Just so we're all on the same page here, people.
The ever-entertaining Jeff Wells of Hollywood Elsewhere spent a large part of last summer and autumn sneering about how bad Avatar was going to be; the actual experience of the film turned him around, and he now regards it with the same sort of soulful eyes that Charlie Dog puts on when he wants to impress a potential master. So these days he feels compelled to call out the infidels, as it were, and today he issued a "take that" to AICN's Mr. Beaks and CHUD's Devin Faraci (or, as I like to call them, "the guys with the beards") and "all the rest of the anti-Avatar fanboys" who compound their error by liking the Lord of the Rings trilogy. Said "take that" was in the form of a previously posted comment from someone with the handle "Plastique Elephant" who begins thusly: "Like people who can't dig Arcade Fire's Funeral, I'd find it hard to respect anybody who can't enjoy this bloody masterpiece." Reading that, I spit out my coffee. I thought about making the thing a "comment we never finished reading" item, but I read the rest in any case, and I left a comment on Jeff's thread. I said it there, and I'm gonna say it here. Just so everyone knows where I'm coming from, man:
"That Arcade Fire album is a lotta overwrought, off-key, charmless, arty Canadian crap. Seriously: rock and roll is dead, alternative rock is dead, all forms of rock are dead. Free jazz lives. Peter Brotzmann rules. Get with the motherfucking program, people."
You dig?
I certainly dig Peter Brotzmann. Less so what I take as the declaration itself, that all forms of rock are dead. What irks me is the claim's readiness to disengage with a vast swath of art because of the prevalence of things you find overwrought, charmless, arty(?) - and probably a great deal many other unpleasant sounds that dominate your average radio station. Do the overwrought qualities that some are seeing in, say, Avatar have more weight somehow? Is it a technical thing? Is it a film critic thing, that this is what you have chosen to focus on, and outside of it there's a greater capacity for discriminating taste? Or is it simply and utterly, you know, a personal thing?
Posted by: Jonathan W. | December 19, 2009 at 01:55 PM
And do note that I believe the comment to have been made largely in jest, as knowing hyperbole. And that the antipathy toward Arcade Fire is real.
Posted by: Jonathan W. | December 19, 2009 at 01:59 PM
Not sure I dig. Funeral isn't an unimpeachable masterpiece, but the second half is pretty strong. I have a soft spot for certain types of bombast, and stuff like "Wake Up" and "In the Backseat" hits said soft spot. Neon Bible is a more consistently good album despite some absolutely godawful lyrics, like "I'm standing on the stage of fear and self-doubt." Win Butler should change his name to Emo Metaphor Fail Butler.
Posted by: JF | December 19, 2009 at 01:59 PM
Glenn: I'm turning 30 tomorrow. Any advice for what to do when those kids just won't get off your lawn?
Posted by: Davin | December 19, 2009 at 02:22 PM
I have never heard an Arcade Fire song from beginning to end, but the snippets I have heard keep me from ever wanting to. I've seen Peter Brötzmann live more than once (at now-defunct NY venues like Tonic and the Cooler), and the entire Last Exit discography (for those who don't know, Last Exit was an amazing jazz/metal group Brötzmann co-led in the '80s and early '90s, with Bill Laswell on bass, Sonny Sharrock on guitar, and Ronald Shannon Jackson on drums) is permanently installed in my iPod. I listen to way too much metal to ever say rock music is dead, though lately a lot of extreme metal's been getting so weird and abstruse it's almost fairer to compare it to Elliott Carter than Black Sabbath. And I'm still passing on Avatar for all the reasons I cited in the earlier thread: the dialogue in the commercials makes my head hurt, it's too damn long, and I don't like the look of the blue Thundercats.
Posted by: pdf | December 19, 2009 at 02:27 PM
The middle class determines what will survive and the avant garde will die right behind polemical crap. As much as I like some of it... good luck, free jazz.
