July 9th, 2009
Whither (Paid, “Professional”) Music Critics?
The above video has been making the rounds for a few weeks now, but I finally got around to watching it this morning, and it spurred a couple quick (probably rambling) thoughts.
I’ve always had mixed feelings about music criticism in general. On a personal level, I’ve written my share of record reviews over the years, but it’s not something I’ve ever been all that comfortable with. I guess I consider myself more of a music journalist than a critic — I got my start as a reporter, interviewing bands and covering events, and when it comes to music I enjoy feature-writing, straight reporting, the occasional absurd humor piece, or writing a few lines why this or that band might merit seeing them in concert a lot more than critiquing albums at length or digging into the minutiae of why some artist is worthwhile or not. I guess at the end of the day, I’m extremely enthusiastic about music and I know what I personally like and don’t like, and I know how to “listen critically,” but I’m not so fervently opinionated and so desirous to have my opinion known by the masses to really want to be a “tastemaker” or “filter” or to tell other people what they should or shouldn’t listen to, or judge/dismiss others’ tastes (as Weingarten does in the above clip). I’ve never thought my opinion was more important or valid than anyone else’s, whatever knowledge I may have accrued about some artist or some particular type of music. Maybe some people see that as cowardice or a cop-out, but I do think you have to be of a certain temperament or have a certain amount of ego to be a professional critic, and I don’t really possess those things. Not to say I haven’t put my opinion out there from time to time, but I’ve never felt like I had all the answers or that I’m necessarily in the right. My opinion’s no more important than anyone else’s.
All of that said, when I step out of myself and what I want to do or not do, I see value in (good, well-written) music criticism, in the sense that it can raise points about music that never occurred to you, or put things in some sort of historical/musical context. To be honest, that stuff usually doesn’t interest me all that much — when I listen to some music, I tend to just get into it in and of itself, the sounds and rhythms and textures and so forth that I’m hearing, and I don’t really think “Oh, this borrows from so-and-so and is clearly in the lineage of such-and-such.” I find myself thinking that way when I have to write something and I get into “analytical mode,” but when I’m listening purely for pleasure, the context, etc. stuff rarely matters to me. But I know it matters to a lot of other people, and when someone can dig into a piece of music and analyze it well, that’s a perfectly valid pursuit. I have nothing against intellectual discourse on ANY subject, and if people want to approach music from an intellectual as well as, or even in place of, a visceral standpoint, that’s cool. Also, I’ve been lucky in that over my life, I’ve discovered more bands and music through word-of-mouth from friends, or through interviews with bands I liked where they recommended checking something out, than via album reviews in magazines or, later, websites. Other people, however, have relied much more on the critics to hip them to things they wouldn’t have known about or ever given a minute’s time to, so it can definitely serve a valuable purpose in that regard. And music criticism can simply be entertaining as hell — as I’ve stated before, our dear, departed Steven Wells is one of my favorite music writers ever, and he was about as opinionated and in-your-face as it gets, and I loved him for it. For me, it was mostly about his spirited language, his way with words, his passion, his creativity, than his actual opinions themselves — I hate some of the bands he championed, and love some of the bands he trashed. His work was art in and of itself, to me. Other critics may mean the same to other people, so I can’t really make the claim that music criticism is pointless or worthless.
But I suppose what really rubs me the wrong way about the above video is Weingarten’s implicit notion that only a select few should have the power and ability to be critics — that when “everybody is a critic” and has an outlet to be seen/heard/read around the world (as it’s become in the Internet age) it somehow dumbs down the culture and makes the only music consumed a sort of middle-of-the-road mush (which is a silly argument — there’s always been people drawn to the mainstream or the mass-”approved,” and people drawn to the fringes, and it will always be that way, and there will always be music created and distributed that fulfills all individual tastes). And, of course, he clearly feels he’s entitled to be one of those special critics. To me, it ultimately comes off mostly as someone who’s more upset that he’s simply not as important/special/tastemaking anymore — that his opinion doesn’t matter as much as perhaps it once did — and that his turf has been invaded than at any purported decline in the state/quality of music criticism in general (aside from his bitterness over the fact that he’s not getting paid for his writing like he used to, but, y’know, suck it up, that’s the way it is in a lot of fields these days). I’ve encountered a lot of self-important, spotlight-craving critics over the years who I know feel the exact same way, and frankly, it’s kind of pathetic. The smug, elitist music critic thing might be a stereotype, but based on my encounters and experiences, it’s often a reality, and I just can’t feel sorry for the plight of Weingarten and others of his ilk/mindset, regardless of my feelings about music criticism in general.
