It looks like people dont know that music critics are just expressing their personal opinions. The dont mean to do general establishments. And whoever takes them seriously are just...well...
The people that object because there is no "reason" to think he knows what he's talking about are the same type of people that think music must be better the more complex it is technically. Rock is essentially a type of folk music, I think, and it has never been about chops. As He says, it's supposed to be about short, punchy, catchy, and not full of progressive wankery. If you want musical complexity, listen to classical or jazz. I think it's safe to say Christgau would say "progressive" is anathema to rock, and/or what's good about rock.
Do people like him (or his work) because of the effort he puts in or because they genuinely think his writing and/or opinions are worthy of praise? Or is it more to do with the fact that he was one of the first music critics and, therefore, he must know what his talking about?
It's people like Robert Christgau who save rock from rock fans. He has imagination beyond just the music, wit and a fearlessness of expression, as well as a broad taste. Without him, the cultural historians of the future in our society would write off rock n roll as being subscribed to by no one but luddites with narrow interests. Thanks to him, they'll recognise that it also was home to a lot of interesting, idiosyncratic characters. And thank God for that.
Max Ember Smtih Holy shit that was pretentious. You and Christgau should go cocktail party hopping together. You could smell your own farts together while insulting simpletons that just aren't on your level.
A music critic is someone who evaluates the artistic, cultural qualities as well as the musical proficiency of a performance or recording. Robert Cristgau, on the basis of the content of his articles, is not someone who could be regarded as a professional critic. Personally, I find his writings too superficial to be taken seriously.
Your writing in UA-cam comment section surely isn’t more valuable than his. This man spent life listening to music 10+ hours a day, and writing about it. And you? A professional critic of critics?
With all due respect, that's a moronic opinion. What you call "elitist" is an intelligent person taking rock seriously and writing about it with insight and wit. Do you dislike writing in general or only about rock? What other subjects should people not think and write about? Sports? Politics? Classical music? Gardening? Cooking? Visual art? Architecture? Maybe we should burn all the books and articles on those subjects and tell the authors just to physically engage in the activity?
I thought Punk had its origins in the 50s. I suppose the only difference is that bands like the New York and Ramones had singers who seemed to deliberately sing badly. Robert Christgau talking about saving music from the pretentiousness of arena rock...the irony being is that Robert Christgau is the personification of pretentiousness. I like punk but I could never see what was wrong with artists showing off their talents.
Seems like Robert Christgau is an adept wordsmith with a firm grasp on the versatility of words while using them to communicate. But for some of us, while his words can communicate music quite extensively, they don't posses the flow of its language. Like a really unpleasant sounding accent - like English spoken with a _____ accent (insert what country's accent sounds awful to you when speaking english) , or Shakespeare being read with heavy US southern accent or a US East Coast/New York/New Jersey accent - you understand what's being said but the essence of it requires something this type of communication will never provide. Unless maybe you speak with a similar accent and you are just glad to be discussing Shakespeare because it makes you feel like you are better, somehow. And so, as far as Mr. Christgau's particular use of words while trying to convey the music he has heard, we have folks (aka weirdos who don't get music like we do #justkiddingbutnotreally ... heehee!/LoL!) who relate to him. OOOH!! - Like, the GUY AT at 2:02 to 2:15 who speaks with the "wordsmith accent". I imagine him waiting to use the word "aeriodite" for a very long time (because when/why would you - the movement required by the mouth to say it feels awkward, imho.).... (but, ok...maybe it does sound kinda cool - don't tell anyone I said that K? Thx). And LO and BEHOLD - he finally got his chance. YAY!! We should give him extra points for squeezing in Aeriodite + Canon + Parse YAHTZEE!! (um, that's not played with words... SHHH!!)
Is it okay for intelligent people to listen to and then form judgements about music as long as they don't commit the thoughts to paper or webpage or would you like to ban thinking as well? Or maybe you'd feel okay about thinking and writing about rock on the condition that the person doing so is a fucking clod? Enlighten us!
This guy is just such a Narc. Whose to say that his opinion is any better than anyone else's. He's not an acclaimed musician so what does he know. I hate critics
His observations on punk are spot on ...
It looks like people dont know that music critics are just expressing their personal opinions. The dont mean to do general establishments. And whoever takes them seriously are just...well...
The only person talking sense in the comment section ^^
Yass. They’re just like us in loving music
His commentary is smart and insightful and he never writes down for the masses. He writes valid criticism not media hype.
Yes, for a man who claims to hate pretentiousness, he sure is pretentious
The people that object because there is no "reason" to think he knows what he's talking about are the same type of people that think music must be better the more complex it is technically. Rock is essentially a type of folk music, I think, and it has never been about chops. As He says, it's supposed to be about short, punchy, catchy, and not full of progressive wankery. If you want musical complexity, listen to classical or jazz. I think it's safe to say Christgau would say "progressive" is anathema to rock, and/or what's good about rock.