Posted by: Chris O. | December 19, 2009 at 02:35 PM
We understand that you generally won't seriously criticize another member of the frat, so "ever-entertaining" is as close as you can get to acknowledging that Wells is an off-the-wall nut, and that his fascination with generically denouncing the so-called "Eloi" (a grand misnomer) distracts from his own low-to-middlebrow life and questionable judgement, and that one can't adequately call him on his own blog for danger of being banished, so I say these things here. I much more respect Mr. Kenny and his analysis of film all the way back to the invention of shadows, as it were.
Posted by: nomorewells | December 19, 2009 at 02:41 PM
i love free jazz, but am certainly prone to enjoy overwrought charmless arty crap as well. however, i don't understand the fascination with arcade fire. at all.
Posted by: justin | December 19, 2009 at 02:48 PM
Wow! I showed this post to My Lovely Wife, and she said, "Boy, are you angry," and I was like, "What? The obviousness of the hyperbole surely ameliorates that," and she said, "Not so much." Just goes to prove I should always listen to her.
Look: Jonathan W. is correct when acknowledging the comment was made at least in part in jest...and that my antipathy for Arcade Fire is real. I recently did some fall/winter cleaning of the spaces where I keep DVDs and CDs, and actually surprised myself with how many contemporary/alternative/what-have-you rock titles I found expendable. Arcade Fire, Clap Your Hands Say Duh, Expander, Exploder, whatever; stuff seemed interesting at the time but like Elvis said, just don't move me. And it's true; I do have less curiosity about/engagement with current "rock" and its offshoots than I have had for many years. I still read MOJO, but half-heartedly; more often I find keys to my heart's desire in Wire, or the Downtown Music Gallery's newsletter.
My most recent visit to Manhattan's Other Music (where one of my most favorite people in the world, Mikey IQ Jones, is employed) yielded very few "rock" purchases: two Kraftwerk remasters, the Broadcast/Focus Group collab, and Roj's Ghost Box debut.
Is it a "get off my lawn" thing? I dunno; I still love noise, whether it comes from the latest Sunn O))) exploration or Fripp's manic soloing on the "Zoom Club" Crimson CD, which I just tracked down. Maybe I now love noise, and blowing, more than songs, or rather, songs that aren't played/sung by Ellington, Armstrong, or Fitzgerald. I still love, as most of you know, the Feelies. And Ubu. But the vocal rock that's represented in its way by Arcade Fire DOES seem very very tired to these ears. Seriously.
And again—kind of half kidding. Except for the love of Brotzmann, who really DOES rule. And everybody should check out the CD by Brown WIng Overdrive, a trio featuring Mikey and DMG's Chuck Bettis, that sounds like something you'd hear on Harry Smith's "Anthology of American Folk" music if electronic instruments had been around then.
Posted by: Glenn Kenny | December 19, 2009 at 03:18 PM
I think its fair enough to declare 'rock is dead', even if i do keep buying up indie rock albums. I'm not sure I agree with the commenter above who asserts that "the middle class determines what will survive". I venture that there are a lot more people today who listen to Ornette Coleman than Ray Conniff. The middle class determine what gets produced in the most units (or downloads ... disposable, either way). The true believers keep the flame alive. I think I'll put on some Grachan Moncur...
Posted by: greg mottola | December 19, 2009 at 03:23 PM
I don't know about Coleman v. Conniff. In certain trendy city spots perhaps. Look, the simplest melodies are the ones that last. If it has too many notes, then enjoy it while you can. Maybe it's all relative, though... and the middle class of 2250 will be able to whistle along with Sun Ra.
This is all coming from a saxophone player, by the way, and one who loves to play Monk.
Posted by: Chris O. | December 19, 2009 at 03:30 PM
I think there's still plenty of viable-but-contemporary rock and roll being made. For an example from this year, I would point to and endorse Future of the Left. Their name may make them sound like soggy neo-U2 "political" rock, but hoo boy, are they anything but.
