Showing posts with label fightin' words. Show all posts
Showing posts with label fightin' words. Show all posts

Wednesday, September 04, 2013

Beeswing: On Not Liking A Popular Song By A Favorite Artist


/

When I posted the second part of my review of Richard Thompson's oeuvre, there was some discussion on FB about whether the lady love of the singer of "Beeswing" was a junkie, as I described her, or a drunkard, with most of the commenters preferring the latter. Basically, I don't care whether her white horse/White Horse was Keith Richards' one favorite intoxicant or Keith Richards' other favorite intoxicant. Either way, I don't really like the song. Yes, it is pretty, but that is true of many of Thompson's songs. My problem is that it is, to borrow from Manny Farber's intentionally non-categorical categorization of art, his most white elephantish song.

In Farber's famous essay, one of the sins of white elephant art is its insistence on stuffing the canvas with meaning and thus robbing it of any organic life of its own.  "Beeswing," starting with its title, tries to cram significance into every verse but essentially devolves into an audience-pandering cliché. Its melody is intentionally designed to sound like an old English folk song, which is a trick that Thompson achieves to much better effect with his ever-popular "1952 Vincent Black Lightning," a song that, as I have written elsewhere, Thompson surely despises now. Anyway, the first verse of "Beeswing" goes:

I was nineteen when I came to town, they called it the Summer of Love
They were burning babies, burning flags. The hawks against the doves
I took a job in the steamie down on Cauldrum Street
And I fell in love with a laundry girl who was working next to me

There are a couple of moments that are interesting here, mostly related to the jargon. Burning babies? Steamie? I assume the former is a reference to Vietnam. The latter is Scottish slang for a wash-house. But it's the manic pixie girl love story that Thompson's after here.

Oh she was a rare thing, fine as a bee's wing
So fine a breath of wind might blow her away
She was a lost child, oh she was running wild
She said "As long as there's no price on love, I'll stay.
And you wouldn't want me any other way"

The bee's wing analogy is sharp, but not so sharp as to justify the missing apostrophe in the title. With the missing apostrophe, the title "Beeswing" sounds as if it means to suggest a second interpretation of "bee swing," but the term is meaningless for this song. The only bee is in the analogy to this girl (who is both physically and mentally delicate, I assume?) and the song doesn't swing. "Al Bowlly's In Heaven" swings, but "Beeswing" has neither the propulsion nor the rhythm. As a name for Thompson's publication company, though, Beeswing works well, but it feels shoe-horned in here. The line about the breath of wind is fine, neither great nor lousy. The "lost child/running wild" line, though, is Bon Jovi-worthy, and her demands for free love seem very specific in a "Me and Bobby McGee" way to the boomer audience to whom this song is clearly meant to appeal. This sentiment and the way that it is worded wouldn't be out of place in a song by Donovan or Cat Stevens, which is to say that it is somewhat beneath Mr. Thompson's usual standards.

In the next verse, we have:

Brown hair zig-zag around her face and a look of half-surprise
Like a fox caught in the headlights, there was animal in her eyes
She said "Young man, oh can't you see I'm not the factory kind
If you don't take me out of here I'll surely lose my mind"

Now this is up to Thompson's usual lyrical panache, at least in the first two lines. Farber's other category of art (and these were not meant to be conclusive, by the by, in that Farber describes them as two categories without closing the system to further categories) was termite art, by which he meant that the art was so alive and unfettered with portent that it eats it own frame. Those first two lines, with their immediacy and specificity that calls to a quality that is difficult to name but easy to visualize, are excellent examples of termite art. The second two lines only push along the plot, though.

We busked around the market towns and picked fruit down in Kent
And we could tinker lamps and pots and knives wherever we went
And I said that we might settle down, get a few acres dug
Fire burning in the hearth and babies on the rug
She said "Oh man, you foolish man, it surely sounds like hell.
You might be lord of half the world, you'll not own me as well"

But we're back with the white elephant stuff right away. Thompson's singer and his manic pixie lady become abstract people meant to flatter the hippie nostalgia of the audience. They're living by their wits off the land! He wants to settle down, but she's too free, man! She even specifically ties her hippie dude to white male privilege! I mean, even the reference to Kent is more of a placeholder to make a rhyme than anything particular to the town of Kent. While there's nothing specifically wrong with going abstract in a song to make the people seem more relatable to the audience, in this case it feeds the grand overarching narrative.

We was camping down the Gower one time, the work was pretty good
She thought we shouldn't wait for the frost and I thought maybe we should
We was drinking more in those days and tempers reached a pitch
And like a fool I let her run with the rambling itch
Oh the last I heard she's sleeping rough back on the Derby beat
White Horse in her hip pocket and a wolfhound at her feet
And they say she even married once, a man named Romany Brown
But even a gypsy caravan was too much settling down
And they say her flower is faded now, hard weather and hard booze
But maybe that's just the price you pay for the chains you refuse

This is ostensibly more her story than his, but she isn't real in it. She's a flibbertigibbet, a manic lady who ditches her hippie man over an argument about migrant labor, who married a gypsy (which is more Gregg Allman than the usually literate Richard Thompson), and who has now become an ugly homeless lady. But, as the chorus reminds us, she was this other special thing. And the singer, by being her hippie man for a time who could see her for the special thing she was, is the element of the song who is more real. Her post-singer history is condensed into four lines.

There's an element of the song that is meant to be feminist to some degree, as the singer clearly finds her demand for free love and free agency to be two of her aspects that make her special to him. But the song itself judges her harshly for these very things in the last two verses. Her independence and strongheadedness leave her homeless and drunk (or strung out on heroin, which is a drug that many users can actually put in their hip pocket before it is heated into liquid and put in a syringe, but whatever, this isn't the point) and that's the price she pays for being free, says the song. The suggestion is that if she'd consented to the hippie singer's domestic proposal, she wouldn't be drunk and homeless.

