kung Posted March 4, 2003 Report Share Posted March 4, 2003 Exclaim has been pissing me off with their emo boy pretentious 'improvisational' music coverage for ages. This dude just fucked up the Mule review and the editor totally let a bad bit of editorializing slip. Not like me to defend 'jam-heads' and such but I hate it when it doesn't come from a full appreciation of the scope of the scene. Here's the offensive quote: "The whole quartet were so on this evening and their style so fluid that one can only wonder if most of the jam-heads in attendance knew just how heavy of a show they were witnessing. It’s hard to say if their musicianship is often lost on the jam-band masses, many of whom are there more for the groove and the party than the songs themselves. " Gov't Mule review in Exclaim If you want to post on the Exclaim message board here's the link as well. I put up a really biting diatribe that is pretty hard to contend with. Just don't make us look dumb. Exclaim message board Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hux Posted March 4, 2003 Report Share Posted March 4, 2003 mercy!!! nice job...! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davey Boy 2.0 Posted March 4, 2003 Report Share Posted March 4, 2003 Two very enthusiastic thumbs up, Kung. You cut them down to size perfectly. That's the way to keep em honest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booche Posted March 4, 2003 Report Share Posted March 4, 2003 Whoa, I had written a reply to this thread (and doing so again, obviously), but I hadnt read your response on that message board. "It's one of those remarks that you can't really go wrong with when a bunch of pasty music crit twits are reading" HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! I am trying to reply on that message board Kung, but you lay a heavy hand on that table. I guess my words will be better than no words, but it is still tough. Do you also play poker? Where the heck is Davey-Boy, this one calls for you son............ My post would be a nice sandwich between yours and Kungs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booche Posted March 4, 2003 Report Share Posted March 4, 2003 Oh, there he is. I guess I had this page open for a little while longer than I thought........ "Gimmie little drink!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CyberHippie Posted March 4, 2003 Report Share Posted March 4, 2003 Man that's pretty brutal! The jam-heads knows precisely how good it is, that's why we are all there. The collective 'we' have been finding the most amazing music for decades. Since we're all such cool people a good party just naturally follows us around. Buncha chumps! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AD Posted March 4, 2003 Report Share Posted March 4, 2003 Uh, am I missing something here? That was a great Gov't Mule review! "This is a band better than most at the top of their game." The thing you're disagreeing with is what he said about the fans, which he's not even sure he believes. "One can only wonder if most of the jam-heads in attendance knew just how heavy of a show they were witnessing. It’s hard to say if their musicianship is often lost on the jam-band masses, many of whom are there more for the groove and the party than the songs themselves." It's pretty obvious this guy LOVED the show, even if he didn't understand the fans. So what? "A superior first set..." He went to the Opera House to review the show by the band, loved it, and you guys are complaining! Geez. AD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booche Posted March 4, 2003 Report Share Posted March 4, 2003 I think the reviewer is implying that the crowd didnt get it, because they were there for different reasons. Which, I have a huge issue with, how would he know? And, because of that, I see Kung attacking the holes he creates in his 'facts', or lack there-of. Sure, he loved it, but he is writing for the "twits", and that is another issue, which is almost greater. Actually, it is greater. I think................. (Sue me, someone told me it was ok to possess 30 g's or less) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davey Boy 2.0 Posted March 4, 2003 Report Share Posted March 4, 2003 Dude, the complaint is that he took the time/space to launch a foolish jibe when he coul have been expanding on what he liked about the show Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AD Posted March 4, 2003 Report Share Posted March 4, 2003 I don't think he could have said any more positive things about the show without looking like a suck-up. Whatever people write about the jam scene, someone will get really offended, which is fine, but it's a music review in a free Canadian monthly newspaper, not an amendment to the Constitution. Imagine if it was a negative review! Remember the Toronto Sun's review of the Phish show in 2000? Geez. This Exclaim! guy actually loved the show and wrote about it, and people are pissed. Isn't everyone wracking their brains trying to promote this scene so bands / promoters etc can make a living? Don't bite the hand that feeds you. I posted a reply on that Exclaim! board too. ad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AD Posted March 4, 2003 Report Share Posted March 4, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Davey Boy: Dude, the complaint is that he took the time/space to launch a foolish jibe when he coul have been expanding on what he liked about the showHe could have also wrote about things he didn't like, which would have been met with even more criticism here. Or he could have wrote about the hot-box atmosphere, caught the eye of the police, and ruin the next shows in the Toronto jam-band scene. He could have filled the space with Swedish porno dialogue. He wrote a review. Disagree, fine. Remember that people respond to constructive criticism a whole lot better than petty name-calling. ad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AD Posted March 4, 2003 Report Share Posted March 4, 2003 Have fun with this review. Chart Magazine review ad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kung Posted March 4, 2003 Author Report Share Posted March 4, 2003 This AD guy's on my hit list. I think you've missed the plot if you think that bands like Grand Theft Bus, Jimmy Swift and Nero are going to get anything close to a fair shake in a mag like Exclaim!. Nero was who was coming to mind as I was writing that, hell they did a whole feature on improvisation in Montreal and Ottawa I believe a few months back and it's all these avant garde bozos that play in the palace Du Maurier built. