, then informed
> analysis.  Point of view (also called bias)
> is inevitable in reportage, but at least takes
> a back seat to getting the facts straight.
>
> Criticism, though, is much more entertaining
> (see Slonimsky's Lexicon of Musical Invective).
> What's bothersome is how media conglomerates
> have co-opted some of these people into cultural
> arbiters.
>
> On Dec 5, 2007, at 8:32 AM, Sarah - 21 Grand wrote:
> > Well, I'm sure Mr. Slusser would appreciate that the first results
> > in a
> > google search for the writer's name yielded an actress that had
> > appeared in
> > videos produced by Playboy, but I doubt that is our gal.
> >
> > She appears to be a UK based writer, fairly young, or young to
> > writing (as I
> > can't find many publication credits to her name) based in the UK
> > with more
> > of a background in pop/rock music.
> >
> > Reading the full review, it does seem that the writer had set
> > perceptions or
> > expectations, and the review seemed a bit unsure of itself.
> >
> > Now Mr. Zelner, since you brought it up, you get to come up with the
> > promotional pull quotes you do so well!
> >
> > sl
> >>
> >> Message: 4
> >> Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2007 14:55:09 -0800
> >> From: weasel walter <weaselw at juno.com>
> >> Subject: Re: [NewMusic] Perfume of a Critic's Burning Flesh
> >> To: newmusic at music.mills.edu
> >> Cc: newmusic at music.mills.edu
> >> Message-ID: <20071204.150155.4100.134.weaselw at juno.com>
> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> >>
> >>> It's credited to a Jennifer Allan.
> >>
> >> when people write reviews like she's written for my group,
> >> honestly the
> >> first thing i think is "where is this person coming from?" i can't
> >> decide
> >> if she's a rock person who hates improvisation or an improvisation
> >> person
> >> who hates me personally, or . . . the review seems more about her
> >> complex
> >> expectations about my band rather than the music.
> _______________________________________________
> Bay Area New Music Discussion Group
> NewMusic at music.mills.edu
> http://music.mills.edu/mailman/listinfo/newmusic
>