Consider "1952 Vincent Black Lightning" as an alternate. Like "Beeswing," it is written as a modern take on an old English folk song, but unlike "Beeswing," it tells a specific story about specific people with specific traits and it doesn't try to make them particularly likable or universal, but instead hangs the story on a powerful emotion and a weirdly specific metaphor for freedom. People like the song because it eats its own framing device.

"Beeswing," instead, idolizes a manic pixie love interest, judges her harshly for abandoning the protagonist, and flatters the audience with silly hippie nostalgia that most of the audience probably never experienced firsthand, but nevertheless knew from the movies and music of the time. It attempts to create a universal feeling out of a clichéd story, and the central metaphor is ultimately crushed by the weight of its trappings. It is a white elephant. You can hang it on your wall if you like, but it seems cynical to me.

Tuesday, March 09, 2010

Salon on Waterboarding

Reading about how the CIA has fine-tuned the art of waterboarding makes me sick to my stomach.  Can we, at long last, agree that this is an offense against human dignity?  Mark my words: the US will end up paying reparations to aggrieved parties for allowing this to happen.  I doubt Bush, Cheney, Yoo, or any of the others responsible will ever face an international trial for their crimes, but this is pretty clearly a conscious violation of international law.  They should be punished, but this is a stain on every U.S. citizen's conscience.

Here's Salon's report.  Read it if you dare.

Wednesday, January 06, 2010

The Best Albums of 2004, Five Years Later

Back in January 2005, I listed my favorite albums of 2004:

1. Fiery Furnaces - Blueberry Boat.
2. Wilco - A Ghost Is Born.
3. Animal Collective - Sung Tongs.
4. Mike Watt – The Secondman’s Middle Stand.
5. Liars – They Were Wrong, So We Drowned.
6. Mission of Burma – ONoffON.
7. Deerhoof - Milk Man.
8. Will Johnson – Vultures Await.
9. The Streets – A Grand Don’t Come For Free.
10. TV on the Radio - Desperate Youths, Bloodthirsty Babes.
Best album of 1967 that I never expected to hear in my lifetime: Brian Wilson - SMiLE.
Other albums I considered: Mekons - Punk Rock, Iron and Wine - Endless Numbered Days, Madvillain - Madvillainy, Shearwater – Winged Life.
Bought too recently to review: Oneida, Comets on Fire, Panda Bear, and Cul de Sac/Damo Suzuki.
Would I still rank 2004 albums the same way?  Not a chance!  Last year I gave myself a report card for my 2003 picks, a practice I will continue.  For one thing, it promotes humility. For another, shame. And, as an added bonus, it gives me a chance to revisit favorite albums that may have dropped from my regular playlist. Everybody wins! Here's my picks for 2004 with five years of time to let them percolate:


1. Animal Collective - Sung Tongs (up from #3).  At the time I could stop raving about how delightfully psychedelic this album is. I still love it, maybe even more than the Fiery Furnaces, who have finally worn me down. But every time this album or a track from this album crops up in my listening, I am invigorated.


2. Fiery Furnaces - Blueberry Boat (down from #1). Actually no, I still love this album. But I do have some lingering fatigue for it that I didn't have at the time. I'm much more inclined to listen to only one song from it at once rather than commit to the whole enchilada.


3. Mastodon - Leviathan (not yet on my radar). This album rules. I wish I had heard it in 2004.


4. Deerhoof - Milk Man (up from #7). My affection for this album has only grown, while my affection for the Liars album has plummeted (I mean, yes, the Liars albums is awesome in some respects, but it's also sort of a drag). This one is my favorite Deerhoof album.


5. Joanna Newsom - The Milk-Eyed Mender (not yet on radar). I'd read about the twee harp girl on Pitchfork, but I was foolishly avoiding her in 2004. I shouldn't have. This album is chock-full of stunning music and passionate, brainy songs.


6. Wilco - A Ghost Is Born (down from #2). Still a great album and sometimes my favorite Wilco album, but it's tarnished by the lackluster efforts that have followed it. And I don't like the second half as much as I used to. But the first six songs are unstoppable.


7. Comets on Fire - Blue Cathedral (bought but unreviewed as of when I made the list). Comets on Fire will MELT YOUR HEAD. And I like their follow-up album even more. Are they still together? I miss these guys.



8. Oneida - Secret Wars (bought but also unreviewed). This one has the krautrock/punk/drone down flat, but it's also fairly user-friendly for newcomers to Oneida.


9. The Magnetic Fields - i (doesn't appear to be on my radar). Now that I think about it, I may have had this album when I made my list, but I think I had seriously underrated it. Some of the songs are a little lackluster, but most are witty fun.


10. cLOUDDEAD - Ten (definitely not on my radar). I don't remember when I got into cLOUDDEAD, but their freaky psychedelic hip-hop head-trip is an utter delight.

Honorable mentions:

Mike Watt - The Secondman's Middle Stand (down from #4). Watt's song-cycle held a lot of interest for me back in 2004, but it's become the Watt album I reach for the least in the intervening years. Sorry, man. I still like it, but I don't love it quite as much.

The Hold Steady - Almost Killed Me (not on radar). Not the best Hold Steady, but still a great album.

Dosh - Pure Trash (radar-less). Martin Dosh's song-cycle loosely about the terrors of parenthood would have resonated with me quite a bit in 2004, when my wife and I were expecting our first child.

Brian Wilson - SMiLE (left off list intentionally). At the time I thought including it would be an automatic #1, but I hear more of its faults now.  Not that there's many, but the album is more of a re-creation than a creation for 2004.

