On Music Blogs
Here, a guy named Chris Ott came out as the writer of a blog called Gerard vs. Bear.
Earlier this year, Ott wrote a piece for the Village Voice tearing into Colin Meloy's stage presence, basically. Why bother reviewing the guy's music, I guess. Anyway, I assumed it was just this guy trying to stir shit up and make a name for himself, and couldn't have given a shit about what he said in this column. I don't care if a lead singer is hypersensitive or kind of a douche bag - look at Lou Reed, Johnny Rotten, Paul Westerberg, well, it's a never-ending list.
To this self-outing post, where he again takes time to justify his attack on Meloy, and I guess implicate him for Google-alerting his own name (who gives a flying fuck?): Aside from all of the verbal tics vomited on the page, this post (and the original piece on Meloy) reminds me of people who have friends of friends who say that some musician is a douche bag: who cares? Ott's self-importance and self-righteousness - "which is in all likelihood more than I’ll ever sell of anything, but after some complicated math it still adds up to Not Enough Money for Anyone in the Band to Survive On for More Than Three Years" - is endemic of what's wrong with music criticism today. Hey Ott, shut the fuck up and write down some thoughts about a record you've heard recently. There's a novel idea.
And, what the fuck does this mean: "NY1 news briefing, 4:55PM, 03/24/06: “We have some breaking news for you, a writer for the Village Voice has been fired for fabricating a story. More at 5:30.” The fervor with which both “serious” news outlets and blogger nobodies attempted to turn RIFF RAFF’S OOPS into a self-righteous springboard was without question the most offensive situation of 2006. I have a list here, and most of you are on it."
It's a reference to Nick Sylvester, on whose blog this screed appears, who wrote some kind of expose of a dating book from a year ago... ah, all that shit's boring - the point is, he made up most of the article, fabricating interviews with people who he never really talked to. Gawker made a big deal of it. It was news (schaudenfreude) and hilarious because Sylvester is a Harvard grad, and a number of them seem to be having trouble with the ethical boundaries of writing both fiction and non-fiction. Oh, and Boris sucks. Still, what the fuck does that section mean?
So yeah, Ott is a self-important twat and will never be Greil Marcus. We don't need another one, anyhow.
Earlier this year, Ott wrote a piece for the Village Voice tearing into Colin Meloy's stage presence, basically. Why bother reviewing the guy's music, I guess. Anyway, I assumed it was just this guy trying to stir shit up and make a name for himself, and couldn't have given a shit about what he said in this column. I don't care if a lead singer is hypersensitive or kind of a douche bag - look at Lou Reed, Johnny Rotten, Paul Westerberg, well, it's a never-ending list.
To this self-outing post, where he again takes time to justify his attack on Meloy, and I guess implicate him for Google-alerting his own name (who gives a flying fuck?): Aside from all of the verbal tics vomited on the page, this post (and the original piece on Meloy) reminds me of people who have friends of friends who say that some musician is a douche bag: who cares? Ott's self-importance and self-righteousness - "which is in all likelihood more than I’ll ever sell of anything, but after some complicated math it still adds up to Not Enough Money for Anyone in the Band to Survive On for More Than Three Years" - is endemic of what's wrong with music criticism today. Hey Ott, shut the fuck up and write down some thoughts about a record you've heard recently. There's a novel idea.
And, what the fuck does this mean: "NY1 news briefing, 4:55PM, 03/24/06: “We have some breaking news for you, a writer for the Village Voice has been fired for fabricating a story. More at 5:30.” The fervor with which both “serious” news outlets and blogger nobodies attempted to turn RIFF RAFF’S OOPS into a self-righteous springboard was without question the most offensive situation of 2006. I have a list here, and most of you are on it."
It's a reference to Nick Sylvester, on whose blog this screed appears, who wrote some kind of expose of a dating book from a year ago... ah, all that shit's boring - the point is, he made up most of the article, fabricating interviews with people who he never really talked to. Gawker made a big deal of it. It was news (schaudenfreude) and hilarious because Sylvester is a Harvard grad, and a number of them seem to be having trouble with the ethical boundaries of writing both fiction and non-fiction. Oh, and Boris sucks. Still, what the fuck does that section mean?
So yeah, Ott is a self-important twat and will never be Greil Marcus. We don't need another one, anyhow.
posted by JoePo at
4:51 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home