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booche Posted March 4, 2003 Report Share Posted March 4, 2003 "Remember the Toronto Sun's review of the Phish show in 2000? " I remember that, and the 99 one, which was even worse, from the same writer! (Keiren Sumphin?) I responded, it was the worst review I ever read in a paper, based on a concert I was at. BUT, this is a tad different, I think..........but at the same time, fits this bill, read on. Basically, too many people get caught up with labels, and this reviewer tends to apply it again. "jambands" Which, is a negative connotation, slowly becoming an already written review unto itself. I see a circle here, and call me pessimistic. All in all AD, I philosophically agree with you, and I wouldnt post a negative review myself, and I dont, but I can see where Luke is coming from. I think. Remember, I am a tad 'out of my tree', so to speak............... (ok, ok, ok.........I had to edit this. I just noticed upon hitting the ADD REPLY button, that Kung had replied to AD, 15 minutes or so, before I had thought I had. I think I just lost anywhere from 15 minutes, to 2 hours of my life. Thanks for playing folks.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AD Posted March 4, 2003 Report Share Posted March 4, 2003 Ask the bands if they want their name in a national music magazine. Offer to freelance or something, write reviews and send them in, 'give the bands a fair shake' yourself if you don't think Exclaim! can do it. I don't think it would hurt to get some press for bands that we like. Oh yeah - you said something earlier about 'letting bad editorialising' into the Mule review. No music review is objective. The whole thing is an editorial. I think it's strange that you have a hit list. I'm not that dangerous you know. Open-minded, yes... Stupid online arguments.... AD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booche Posted March 4, 2003 Report Share Posted March 4, 2003 Obviously, my timing is rather poor............ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AD Posted March 4, 2003 Report Share Posted March 4, 2003 Just clarification: The reviewer never calls Mule a Jamband. He calls them 'heavy blues rockers'. He calls the fans 'jam-heads' and 'the jamband masses.' AD - I'm going to bed. The Sens will beat the Laughs 4-2 tomorrow night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paisley Posted March 4, 2003 Report Share Posted March 4, 2003 ah, let the press say what they want and to hell with too much more publicity for the scene... mainstream popularity killed the Dead in the final years... the whole thing works better on the 'bring your best friend' level... keeps the scene fairly pure and simple... the curious are obviously more than welcome... have to admit though, I choked on my chocolate milk when I read the "if the jam-heads knew just how heavy" comment... blissful ignorance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoMack Posted March 4, 2003 Report Share Posted March 4, 2003 AD: I was with you a little (seeing your point) and seeing the other side... but as soon as you said the Sens would beat the leafs you lost all credibility with me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AD Posted March 4, 2003 Report Share Posted March 4, 2003 Sean Palmerston's wife replies to Kung's post on the Exclaim! message board: "OK, I rarely participate in these sorts of debates, and as the Mrs. there is an obvious reason why I should not, but I do believe I can debunk much of this via my unique relationship with Sean, and since he's just left the house to play hockey, I feel free to have at it.... I think this gentleman has decided that Sean means all Gov't Mule fans are jam-heads and therefore not discerning music fans - but this is merely a knee jerk assumption made with little basis. I also think that this gentlemen has also got it into his head that all Exclaim! reviewers are exclusively indie-er than thou exclusionary geeks who must posess special licensing to review live shows and records. Both assumptiions seem to inform his comments. Indeed, how does Sean know that Mule dusted off some early songs for their show? Perhaps this would be because Sean has been to see Gov't Mule a number of times, including back in '96 (or '97? I'm not the one for obsessive dates in the relationship) when they played Toronto for the first time. This, hand in hand with the many live shows he posesses on tape and cd that he has collected from friends and jam-heads over the years. Why is Sean required to comment on each and every cover song the band played on this particular night? Perhaps he felt he needed to maintain his writing focus on Gov't Mule's originals - worthy as they are of such focus. And, why does he need to list the definite geneology of each member of the band when he only has so many words in which to express how much he enjoyed the show? Perhaps the gentlemen was preferring an exhaustive "Taper's Compendium" account of the proceedings, and if this is the case, a music magazine is not the appropriate venue for such an account. It is true that Exclaim!'s musical province is generally of the cutting edge-ish ultra-hip indie musical genres, but it is by no means its