Danger Mouse - The Grey Album (unheard at the time). Everybody was raving about this at the time, but I held off. Probably shouldn't have, though, because it's fascinating.

Mission of Burma - ONoffON (down from #6). Still awesome.

The New Year - The End Is Near (not on radar). Also great.

The Dexateens - The Dexateens (unbought). Killer debut from killer band.

Danielson - Brother Is To Son (unheard).

Of the others, I've sort of lost interest in the Liars album, although I still think it's a significant work of art.  I've really lost interest in Will Johnson and Centro-Matic in general. The Streets don't move me like he used to, and the TV On The Radio is the only album of theirs that I hardly ever listen to.  I like Madvillain, but not as much as other DOOM albums, and I only picked up his other one from 04, Venomous Villain, recently.  So there you go.

That's only 4/10 that stayed on my list, but two of my top three were pretty consistent, and all of my top three stayed on the list.  Not so good overall, but not so bad with the high-profile ones. I'm going to give myself a B for the year. I probably deserve a B-, but goshdarnit, I feel I deserve the bump.

Tuesday, January 05, 2010

Top 10 Albums of 2009

I know, I know.  You've had enough of the opinions of The Knowledgeable And Qualified.  You're asking yourself, "So what does a fat guy with a blog think about 2009 in music?"  Glad you asked!  Considering my poor track record, these are sure to be remembered for a good week or maybe even less.  Here's what I liked:

10. Dinosaur Jr - Farm.  How, you may ask yourself, can I assure myself that this guy is getting old and complacent?  Here's your first hint!  This album is so much of a piece with the earlier Dino Jr albums that it wouldn't be out of place in any Best of 1989 list, and yet it's in my Top Ten list of 20-freakin'-09.  Well, complacent I may be, but I know what I like, and I like this.  Maybe this is the problem with trying to make a long-term assessment of music at the end of the year.  Be sure to keep an eye out for my self-report card coming out this week, in which I'll tell you what my picks for 2004 were and why I was completely wrong about all of them.  Anyway, I know this isn't the greatest Dino Jr album, but it's a damn good one and it works for me. So yeah, it's my No. 10 album for 2009.

9. Akron/Family - Set 'Em Wild, Set 'Em Free.  Akron/Family's last album, 2007's Love Is Simple, was a near-perfect mess. It was my favorite album of that year, a psychedelic mix of choral singing, folk music, skronky freakouts, and an overwhelming emotional need to reach out and connect with the listener, to bring you along on the woolly acid trip of the lyrics.  Man, I loved that album.  This one has all of the same elements, but they are considerably less integrated.  It seems less like a journey to a destination than a time-killing road trip to nowhere with friends.  Which is fun, and this album is definitely pretty good.  But it won't turn your head inside out, which is definitely a step down for the Akron/Family.  Not bad, but not insane.  I will say that the live show I caught with some friends at the Mess With Texas Fest during SXSW was freakin' insane.  More of that, please.

8. Animal Collective: Merriweather Post Pavilion/Fall Be Kind EP.  I originally gave this spot to Tortoise, but after listening to both albums again, I switched them.  I seem to be on my own with this opinion, but I think Animal Collective peaked with Feels.  I originally underrated this one for failing to be Feels.  It doesn't contain the folk elements that infuse Feels with such beauty.  Animal Collective have moved on, and their direction into upbeat pop isn't terrible by any means.  It's just not quite as far up my alley, y'know.  Merriweather Post Pavilion dropped in January, and I was unimpressed then.  By the time Fall Be Kind, an EP that basically contains outtakes from MPP, came out last month, I had come around to the sound.  So I don't think it's the album of the year (as Pitchfork does), but I do like it and think it's a significant album of 2009.  Significant enough to be here in my Top Ten in a way that I ultimately denied Tortoise, that is.

7. Oneida - Rated O.  Oneida's getting weirder, and god bless 'em for it.  On this album - a three-disc set! - Oneida lunges from third-world funk to their more typical redefined krautrock to garage-rock jams to screaming noise-rock to head-space chanting to afro-pop guitars to pure brown-noise drone to 60s-style sitars as punctuation.  Nearly two hours of music total, and it's never uninteresting.  This one's definitely not for Oneida neophytes, though.  Start with Secret Wars or The Wedding, both of which are a little more accessible (a relative term with Oneida) and then move along to Rated O or 2008's Preteen Weaponry. These later albums are more rewarding listening experience, even if they require more patience from the listener.

6. Andrew Bird - Noble Beast.  Although not quite as strong as Bird's previous album Armchair Apocrypha, Noble Beast is still an impressive collection of songs.  It took a little while to grow on me, though.  Where Armchair Apocrypha and 2005's The Mysterious Production Of Eggs had a way of rewriting your expectations in an epic sweep that carried you from moment to moment, Noble Beast is more hermetic.  It is still full of surprises, but they are more coy, waiting for you (or, more likely, your subconscious mind) to do the work of unlocking them.  On the fifth listen, though, I was hooked.  The things that took me by surprise were not what I expected them to be, which is quite alright due to the nature of surprise.  And man, Bird writes a gorgeous hook.  Something to whistle along with, should you happen to possess a set of pipes that allow you to whistle along with the man.

