Writing about music

[freakytigger.livejournal.com]

Just wrote this on ILM, on a thread called "What do you look for in music writing". It's not an especially good thread, it's mostly people arguing whether reviewers should write about themselves or try to describe the music or whatever. But I was pleased with my post to it. It seems to me answering the question should look at the outcomes of music writing first and then work back to more formal preferences.

What I like in music writing, in rough order of priority:

- brings me to (or back to) the music in question
- shows me something new or richer about that music
- tries to start conversations, not stop them
- makes me think, excites me with its insights and ideas
- a focus on the listener
- avoids recieved wisdoms
- elegant or lively sentences
- unforced humour

It's not *that* hard to tick all these boxes, which makes it irritating that most print music mags fall down on #s 3-6 and most blogs fall down on nearly all of them. (And that I can't hit them all every time I write something). piratemoggy's entry on poptimists yesterday, about Cascada, ticked all eight, for instance.

If I can think of a couple more then I'll have ten, which is the kind of number (sorry dubdobdee that Pitchfork columns are made of.

ADMIN: All 22 LoP tracks received and sent, links to the zips up soon. Intros for Week 11 up tomorrow.

Comments

[katstevens.livejournal.com]

Does 'elegant' sentences cover actually being able to read the article without wanting to punch the person writing it? A lot of music writing falls at that hurdle for me. I have no problems with stream of consciousness (hell I do that all the time) but putting in superfluous phrases that MEAN NOTHING ("in actual fact this band are literally by far, in a sense, but not really, do you see") oh god it makes me want to tear my eyes out. I know that's not really very positive requirement but PLEASE music writers out there, just read back through what you've written and spend some time/effort on it!

[dubdobdee.livejournal.com]

i sent my intro -- ia it what yr after?

[freakytigger.livejournal.com]

Yes!

[piratemoggy.livejournal.com]

I think a lot of the problem of music writing at large is writing on demand. I can see the point because journalists have to pay the rent etc. but since I think journalism is a form of artistry as much as any other writing and that ultimately it 90% boils down to theorising, a lot of what's symptomatic of bad music writing is what's symptomatic of me trying to write an essay on a topic I'm not interested in, in that it will be about 1/3 as good as an essay which I actually give a crap about. Except that you have to write a lot of stuff which is boring as all fvckery in order to be allowed to write anything you give a crap about, usually.

I am not sure why blogs are so bad at this, mind, because technically the people should be writing about what they want to write about. Except that often they aren't at all, they're writing about what they think they ought to be writing about to keep up with Popjustice or whoever. Which is what's nice about poptimists in a lot of ways because people do what they do and if anyone comments it's a bonus, etc. although I think this maybe only works because as a group it has an assured audience anyway and journalism with no audience is fairly pointless or at least unrewarding/disheartening.

Which I suppose comes back to the DDR notion that's been bandying around. A bit, anyway.

[piratemoggy.livejournal.com]

Also, I meant to say- I'm glad you liked the Cascada thing! I thought everyone might just hate me and think I was mad.

[alexmacpherson.livejournal.com]

Except that you have to write a lot of stuff which is boring as all fvckery in order to be allowed to write anything you give a crap about, usually

o how the same is true of music journalism! definitely if you want to make a living off it anyway.

blogs are bad because they have no editors and no self-control. they're like ani difranco records, they may have good bits but they come at you with no respite and after a while you realise you don't care enough about the good bits to wade through the piles of crap just because the silly bitch doesn't have an internal editor.

[freakytigger.livejournal.com]

blogs are bad because they have no editors and no self-control

Almost everybody who goes from the blog/ILXosphere into mainstream work comes out with this line! It always strikes me as defensive. 90% of music blogs don't even have writing on them these days - self-indulgence is SO not the problem any more (if it ever was).

[freakytigger.livejournal.com]

Well no, it IS the problem, but it's not expressed in rampant prolixity which is begging for the STERN yet LOVING SMACK of a FIRM EDITOR.

[justfanoe.livejournal.com]

Heh, my blog is.

I see what Lex is talking about though. The problem is, when you have no outside hand guiding what you do, it DOES get overly self-indulgent. You are only posting about stuff you care about and it's highly unlikely anybody else will care about a majority of the stuff you care about. For only a small percentage of the blogs are posts blatantly too long and rambling, I agree, but I can definitely think of some out there.

wild, unsupported statements

[piratemoggy.livejournal.com]

I think with a lot of (but by no means all) blogs it's the lack of direction which screams for some higher editorial power. Not that "direction" is a necessity but a lot of people (and by this I would definitely include myself when I first started putting hands-to-keyboard re: music and it almost certainly still holds, I think it might be particularly symptomatic of a teenageish blogger but that's a gross generalisation and by no means do I mean it as a slur against all teenageish bloggers because there are some great ones) have a sort of 'wait what I have no idea what I'm thinking really except I've heard blogging is important to liking music this is cool no it's not' sense of what they're doing, which is all very well but a lot of them seem to have absolutely no idea they're doing it, thus ending up just being rather obnoxious and metaphorically standing there shouting random things.

Not to mention blogs get terribly sycophantic a lot of the time. The great and random editor of the (blech I hate this word) "blogosphere" is whatever's fashionable with whoever's on the link bar, for way too many of them.

[piratemoggy.livejournal.com]

I agree with the point re: blogs being very inconsistent; even the worst are occasionally insightful or whatever. A major problem with them is the fact most people just update them very sporadically on a completely schizophrenic basis so they don't even gather a bit of improvement with practice or whatever.

I am guilty of 99% of the crimes of bloggers which I could accuse them of, I suspect. Albeit I do not really think of 'raving in my livejournal' as 'blogging.'

[mooxyjoo.livejournal.com]

almost ALL writing heads straight FOR received wisdom