CHAPTER 1
THE ALBUM REVIEW
INTRODUCTION
EXPERT ADVICE FROM OUR WRITERS
ANN POWERS ON DAFT PUNKāS RANDOM ACCESS MEMORIES
JIM DEROGATIS ON SIMON & GARFUNKELāS BOOKENDS
LAURIE ANDERSON ON ANIMAL COLLECTIVEāS CENTIPEDE HZ
LOU REED ON KANYE WESTāS YEEZUS
WRITING PROMPT: THE BLIND REVIEW
WRITING PROMPT: MAKE IT BETTER
INTRODUCTION
How do writers show up in their reviews? Ann Powersā keen eye for the gender politics of rock gives her review of Daft Punkās Random Access Memories a characteristic perspective: āThere is one glaring omission from Daft Punkās foray into vintage pleasures. Where is the female voice representing those who truly defined that liberatory spirit?ā (Sheās just limned out the albumās relationship to the music of the 70s, its hedonistic nature and āpromiscuous eclecticism.ā) The lack of a āfeminine presence,ā she concludes, makes āthe satisfactions RAM offers ā¦ incomplete.ā Itās a fair and telling point. Powers identifies a shortcoming to which another reviewer might have been blind. How the critic sees and hears a record, Powersā caveat reminds us, isnāt neutral or objective, but determined by their own experience, passion, and focus.
We often learn more when we come across a knee-jerk review that strikes us the wrong way than from one we agree with, learn more not only about the record under consideration but about some aspect of our own response to music, especially if that aspect isnāt yet entirely clear to us. The āDean of American Rock Critics,ā Robert Christgau first published his āConsumer Guideā capsule reviews in 1969. Theyāve served to define the nature of record reviews ever since even as they remain largely inimitable, marked by a fiery critical intelligence and an immediately identifiable style. For all the critical stances he takes that are utterly convincing however, an important aspect of reading his reviews is the way the ones you disagree with get under your skin.
His Bā for Guided By Voicesā Bee Thousand isnāt a particularly low mark in the pre-grade-inflation reckonings of the Dean even if the grade itself doesnāt entirely jibe with the damning consonance-rich sentence that caps the review: āthis is pop for pervertsāpomo smarty-pants too prudish and/or alienated to take their pleasure without a touch of pain to remind them that theyāre still alive.ā
Even if youāre invested in the record or the band, those over the top įæ¾pās are fun to hear coming from the lips of the master reviewer but they tend to leave sticky traces of his spittle on your face. Taking a second to wipe them off gives you pause to think about whether or not you are a prudish, perverted pomo smarty-pants and whether thatās why you like the record after all. Once you decide youāre not really any of those things, you become almost grateful for the fact that the critic has given you a chance to confirm what you know about yourself and the music you love.
Reading that sentence reminds me of Christgauās early reviews of Sonic Youth. The fact that there was an audience out there which liked this stuff seemed more of a disincentive to the critic than the music itself: he sends up the preciosity of the kind of store where you can by an EP like Death Valley ā69 by calling it a āshoppeā and suggests that if you actually pay for such bootless product you might as well be sexually servicing (his language is less polite) the āBoho poseursā in the band. Are the Boho poseurs who constitute Sonic Youth (a band that consistently received As from Christgau for much of its later career) and its fan base predecessors of the Guided by Voices listeners he imagines to be perverted pomo smarty-pants? They must be. The criticās allergy to the image of the fawning hipster makes his eyes swell up so quickly that he canāt see the music isnāt postmodern or enervated at all but an example of brilliant, even lovingly rendered songs made by regular guysāOK, so one of themās a regular guy who happens to be a geniusāwith a full-blooded love of rock and very limited recording equipment. Christgau may have identified accurately a portion of the bandās audience in New York who lionized Guided by Voices for the wrong reasons and found this demographic as repellent as early Sonic Youth fans, but once he has these cardboard cutouts in his sights, he can only dismiss the music without really taking it in.
Iām not dwelling on this review merely to settle scores with a famous critic about a beloved record (though thereās that), but to suggest a couple of things that might prove useful to a writer of album reviews. First, the critic both uses and is sometimes blind to his prejudices and idealsāthe more you know about yourself and how you process what youāre writing about given that self-knowledge, the better. Second, donāt write as someone who doesnāt care about what you care about. Donāt be hipper or more sanguine, less cranky or suspicious than you are. Show up on the page as yourself. Thereās nothing cautious or second-guessing about Christgauās GBV and Sonic Youth reviewsāand thatās the pleasure of reading them: his verbal intelligence, desire to sniff out a bad deal for the āconsumer,ā and concern that what heās hearing may not be authentic are all palpably real aspects of his response to music. You, on the other hand, might be more inclined to draw out nuance than spit fireāor even praiseāso use what youāve got. And as Rob Sheffield writes about what proved to be a dead wrong review he wrote of a Radiohead album (The Bends) that became one of his favorite records by one of his favorite bands, āgetting things wrong is part of a music criticās life ā¦ Thatās probably the most crucial advice I could give a young criticāplan on getting a lot of things wrong.ā Just make sure when youāre wrong, youāre wrong on your own terms.āMW
EXPERT ADVICE FROM OUR WRITERS
With album reviews, there was a time when writers got advance albums two or three months before the general public ever heard it. So you could spend some time crafting a meaningful argument that was really unaffected by the fan reception of a record, or by the promotional campaign of that record. That landscape has changed so dramatically that writers donāt have much of an advantage over anyone else. Everyone has an opinion the moment an album is leaked or released, and editors are going to (understandably) demand that their writers join that chorus as quickly as possible so their outletās coverage doesnāt feel stale. When youāre under that kind of deadline pressure, as a writer, I think itās much harder to write something personal and meaningful and structurally sound, so readers often get something half-cooked or something that pretty much repeats the safe status quo opinion thatās floating around out there. The democratization of this stuff is a lot better than the old āgatekeeperā system in so many ways, but I think serious criticism is really struggling right now, because even the stalwart voices have the ability to see what everyone else is saying, and we wind up in a weird feedback loop.āCasey Jarman, Managing Editor, the Believer