5. The Dexateens - Singlewide. This album dropped on my birthday, and it felt like a present.  Over the last few years, the Dexateens have been moving in a direction that dropped the raging guitars of their early work but kept the folk and country aspects with an added pure guitar pop sheen.  I compared them when this album came out to Big Star and the Band, and I think those remain apt comparisons.  This one is more contemplative than the previous albums, but it culminates in the kicker "Can You Whoop It?," which throws a handful of Southern stereotype jokes at the wall and then states bluntly, "Locks are for the honest/Guns are for the wise/Laws are for the frightened for to line their nest with lies/I live in the space created by your compromise/So can you whoop it?"  Now here's a strange thing: when I visited Tuscaloosa over the summer, I heard rumors that guitarist and founding member John Smith, who wrote a bunch of the songs, had left the band, which was later confirmed by Dexateens lead singer Elliott McPherson.  But the website doesn't acknowledge it, nor has the band made much of a fuss about it.  Frankly, with music this good, I hope that whatever is going on with Smith being out of the band is a temporary thing.

4. Isis - Wavering Radiant.  Does it make me a poseur that I like this album almost as much as Isis's magnum opus Oceanic?  Then so be it.  I've long held that Isis is like Sigur Ros with distortion pedals and the occasional cookie monster vocals.  But Isis is actually quite a bit more psychedelic and varied than Sigur Ros, with a musical palette that includes metal and hardcore along with the post-rock melange of krautrock and space rock that the Icelandic band employs.  Anyway, this is one of the headiest and still heaviest albums of the year, and that's a neat trick.

3. Mastodon - Crack The Skye.  Everybody loves Mastodon, and I'm no different.  This is yet another concept album, but I can't follow the story to this album at all, and I don't care.  The music is amazingly intricate and thoroughly thrilling.  There's two 10+ minute tracks, but the music is far too engrossing to notice the song length.  There's elements of all kinds of genres on this album, but the album is overwhelmingly a) metal and b) greater than the sum of its parts.  This is the sound of a band trying to figure out just how far they can push themselves.

1 (Tie). Vic Chesnutt - At The Cut.  I was thinking about putting this in the No. 1 slot all by its lonesome when I heard the SOB had killed himself on Christmas Eve.  I'm still somewhere between heartbroken and furious.  I know it's wrong to dock the album for this.  I didn't know the guy, but I knew he was in pain.  Anyone who listened to his songs knew he was in pain.  But he was also witty and full of sharp humanism, and I wanted more.  I didn't know about his $70K+ medical debt.  And I'm talking about Chesnutt instead of At The Cut, which is his best album yet. Wryer and more incisive than he's ever been, with music so well-tuned to his songs that it freakin' hurts, At The Cut invites intimacy while asking you if you really deserve it.  In retrospect it sounds like a suicide note, but no more than many of his albums.  Why now?  I didn't know the guy, but I feel like I lost a friend.


1 (Tie). Yo La Tengo - Popular Songs.  I gave it a boost in the worst possible circumstances, but it's not like this album doesn't deserve it.  YLT has broken no new ground with this album, but man, I love this ground and they own it.  Does this make me old and complacent?  Maybe!  I don't care.  This is great stuff.

The rest:

11. Tortoise - Beacons of Ancestorship 
12. Grizzly Bear - Veckatimest
13. Sonic Youth - The Eternal
14. The Bats - The Guilty Office
15. Pelican - What We All Come To Need
16. Darcy James Argue's Secret Society - Infernal Machines
17. Sunn 0))) - Monoliths and Dimensions
18. The Clean - Mister Pop
19. Mission of Burma - The Sound, The Speed, The Light
20. A.C. Newman - Get Guilty
21. The Soft Pack - The Muslims
22. The Clientele - Bonfires On The Heath
23. The Mountain Goats - The Life of the World to Come
24. Dirty Projectors - Bitte Orca
25. Danger Mouse and Sparklehorse - Dark Night Of The Soul
26. The Fiery Furnaces - I'm Going Away
27. Molly Berg and Stephen Vitiello - The Gorilla Variations
28. Sparklehorse + Fennesz - In the Fishtank 15

Sunday, September 13, 2009

I'm mad as Glenn Beck and I'm not going to use grammar any


When faced with the terrifying prospect of a democratically-elected leader who has been blatantly encouraging the legislative body of this country to improve living conditions for millions of Americans who are not necessarily me at this very moment, I can no longer hold my tongue.  I hereby join the right-wing blogosphere, and will therefore no longer abide the tyranny of civilized debate, common sense, or grammar.

My first order of business is to report something that may not be based in fact, but has its roots in the higher truths of innuendo and outright slander.

Item 1: So you know how Comrade Czar Obama Binn Laden refuses to release his birth certificate and plan to steal all your privately-funded Medicare dollars and give them to illegal immigrants with names that real Americans can't pronounce?  Well, did you know this?  I heard that he once made a remark to a white woman of a sexual nature.

Item 2: So you know how those FACISTs Hairy Reed and Nanny-state Pelosy want to murder old white people with their death panels and stuff?   Well, did you know this?  I heard that when Obama speaks to white men, he doesn't always say "sir" to them.

Item 3: So you know how Obama is trying to turn America into a NAZI COMMUNIST CZARIST SOCIALIST HITLER-ISH STALINIST ISLAMIC TERRORIST-RUN ACORN-FRIENDLY state and it takes a real American hero like that guy who used to work for Strom Thurmond to bring some media attention to the levelheaded opposition by interrupting the President and calling him a liar during his address to Congress?  Well, did you know this?  Obama is secretly an outside agitator who came to this country just to stir up resentment among our own well-meaning minority populations.

In the meantime, please enjoy some images of my well-informed brethren at play.  Their side has silly people who protest using puppets and strongly-worded t-shirts, and those people rightly went to jail for daring to contradict God's Own President, our savior who kept the world safe for 8 long years (with only a few minor exceptions).  But on our side, the white people out there protesting are the base!  That's why we get to carry guns to events involving Satan's Favorite President, a guy who ran the whole country into the ground in only 8 months.  Because he's not one of us!  We just want our country back!  No mere election or public opinion poll should stand in our way of getting what we want!