exclusive province. I know that Sean was quite excited to get the chance to review the Gov't Mule. If you happen to name-check Sean in the magazine, I am sure that you will find he often does not deal with the ultra-hip du jour and prefers to review. research and interview bands that he is passionate about regardless of their genre and its percieved coolness. What is this gentleman so bent about? It must be the assumption, as I've pointed out above, that Sean is another emo-twink who thinks he is gawd's gift to criticism and believes himself about the "jam heads" who litter such a show as Gov't Mule. But, if you were to see our car, you'll see the lovely little Stealie sticker on the back window (it goes well with the Guided By Voices sticker that also adorns the car). If you were to travel back in time to the late 80's, you'd see a highschool aged Sean at one of the 27 Grateful Dead shows he attended between '87 and '92 (when he stopped going because the crowd started getting decidedly spaced out neo-hippie which in some segments of society was the then cool thing to do). If you came into our home, you might marvel at the astounding collection of bootlegs of bands like the Dead and Gov't Mule (and, for the record, the boots of the Pixies, Elevator, Stereolab, Dylan, Super Furry Animals, Uncle Tupelo, and other assorted wonderful bands, including a dearth of metal which I personally hate!), on such a variety of formats as cassette (which we can't play for lack of a working deck, something confounding our listening of newer aquired The Dead shows of last year), CD, video tape and now DVD. But, because Sean writes in Exclaim! it is assumed that he must know nothing about any genre beyond what-the-hip-indie-kids-are-bleating-about. Such an assumption is juvenile. If the gentleman dislikes the review Sean wrote so much, he really should consider submitting a few writing samples to the editor and writing a few reviews of his own. Those who do know Sean know he always proclaims one thing (which I am about to share with all of you who do not have the priviledge of knowing him personally): Sean is not a music writer nor a music critic - he is a music fan first and foremost and he writes about music because he loves it so much. Oh, and because Exclaim! does not provide a dictionary with each review, I'll explain what a jam head is: a jam head is one of those people who listens to jam music almost exclusively because it is a lifestyle. Sean, and many of his old pals from his Dead touring days, often wonder how discerning these individual's are and hence the comment about whether those jamheads in attendance at Gov't Mule knew what a kick-ass performance they were witnessing. Because, quite frankly, I have myself seen those folks we refer to as jam heads grooving to some very awful music that is seemingly only made acceptable because it is labelled jam and the jam heads are often looking more for a good time than to witness great art. So, there, I have exhausted my protectionist urge. " I like her style and echo her sentiment. AD Now I'm really going to bed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briguy Posted March 4, 2003 Report Share Posted March 4, 2003 Sean Palmerston, great guy, huge jamband fan. Been writing jamband CD reviews for Hamilton’s View mag for years. Funny to see such a big jamband supporter getting assaulted on such an issue. Haven’t seen Sean since a BNB show a few years ago, funny to see his name come up in here like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewRider Posted March 4, 2003 Report Share Posted March 4, 2003 First of all I'm more pissed off that the Chart reviewer couldn't spell Allen correctly. I think it is just poor journalism to go to a concert and make comments and judgement on the crowd. It would be like me going to write a review of a Rancid concert and continuously mentioning how violent people were in the "mosh pit". Or going to a Rolling Stones concert and commenting on how everyone was sleeping the whole time. It makes me think that the reviewer didn't understand the music so they just decided to review the audiance, much like the Toronto Sun does when Phish comes up here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paisley Posted March 4, 2003 Report Share Posted March 4, 2003 quote: Funny to see such a big jamband supporter getting assaulted on such an issue. as a huge jamband supporter why would he think jam fans wouldn't appreciate how heavy the Mule show was? I have lots of beautiful memories of dancing and groovin with heads to industrial to world beat to jazz to blues to metal to classical to all forms of decidedly alternative(heavy and not) music on tour... if I know of a crowd of people who would appreciate any show on its musical merits it would definately be the, apperently slammed in this article, "jam-heads" thoughts (and again, only let your good friends know about how real and good and true the jam scene can be, no mainstream media, don't let them overcrowd us out of existence with imposed mediocrity,we're taught mediocrity from birth but some of us are lucky or stupid enough to fall through the cracks ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paisley Posted March 4, 2003 Report Share Posted March 4, 2003 ps. - I'm not saying Sean Palmerston isn't a great guy... just read like somewhat irresponsible journalism to me... everyone has a bad day here and there... nothing wrong with talking about the show but don't slam most of the people at that show for no good reason... great guy or not, I don't agree with what he said "jam-head" Gov't Mule Thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaimoe Posted March 4, 2003 Report Share Posted March 4, 2003 Sean can't be much of a Mule fan, because in his opening sentence he calls Allen Woody, Allan Woody. Allen was on the jam scene for more than 15 years. No excuse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.