I listen to music as I would āin the wildā before I approach it critically. That means listening to it regularly on headphones to and from work usually.āMatt LeMay, senior contributor, Pitchfork
I begin by listening to the disc in question several times. Even as a young sprog reading magazines like Crawdaddy! and Fusion, I could tell when the reviewer had only listened to something once, especially if I already owned and enjoyed the record. Thereās research for record reviews, too. Most reviewers, at least the majority of those Iāve read, seem to think that the music to which theyāre listening and the accompanying liner notes are sufficient data from which to build a review. A little research, especially beyond the immediate realm of music, goes a long way towards enriching both oneās opinion of a record and the ability to express that opinion with allure.āRichard Henderson, music writer and 33ā
author
When I reviewed Oneohtrix Point Neverās R Plus Seven, which was voted Tiny Mix Tapesā favorite album of 2013, I already knew the album intimately, since I had listened to it many times before knowing that Iād be writing about it. But in general, itās crucial for me to immerse myself in the music first, then, depending on the artist, do as much research as possible by reading interviews and articles. This research is not only for fact-gathering purposes, but also to understand how meaning is created and reinforced throughout the media, how publicity might have affected how people are writing about the music in question, and whether or not any of it aligns with my personal beliefs.āMarvin Lin, Editor-in-Chief, Tiny Mix Tapes
Iāve realized that I try to make everything I write, even reviews, into some sort of narrativeāthere has to be a story or I donāt know what to say. And then I just smooth it all together into a legible story.āMichael Azerrad, author, journalist and Editor-in-Chief of the Talkhouse
I wrote a 1500-word review about the Slint boxset (multiple LPs, book, and DVD) in the Wire magazine. I listened to the music, watched the film several times, and started by simply thinking about exactly what struck me as most significant about the band, their reputation, their album Spiderland and the historical gap between the time of its creation and the present. Once I had a lot of sentences more or less worked out in my head, I wrote a preliminary draft. Then I revised it many times, adding and expanding and cutting back and reshuffling certain key points. Then I sent it to the editor and we had several back-and-forth edits and changes. He wanted me to add some things and I thought about how I would do that effectively. Itās not just about āyour voiceā or āinspirationāāto write is to work with editors, to revise, and to sometimes change your mind and your emphasis.āDrew Daniel, Assistant Professor, Department of English, Johns Hopkins University
The short form is hard for meāespecially the really short form. Like I donāt know what Iād do if I had to write one of those 200-word album reviews. I guess Iād adapt. Short for me would be in the 2,500-word range. And even then things spill over. But I like revising and editing a lot. Those are my favorite things about writing.āBryan Charles, writer and 33ā
author
When Iām assigned an album for review, the first thing I do is contact the publicist to try and track down a promo copy of the album (if I donāt have one already; sometimes my editor will provide me with a promo, or Iāll have pitched the album for review having already listened to it).
Then, I listen. A lot of people ask me how many times I try and listen to an album before reviewing it, and the truth is that there is no magic number. It really depends on how far in advance Iām given a record; sometimes Iāll live with a promo copy of a record for months before I have to sit down and organize my thoughts about it, and in other casesāespecially with bigger, major label releasesāIāll hear an album for the first time a day or two before I have to file the review. I prefer situations between these two extremes. If you have too long to marinate on an album, you can sometimes overthink your opinion and second-guess your gut reactionāspecifically if you see a lot of people arguing about it a lot on the internet. But of course, you donāt want to feel rushed, either. A lot of my favorite albums are āgrowersā that didnāt immediately grab me on first listen, but I came to appreciate them over many consecutive listens, and I try to consider this when listening and writing.
One thing I try to do consistently, though, is listen to an album Iām reviewing in a variety of contexts. A lot of people might think of a music critic pensively listening to a record alone in a silent room and through huge, state-of-the-art headphones ā¦ and true, sometimes I do that. But thatās not the only way people listen to music, and I try to remember that when Iām writing about a record. I want to take it out for a test-driveāto try it out in real life. I try to listen on speakers and on headphones. I try to give it a few spins (pen and notebook in hand, usually) focused specifically on the music and when Iām playing it in the background of doing something else. Sometimes Iāll listen alone and sometimes with other people. Music filters into our lives in a variety of ways, and I try to keep this in mind when Iām evaluating it.
Then, once I feel like Iām ready to say what I want to say (or when my deadline is unavoidably looming), Iāll sit down at my computer and write. Usually Iāll have already jotted down some phrases or observations on a napkin, or my hand, or the notebook Iām always carrying with me, and Iāll consult these notes if I have them, but sometimes I like to start the review as a blank slate. Even when I think I have a handle on how I feel about an album, I donāt really know exactly what Iām going to say until I sit down to write, and I think the trick is finding that uncertainty exhilarating rather than terrifying.āLindsay Zoladz, Associate Editor, Pitchfork
I would make it illegal to review a record sooner than a month after release. I think itās impossible to have the proper perspective on a record when youāve sat with it for just a few weeksāsometimes even a few days for bigger records. There are so many reviews Iāve written that I would change almost completely because how I felt about the rec...