Remember, only you can prevent this great nation becoming a confederacy of dunces.

Friday, September 04, 2009

Just Hinting At Desperation Is So Brick-And-Mortar: Further Adventures with eMusic

Yesterday eMusic gave an unknown number of members an unexpected bonus of 50 free downloads, the equivalent of a whole month under my newly disimproved plan. I know at least one of my friends who also stuck it out with eMusic received this bonus, as well, so I'm assuming it was wide-flung. Without any specific information about why eMusic would do such a thing, the reason seems obvious: they have alienated and lost many of their long-time customers without bringing in enough new customers to offset their losses. I could be wrong about this, but this certainly appears to be a desperate plea to stop the bleeding. The problem with this is that the naked desperation could alienate investors and sour their Sony deal.

Should someone in the planning division of eMusic read this, I'm offering you this business advice for free. I'm not a marketing sage, but I do work in public policy and can recognize a poorly-planned and poorly-functioning program when I see it. What you've done wrong is acted as if the record companies are your clients but the subscribers are not. You have worked out a deal that is better for the former, but you treated the latter as if their continued subscription was a given. And now you're losing money and desperately trying to re-establish the loyalty of your customer base. Here's a couple of things you can do to reduce your flop-sweat.

1. Give people advance notice so you look like you know what you're doing. Instead of the current message, which is: "Surprise! We really really really love you, after all, so please GOD don't cancel your subscription today," you need to send an advance message that says, "This is a rough transition, but we appreciate you sticking with us, so next week we have decided to reward long-time customers with an extra month of downloads." Then send another message thereafter. Email is free, people. Don't spring things on the base.

2. Try to attract customers back with the economics of album purchases, not single purchases. Amazon charges customers $8 - $10 for albums, and iTunes charges $10 - $12. You charge customers roughly $5 per album. It's STILL the best deal on the Internet (even after you alienated everyone by doubling your cost-per-download with insufficient notice), but you make no mention of this on your site. When you list your values, you focus on single songs. That's great, but bring it on home, homies. Your base, whether you like it or not, are mostly rock geeks who are interested in albums, not singles. In fact, you discourage purchases of singles by requiring album downloads to get ahold of certain songs, seemingly those that are quite popular or over 10 minutes in length.

3. Adjust your number of downloads per month or your number of credits per album. This is key, guys. I have 50 downloads, and albums cost 12 downloads apiece. That's four albums and change. It appears that you don't know how to divide. If you want to standardize the number of downloads per album - and I realize that this isn't the case on every album, but it is on most - make it so that your plans include a whole number of albums. As a customer who likes value, I would appreciate it if you would standardize album downloads at 10 credits, or five albums per month for guys like me. You would then be charging $4/album, which is roughly half of Amazon's best deal, an easily-understood value that people can relate to and that you can market with. I realize you want a sliding scale for EPs, but, just speaking for myself, EPs are a tiny portion of my downloads. Go 1 credit/1 download for albums with fewer than 10 songs. This would be good business because unlike Amazon or iTunes, your customers are locked into a certain number of downloads per month. You should strive to give them the biggest bang for their buck, and speaking as a customer, it's easier to justify the expense ($240/year!) when I look at the albums per month, which has fallen precipitously since you changed your subscription service.

Anyway, please work on this, guys. As annoyed as I have been with your past mistakes, I'm sticking it out with the hope that you will get your damn act together. Should you decide that my common sense and economic skills are the answer to your current mess, my contact email is easy to find at the bottom of the page.

Thursday, July 02, 2009

The eMusic eRevolution Will Be eHalf-Assed

Yesterday eMusic began offering the Sony catalog to subscribers, and incidentally screwed over many of the same long-term subscribers. Here's what happened.

At the end of May, the eMusic CEO Danny Stein announced that eMusic had inked a deal to offer some of the Sony catalog to subscribers. This led to two changes:

  1. New plans with less value for our dollar. Long-term subscribers were forced into new plans with fewer downloads for the same price per month. Some of these subscribers had plans that eMusic had grandfathered some years earlier. My former plan, for instance, was one I first bought in October 2005 for 90 downloads for $20/month. At at least one point afterwards, eMusic had modified their $20/month plan to include fewer downloads, but had allowed me to keep my plan. My new plan, however, is 50 "downloads" (I'll get into why I put scare quotes up in a minute) for $20/month. So my downloads have gone from 22.2 cents each up to 40 cents each. Still a better deal than Amazon or iTunes, but the effective cost to me has gone up by nearly 100 percent.
  2. Album pricing. Some - but not all - albums with more than 12 tracks will now have a fixed price of 12 "downloads," a term that eMusic has changed to "credits" on some pages. Some albums with fewer than 12 tracks, especially those where at least one of those tracks is longer than 10 minutes, will now cost subscribers 12 "credits" to download. This really hurts in metal and jazz, where the bang for the buck has always been so valuable. For example, I had 4 Albert Ayler albums in my Save For Later list, each of which had 2 tracks per album. Now eMusic wants 12 credits for each. It's still a better deal than Amazon or iTunes, but a far worse deal than I was offered just the day before yesterday.

So I spent the evening going through the new Sony offerings. I should point out that this wasn't easy, because eMusic's website remains as clunky and unfriendly as ever. The only way to find out what eMusic had added from Sony was to scroll through the new pages, which list everything recently added in groups of 10. All the Sony additions were made on 6/30/09, and to go through them all, I scrolled through nearly 900 pages. Some of the additions are damn great (Skip Spence, the Clash, Dylan) and some aren't (wow, the whole Celine Dion catalog plus Kenny G plus the New Kids On The Block, oh my!). The thing is that like many of eMusic's long-time subscribers, I'm already a hardcore music collector and I already have most of the new additions that I would be inclined to buy. I ended up adding a few Dylan albums that I don't have to my list, plus some Ellington and Mingus albums. I expect that it will take me maybe 2-3 months to burn through all of the new additions that interest me. At least, at the rate of my newly enhanced plan.