Posted by: Davin | December 19, 2009 at 03:32 PM
And speaking of lasting simple melodies... I thought it was an interesting coincidence that Wang Chung's "Dance Hall Days" appeared earlier this year simultaneously in DUPLICITY, ADVENTURELAND and the commercial for Major League Baseball 2K9
I say this, as Glenn might say, free of snark.
Posted by: Chris O. | December 19, 2009 at 03:36 PM
How many people actually believe Jeff has ever listened to Arcade Fire before?...
Posted by: The Chevalier | December 19, 2009 at 03:39 PM
I always pegged Wells' CD collection to be anchored by Sinatra's DUETS, Clapton's UNPLUGGED and, of course, to "keep it real"... Carole King's TAPESTRY.
There may be an unopened Dylan soundtrack to Scorsese's NO DIRECTION HOME in there somewhere.
Posted by: Chris O. | December 19, 2009 at 03:44 PM
@ Greg Mottola: Grachan Moncur, oh yes; fantastic. This weekend I've been educating myself on Prince Lasha, whose recently reissued "Insight" is knocking a few books off my shelf. Great stuff, and the only other thing with him in my current library is, of course, Dolphy's "Iron Man."
Posted by: Glenn Kenny | December 19, 2009 at 04:07 PM
I feel dumber than usual, because I don't recognize any of the bands named in this post or comments thread. But, that's the great thing about all art forms: there's always new stuff to discover, explore, and engage with, and I have a few names to get me started...
Posted by: Tom Russell Listens to Air Supply | December 19, 2009 at 05:33 PM
What's it like being a self-loathing hipster, Glenn? ;-)
Posted by: don r. lewis | December 19, 2009 at 06:55 PM
Jeez, Don, I dunno. I didn't think that an enthusiasm for "out" jazz and being a hipster had been seriously associated with each other much since shortly after Thomas Pynchon's "V" was published. These days the term seems to mean anything vaguely slack and irritating: guys in trucker hats drinking PBR, latter-day refugees from Jackie 60, white fellows who affect hip-hop patois, what have you. And anyone who ticks off Armond White, of course. It's all so confusing!
Posted by: Glenn Kenny | December 19, 2009 at 07:03 PM
Re: "The middle class determines what will survive." I'm guessing she's not on your fave list, Chris O., which is fine with me. But you know, ask Patti Smith. From bebop to the Velvets -- not to mention Georg Grosz or, knock wood, Guy Maddin -- it seems to me the opposite is true. Sales at the time are one thing, survival (in the Artistic Immortality sense) another.
Posted by: Tom Carson | December 19, 2009 at 07:19 PM
I wasn't talking about sales at all. Jury's out on all of it, of course -- and really out on Maddin -- but what will survive out of those folks? Patti Smith's cover songs; "Candy Says" & "Sweet Jane"; "Oleo", "Salt Peanuts" & "Take Five" (probably "So What"); and... I think Magritte will outlive Grosz.
As for being "on my fave list," don't get me wrong... I agree with Tom Russell about the excitement of discovering new stuff. I enjoy Mysteries Of The Organism as much as The Beatles' Revolver. I don't quite get the Arcade Fire/Avatar sentimment on HE, but at the same time I wouldn't discount the Candadian band just because their melodies are digestible and they're enjoying some mainstream success.
Posted by: Chris O. | December 19, 2009 at 07:39 PM
Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa there, Chris O.; my dislike of Arcade Fire has zip to do with relatively large numbers of people buying their records. I dislike/discount them because they suck. To my ears, that is. That's all. But when you get down to it, saying that "I'd find it hard to respect anybody" who didn't like an Arcade Fire album is chauvinism of a particularly obnoxious sort. I mean, what if Stephen Hawking can't quite get into "Funeral," you know? Or Nelson Mandela? "Oh, okay, for you I make an exception..."