Do people like him (or his work) because of the effort he puts in or because they genuinely think his writing and/or opinions are worthy of praise? Or is it more to do with the fact that he was one of the first music critics and, therefore, he must know what his talking about?
he is the lego man
Graham Parker said it best...
"Some people are in charge of pens, that shouldn't be in charge of brooms"
Let me guess, he disliked your favorite band/album?
Accompanying this documentary about An Important Music Critic are videoclips for Jesus of Nazareth. Love it.
It's people like Robert Christgau who save rock from rock fans. He has imagination beyond just the music, wit and a fearlessness of expression, as well as a broad taste. Without him, the cultural historians of the future in our society would write off rock n roll as being subscribed to by no one but luddites with narrow interests. Thanks to him, they'll recognise that it also was home to a lot of interesting, idiosyncratic characters. And thank God for that.
Max Ember Smtih Holy shit that was pretentious. You and Christgau should go cocktail party hopping together. You could smell your own farts together while insulting simpletons that just aren't on your level.
what fall song is being played in the beginning?
I have read 100's of his reviews. If it's not from NY or if it's heavy he hates it. Just an old music hating Troll.
He never reviewed The Blue Nile. That always bothered me because he obviously heard them and didn't even deem them worth a blurb.
6:20 anyone know what song that is?
A music critic is someone who evaluates the artistic, cultural qualities as well as the musical proficiency of a performance or recording. Robert Cristgau, on the basis of the content of his articles, is not someone who could be regarded as a professional critic. Personally, I find his writings too superficial to be taken seriously.
Your writing in UA-cam comment section surely isn’t more valuable than his. This man spent life listening to music 10+ hours a day, and writing about it. And you? A professional critic of critics?
His job is to have an opinion. Our job is to either agree or disagree. We're getting to worked up about this.
With all due respect, that's a moronic opinion. What you call "elitist" is an intelligent person taking rock seriously and writing about it with insight and wit. Do you dislike writing in general or only about rock?
What other subjects should people not think and write about? Sports? Politics? Classical music? Gardening? Cooking? Visual art? Architecture? Maybe we should burn all the books and articles on those subjects and tell the authors just to physically engage in the activity?
What song plays at 0:30?
C.R.E.E.P by The Fall
Man
I thought Punk had its origins in the 50s. I suppose the only difference is that bands like the New York and Ramones had singers who seemed to deliberately sing badly. Robert Christgau talking about saving music from the pretentiousness of arena rock...the irony being is that Robert Christgau is the personification of pretentiousness. I like punk but I could never see what was wrong with artists showing off their talents.
Seems like Robert Christgau is an adept wordsmith with a firm grasp on the versatility of words while using them to communicate. But for some of us, while his words can communicate music quite extensively, they don't posses the flow of its language. Like a really unpleasant sounding accent - like English spoken with a _____ accent (insert what country's accent sounds awful to you when speaking english) , or Shakespeare being read with heavy US southern accent or a US East Coast/New York/New Jersey accent - you understand what's being said but the essence of it requires something this type of communication will never provide. Unless maybe you speak with a similar accent and you are just glad to be discussing Shakespeare because it makes you feel like you are better, somehow. And so, as far as Mr. Christgau's particular use of words while trying to convey the music he has heard, we have folks (aka weirdos who don't get music like we do #justkiddingbutnotreally ... heehee!/LoL!) who relate to him. OOOH!! - Like, the GUY AT at 2:02 to 2:15 who speaks with the "wordsmith accent". I imagine him waiting to use the word "aeriodite" for a very long time (because when/why would you - the movement required by the mouth to say it feels awkward, imho.).... (but, ok...maybe it does sound kinda cool - don't tell anyone I said that K? Thx). And LO and BEHOLD - he finally got his chance. YAY!! We should give him extra points for squeezing in Aeriodite + Canon + Parse YAHTZEE!! (um, that's not played with words... SHHH!!)
Fall song is "C.R.E.E.P." I believe
@themofo1890331 yeah i agree with u bud
You get that itch a lot, don't you?
Have Moicy! at 1:00?
iS THAT a good album. I was thinking about buying it on eBay but Im not a big folk fan.
Is it okay for intelligent people to listen to and then form judgements about music as long as they don't commit the thoughts to paper or webpage or would you like to ban thinking as well? Or maybe you'd feel okay about thinking and writing about rock on the condition that the person doing so is a fucking clod? Enlighten us!
zappa
LEGO MAN!!!!
@JapanAlex01 oh I'm sorry, I guess my taste is just so obsolete compared to a guy who gave now: club hits an A minus. What a joke.
How can anybody give Pearl Jam's vs. a dud?
Mug
This guy is just such a Narc. Whose to say that his opinion is any better than anyone else's. He's not an acclaimed musician so what does he know. I hate critics