Judging from the 1600+ comments on Danny Stein's original announcement on eMusic's blog, I'd say that I'm not alone in being less than impressed with what subscribers are getting in return for the new catalog and reduced-value plans. I understand that eMusic needs to do what it can to remain a viable business, and Stein said that eMusic had been under pressure from the indie labels for some time to increase its per-download charge. I don't like the suddenness of the change, nor the lack of a response to complaints from eMusic. It is as if they've decided that they don't care about keeping their often-enthusiastic long-time subscribers - or, at least, don't know how to show that they care - and that doesn't make much business sense to me.



eMusic also needs to figure out what the per-album pricing means to them and to customers. If many of the albums I was previously planning to download now will cost me either 12 or 24 credits (double-albums are twice the credits), why are all the monthly download plans and booster packs being offered in multiples of 5? Don't get me wrong: I prefer the base-10 idea, but why not make the per-album credit a flat 10 downloads, then? Not that eMusic would listen to me; I'm merely a long-time subscriber.

Friday, June 26, 2009

The Dead, The Unfaithful, and the Society of the Spectacle

Is it terrible that I really don't have much of an opinion on Michael Jackson's passing? I really love the Jackson Five's Greatest Hits, like Off The Wall, find Thriller vaguely embarrassing, and don't care much about the rest. I guess I should care that he integrated MTV and FM radio. But I don't really. That was hardly the same thing as integrating, say, the Montgomery bus lines or Greensboro lunch counters. There was money to be made for everyone involved by letting Jackson's videos onto MTV, and everyone got rich. Jackson got rich enough to turn himself into a reclusive weirdo who may or may not have been a child predator. So, uh, yay? I suppose his children deserve our sympathy, but jeez, when didn't they deserve our sympathy? I feel a little sympathy for him as the survivor of an extremely fucked-up upbringing, but, to tell you the truth, it's like feeling bad for polar bears at the zoo. I can see that they're in an alien environment and don't know what to do about it, but neither do I.

I feel empathy for Mark Sanford, a guy who I actually despised before his humanity cracked out of him during his press conference the other day. Good for that guy for having a real heart underneath his unfeelingly grey bureaucratic exterior. Perhaps he could use it to help the people of his state who need help rather than following it halfway across the world after a love that he knew was doomed from the outset. I hope that, if he was sincere, he resigns from his job. I hope he doesn't reconcile with his wife for the sake of his career. I hope that other Republicans learn something about the messiness of real life, as opposed to the Platonic ideal of interpersonal relations to which they hold everyone who isn't themselves. This may be akin to hoping that pigs will fly to my house to personally donate bacon to the cause of my breakfast tomorrow, which we'll have to postpone while we enjoy the late-June Texas snow on the ground in the morning.

And tough for Sky Saxon of the Seeds to pass on the same day as Farrah Fawcett and Jacko. Fawcett wasn't much of an actress, but she was decent in Altman's Dr. T and the Women. Saxon was a rock deity, albeit a minor one. Here's to letting all three of the celebrity deceased rest in peace.

Tuesday, June 09, 2009

Some Thoughts On Wesley Willis

In my music library post that included Daniel Johnston, I said:

Some people conflate him with Wesley Willis, whose popularity is mostly
built around his mental illness. Willis is a sad case, it seems to me, as every
mention of him had this ugly "let's gawk at the crazy guy" tone to it. Johnston,
though, is a great songwriter despite his illness.

In comments, cbean45 said:

Wesley Willis was an unstoppable as a freight train in both his art and music .
He loved what he was doing and most fans felt his joy. He felt he was living his
dreams and getting paid. He was happy as a clam.
It's taken me a couple of days to respond because I wasn't sure how to respond. I don't really have an opinion about the well-being of Wesley Willis himself. If he benefitted from his fame, good for him. I understand that he was homeless before he became popular, so I'm glad that he made some money and found some happiness towards the end of his life.

It's the attitudes of his fans - at least the ones I knew - that bothered me, which was my point in this post. There always seemed to be an ugly dose of exploitation in the fans I knew. They liked Wesley Willis because he was mentally ill and his songs sounded like the work of a mentally ill person. Does it make your enjoyment ok if you make someone's life better although your enjoyment is tied up with your desire to see him humiliated, especially when he doesn't know the difference between positive attention and negative?

I don't know the answer to that, actually. I think the answer is hell no, but I'm sure someone will find something that I enjoy that walks that same line, and I'm sure that I have a good reason why it's different, but it's hard to say definitively here. That's not quite right. The answer is definitely hell no, and I'm sure I'm a hypocrite, too.

The Wesley Willis fanhood seems like exploitation to me, but there's certainly a lot of entertainments that are built around the humiliation of the entertainer, even if the entertainer doesn't know that he or she is being mocked. It does seem especially ugly when the entertainer is both mentally ill and African-American, as Wesley Willis was. And knowing both of these facts seemed to be essential to enjoying Willis' music, at least in the case of those I've known who considered themselves Willis fans.

And I do think that Willis is quite different from other mentally ill performers, such as Daniel Johnston or Roky Erickson (although Roky is apparently doing much better these days). Both Johnston and Erickson were recording before their illness became apparent, and I think fans can listen to their music (or enjoy Johnston's art) without knowing that either has had psychological issues. Willis was a homeless and unmedicated street musician when his career started. His songs are pretty crude, too, and that's from an avowed Jandek fan. I don't think you can separate Willis's songs from Willis the man, whereas Johnston's and Erickson's songs have been successfully covered many times and have a life outside of their creator. That's why I find the cult of Wesley Willis uncomfortable: I see no difference between the listening to his songs and listening to a crazy black street musician make a fool of himself. The pleasures are one and the same, and I can't condone the former without feeling tainted by the latter.