Posted by: Glenn Kenny | December 19, 2009 at 07:58 PM
Thanks for the clarification and I completely agree re: chauvinism -- the narrow minded ball rolls both ways. But weren't you saying that all rock, art rock and indie rock is dead? And isn't that chauvinism of its own sort? Okay, okay, tongue in cheek, I get it and I'll stop. But what if Stephen Hawking thought that Roland Rashaan Kirk playing more than one horn was showboating and egregiously excessive? I'd better see a post on his blog.
Oh and be warned... Brian Eno apparently told Coldplay that glam rock will be huge again. These little whippersnapper fanboys will be wearing the rouge and glitter.
Now, what do you think about this Jack White guy...
Posted by: Chris O. | December 19, 2009 at 08:19 PM
"Like people who can't dig Arcade Fire's Funeral, I'd find it hard to respect anybody who can't enjoy this bloody masterpiece."
Misplaced modifier?
Glenn, how much would it take to convince you to draw up a short list of good places to start in music? That sounds very broad--like, your own short guide to listening? Okay, like, ten bands/artists (or albums) you love, artists of whom we probably haven't heard. Like, "Tell ya what, kid, why don't you start here?"
Because I'm drowning in this thread a little.
Posted by: John M | December 19, 2009 at 08:20 PM
@Chris O.: So far as I know, we weren't arguing taste -- just your notion that 'the middle class' is the arbiter of artistic longevity. I agree with you that Magritte will outlast Grosz, but are you implying that it's because Magritte is more acceptable to the bourgeoisie? If so, a fascinating argument I'd love to hear amplified, and I'm not being sarcastic at all. And for the record, I'm also no unthinking basher of 'the middle class,' which these days I kind of miss. I just don't think their track record in guessing what will last artistically is stellar.
Posted by: Tom Carson | December 19, 2009 at 08:26 PM
Hey guys, is this where the hipsters are hanging out tonight??
Posted by: bill | December 19, 2009 at 08:38 PM
Before anything starts, that was just a joke. But good Lord...free jazz? Random and disconnected knocks on the middle class? This thread is my own personal nightmare.
Good evening to you all!
Posted by: bill | December 19, 2009 at 08:47 PM
Oh, Bill, you scalawag, you.
John M: Oh good lord, whittling stuff down to a mere ten is a real mind-boggling idea. Even with respect to Bill's obvious favorite genre, free jazz, ten ain't enough. But it I were to give you a primer on it, I'd tell you to start with some non-free records, because the genre, like abstract expressionism, is best appreciated within a certain context. In that respect, Thelonious Monk's "Monk's Music," featuring both John Coltrane AND Coleman Hawkins, is an exemplary bridge between old and new. Then check out some modern jazz records with heavy emphasis on improvisation: Coltrane's "Giant Steps" and "My Favorite Things," Ornette Coleman's "Tomorrow is the Question" and the classically-titled "This Is Our Music." And whatever album "Lonely Woman" is on. THEN check out Coltrane's "Ascension," Coleman's "Free Jazz," Albert Ayler's "Spiritual Unity," Cecil Taylor's "Nefertiti The Beautiful One Has Come," Archie Shepp's "Fire Music," Jackie McLean's "Old and New Gospel" with Ornette. THEN check out Peter Brotzmann's massive "Machine Gun, " the European answer to most of the above. And if you like that, I'll give you another list!
Posted by: Glenn Kenny | December 19, 2009 at 09:07 PM
@bill, you know my politics, but the snob-leftist take on 'the middle class' has been driving me nuts since Nathanael West. Here's hoping we get to discuss same in some other context.
Posted by: Tom Carson | December 19, 2009 at 09:14 PM
No disrespect to free jazz. Honestly. I tried to like it, and outside of a few individual pieces, I just never connected to it. I have some CDs in my collection, and I feel like a poser because of it.
Posted by: bill | December 19, 2009 at 09:15 PM