Wednesday, October 08, 2008

The Head-To-Head in the Comment Thread!

My comments about the Beatles proved to be controversial to one visitor. It all started because I mentioned feeling a little embarrassed when I listen to some of the Beatles' songs on my iPod. Here's the exchange with a couple of comments at the end:

Joe Victor said...
Embarrassed why? Why embarrassed?
9:47 AM, October 03, 2008

Hayden Childs said...
I don't know. With their truly great songs, I don't get that shudder of embarrassment, but when some of the more obscure or mediocre Beatles songs start on my iPod, I feel like I'm identifying with a population that I don't feel has very sophisticated tastes. It's easy to be a Beatles fanatic and sop up everything they've done, but y'know - anyone can do it. Being a Beatles fan doesn't require a whole lot of work or attention. Their great songs are so accessible that they belie the intricacy and complication that makes them great. Their mediocre songs are just sort of there. And no one really makes an argument against their greatness, but their ubiquity makes it easy not to hear the greatness, and then the Beatles fanatic is just celebrating their ubiquity instead of their cleverness, and I feel a part of that when some of the dreck from the Anthology series pops up. I dunno, I'm having horrible allergies today, so I don't know if I'm explaining myself well.
2:20 PM, October 03, 2008

Anonymous said...
"but when some of the more obscure or mediocre Beatles songs start on my iPod, I feel like I'm identifying with a population that I don't feel has very sophisticated tastes."

The end of that quote made me throw up a little. You obviously think you are a smart person by the way you talk but yet your stupidity shines through.
10:03 AM, October 07, 2008

Hayden Childs said...
Aw, there's nothing better in Internet culture than anonymous jerks calling you stupid because they lack confidence in themselves. Be sure to drop back by when you grow up a little, sport!
10:41 AM, October 07, 2008

Anonymous said...
I have complete confidence in myself. You are talking shit about people's music tastes in the past, back when there weren't 500 billion bands out and the technology that we have today.It's funny too because we happen to be in the same city so I would think that your mind would be a little more open like the rest of us.
10:23 AM, October 08, 2008

Hayden Childs said...
Hey, that's my confident guy! So confident that you anonymously call me stupid for the terrible crime of having a different opinion than you. And then, to top it all off, you accuse me of not being open-minded. Maybe that plays like confidence in your mind, but to me, it looks like you're being defensive. And, sorry to say, sort of a dick.

But, you know, I actually am interested in the free exchange of ideas, and I'm willing to talk more about why it bothers me when I'm listening to Beatles songs. I don't think I explained it very well, and I have a better idea about it now. And, I mean, this is my blog. I can write whatever the hell I want. But I'm not all that interested in going more into this unless you're willing to have an actual conversation about it. So what'll it be, Mr. or Mrs. Anonymous: are you trolling or are you trying to engage me?
11:00 AM, October 08, 2008

Anonymous said...
It's cool, I don't have a google account or whatever, and this is really going nowhere anyway because you refuse to even try to see what I'm trying to say. Yes it's your blog and good luck with everything.
11:09 AM, October 08, 2008

Hayden Childs said...
I refuse to see what you're trying to say? Have you said anything? You call me stupid in the first post and tell me I'm talking shit about people's music tastes in the past in the second, which I admit: I don't know what that means, but I think you're saying that people in the pre-Internet era were huge Beatles fans because it was easy. To which I say: yes, of course. Didn't you see how many Beatles albums I have?

Since you're interested in being an open-minded person, I think you might want to rethink your strategy here. You can be anonymous, fellow, but you're engaging in classic troll behavior: you show up, throw a few bombs, say something enigmatic, and then huff off because you feel your genius is unrecognized. I'm not saying you have to try with me, but as you go to different sites, you might want to consider whether this is the way you want to be on the Internet. There's a lot of people who act this way, but I don't think they're getting much out of their experience.
11:30 AM, October 08, 2008

Anonymous said...
I never post anything, so don't think I "troll around" doing this on sites/blogs. Keep thinking that you yourself have sophisticated tastes and you will stay happy for the rest of your life (apparently).
12:33 PM, October 08, 2008

Hayden Childs said...
Hey, thanks for your concern! I am, in fact, a pretty happy guy.

I honestly hope you enjoy collecting however many Beatles albums you need, and I'm sorry I stung you with that comment about those with less sophisticated tastes. I'm sure your tastes are ultra-sophisticated, and that you get way more out of "Across The Universe" and "Besame Mucho" than I do. I also hope that maybe you find a Beatles appreciation site where everyone can reassure you about your super-sophisticated tastes in music, because we've pretty much hit the end of my compassion for a guy who starts with "I disagree, therefore you're stupid" and doesn't seem to have much more to say than that.

Just for the record, all I was trying to say was that when the Beatles are great, they're unimpeachably great, but when they're just okay, I find it pretty boring. Why I find it boring is personal: I was a Beatles fanatic when I was around 13, way back before there was an Internet. I hunted down everything I could find - which, given my limited resources, meant a lot of interlibrary loan time. I listened to them obsessively for a time, and then I moved on. It's hard for me to hear "Love Me Do" or "Twist and Shout" or even the late, more ambitious (and, less successful, I think) Beatles music without remembering the time I spent trying to figure out how to pick those songs out on a guitar and parse those twisted harmonies, and it all seems vaguely embarrassing to me now. I feel like if you're going to be a fanatic, you should find something that challenges you and expands your horizons, and Beatles fanaticism is so ingrained in American culture that it's as challenging as being a Yankees fan. For the record, I feel exactly the same about Led Zeppelin fanaticism, so if you live in a Led Zep echo chamber and can't stand to hear criticism of their awesomeness, here's your early warning.
1:03 PM, October 08, 2008

Anonymous said...
I don't need my tastes reassured. I didn't call you stupid because I didn't agree with you, I said that it was stupid for someone to basically call other people stupid for liking certain Beatles songs while you yourself like others. It wasn't/isn't necessary for you to look down on others just because they like certain Beatles songs that you don't.
3:57 PM, October 08, 2008

Hayden Childs said...
I haven't called anyone stupid, fellow. You're the only one here doing that.

I said that I don't think Beatles fanaticism is a sign of very sophisticated tastes. If you're suggesting - as I think you are - that I'm an elitist, a snob, a connoisseur, or what-have-you, then yes, you're right. That's what I am. All those words signify the time and effort I've spent trying to increase my knowledge and appreciation - the root of my authority, my expertise - of rock and many other kinds of music. I have a certain set of tastes that I think of as somewhat developed - or sophisticated, even - and you, of course, are free to disagree about my judgment, but you're probably not going to change my mind without giving me some credentials and a great, sea-change kind of argument.

But you also seem to be bristling at the idea that I think your tastes aren't sophisticated, because you feel that they are. I can't speak to that. I don't know you. You may have the tastes that impress me most of anyone in the world for all I know. But I think that's the crux of the disconnect between the two ideas: you give me a certain authority by thinking of me as an elitist whose opinion has meaning and, at the same time, you want to take that authority away because I said that a population that you identify with is "not very sophisticated."

Your real problem with me is that you saw my comment as a dig at you. You think I'm looking down on you for loving everything in the Beatles back-catalog. And man, I don't even know you. I don't think you or anyone like you is stupid, and I don't judge anyone's intrinsic worth by the music they listen to. Do you think less of people who prefer to dine in different restaurants?

Let's say my favorite place to dine is Aquarelle (assuming I had that kind of budget) and yours is Hoboken Pies (to extend this analogy, because everyone loves pizza but not everyone loves French cuisine). I can say that I really, really like several of the specialties at Hoboken Pies. If I'm going to eat pizza, that's what I want. But there's some pizzas they make that are completely unexciting to me now. Maybe I ate too many when I was young. Maybe all those years I spent toiling in kitchens has robbed those flavors of their mystery. I come to the conclusion that people who love those pies - especially if they love them as much as they love Hoboken's more complex pizzas - don't have a very discriminating palate. I think that on the flip side of this analogy, this is where you get offended. And hey, I even apologized for offending you, but man, I'm not going to apologize for thinking that some things are better than others.

Which gets back to that authority crux I was talking about before: my tastes are just my tastes. My judgment has no bearing whatsoever on yours, unless you choose to make it so. I think of my sophisticated/unsophisticated heirarchy as perpendicular to judgments about good and bad. My personal axis is built on challenge and surprise and passion. A lot of Beatles songs, despite thousands of repeat listens, still challenge and surprise me, but there's a whole bunch of Beatles songs that just sound bland and Music 101 to my ears. You hear it differently.

If anything, people with tastes like mine are willfully cutting ourselves off from a lot of music that brings joy to the masses of music listeners. Where I hear saccharine, many - if not most - people hear the voice of god. Or whatever it is that people seek out of music.

So, what are you looking for? Do you need to hear that I'm not judging your tastes? 'Cause I am. But so what? You're judging my tastes, too. Do you need to hear that I don't think your Beatles fantaticism is unsophisticated? Well, I do. I still think it's the musical equivalent of supporting the Yankees. Or choosing pizza over other foods. Or some other analogy involving picking the dominant overdog. I don't think it's very interesting to affirm the greatness of something that conventional wisdom already believes to be great. I don't think it makes you stupid to do so. It just means I'm not very likely to ask you for a CD mix because I don't think I will like it.

Since I spent so much time on this response, I'm going to copy a lot of this stuff onto the main page as a blog post of its own. One last thought: you should read Carl Wilson's 33 1/3 book on Celine Dion. Seriously. I think you'll find his discussion of music taste and the assumptions that go into it to be enlightening.
5:42 PM, October 08, 2008

------

A few thoughts: I assumed Anonymous was a mindless troll after his first comment and was more of an ass than I should have been with him at first. I no longer think of Anonymous that way, but I do wonder what he's looking for out of me, if not affirmation that his all-inclusive love for the Beatles trumps my less-inclusive love for the Beatles. He ain't getting that. So, a hug, perhaps?

------
UPDATE, 8/9:

In comments, our Anonymous friend says that he's not the Beatles fan I assumed he was (because if he wasn't personally offended and he wasn't trolling, then his reason for dropping by and calling me names is...? I have no idea) and then goes on to ask why I wouldn't want a mix tape from him (here's a hint: I only want mix CDs from people who are interesting). So I was arguing with a straw man, which I sort of suspected, anyway. I think this the towel thrown in, fork stuck in ass, and fat lady singing moment. On my iPod at this moment: Kris Kristofferson singing, "It's over; nobody wins." Truer words.

My photo
Cary, NC, United States
reachable at firstname lastname (all run together) at gmail dot com

About This Blog

From Here To Obscurity, founded ca. 2003, population 1. The management wishes to emphasize that no promises vis-a-vis your entertainment have been guaranteed and for all intents and purposes, intimations of enlightenment fall under the legal definition of entertainment. No refunds shall be given nor will requests be honored. Although some may ask, we have no intention of beginning again.

  © Blogger templates Brooklyn by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP