"And now you hear not only a Handel who, disfigured by radio, is, all the same, in this most ghastly of disguises still divine..."
- Hermann Hesse (Steppenwolf)
In 3000,098,5678 B.C., neanderthal man had perfected a culture that would be hailed as the apex of sexist behavior in the 21st Century. Those restless go getters weren't satisfied with mere domination of saber tooth dinosaurs and women. They wanted to take it to the next level by evolving a new role for man that involved less physical labor and enhance their ability to attract optimum non-animal candidates for breeding and making sandwiches.
I'm talking about rock and roll, of course, and the earliest known rock concert in the Stone Age (note clever reference) was documented on an ancient Babylonian healing crystal that was accidently included as a prize in a collectable Happy Meal box on sale in the 5th Avenue Salvation Army store in Chicago and dated by an anonymous Internet expert as being from the middle Yabadabadu period.
By this time the science of rock music was only five minutes old, yet a translator from the Ivydog Institute Of Ancient Stuff documents that the inscription on the crystal reads,
"Sabertooth Delaney phones in a rote recitation of boring rehashed cliches; a pathetic attempt to squeeze out one more payday by a washed up rocker well past his prim." [Citation needed: some scholars assert the translator plagiarized a review from a 1975 issue of Playboy Magazine, though the word “prim” appears to be an autocorrect error and should read “prime”]
Not only does this confirm the early existence of rock concerts, but literally five minutes after, the first rock magazine and Music Critic was born. [Citation needed: being inscribed on a crystal only makes it a rock magazine in the literal sense, and a bad attempt at a joke]
...rock and the Bible...
All references to rock and roll were excised from early Biblical tracts after the Council Of Vizine in 768,1234 A.D. An account of that period survives in the Lost Gospel Of Murgatroyd, page 115, paragraph 5 which relates that several scholars who happened to be Heavy Metal fans attempted to insert erotic Satan worship poetry into the Bible to stimulate sales and were rebuffed by then noted Bible critic, Saul Saint Patrick, who said "there's already enough sex, violence and references to Satan in the text, thank you, and no one's going to try to make money off of religion anyway."
That was also the last historical reference that has the words “Heavy Metal fan” and “scholar” in the same sentence. A recent search on the Internet could find no other examples.
...the purpose ..
It may appear that a music critic's primary job is to help a publisher sell advertising and subscriptions, but look a little deeper and you'll see that it also provides gainful employment for the musically inclined who wish to avoid physical labor but can't play an instrument (or can't play competently enough to satisfy other critics).
Before the first negative one star review (which was first seen in an Assyrian astrological chart in 2345 A.D.) there are documented oral traditions among the early bronze age tribes in a primitive region that survived into modern times as Indiana which relate that music critics were once just fans like you and me, but became ridiculed as "industri numsekysser" which roughly translates to "industry butt kisser." [Citation needed: the words also can mean "politician" in some languages that are similar]
By 1635, it became essential to ensure that at least one writer on a musical review staff was an "arrogant pedant" (defined in the 1917 edition of Webster as "a man who treats all mankind like his wife) so that the Recording Industry would respect the journalistic integrity of the publication and have to buy expensive ads to get positive reviews.
…the rise of democracy…
The Internet dealt an almost fatal blow to the exacting discipline of music criticism when the process of denigrating artists was democratized by the Internet, which also gave everyone easy to learn open source software to create a fake background in the arts if a title was required.
Fortunately artists and labels can use the same tools to create fake fans and positive reviews, which shows that Mother Nature always asserts it's power to restore balance and maintain a receptive environment for commerce.
Indeed, due to the unavoidable drop in literacy and musical knowledge caused by the larger pool of critics and Influencers who'll rave about any product for money, the need for deep penetrating analysis of the arts has increased. [Citation needed, it's not clear where the demand is]
…the choice…
The dilemma that the Music media wrestles with is that unlike the mainstream news organizations, they rely on a specific industry or genre for advertising income. A major network can trash the President (along with everyone else) who has no choice but to buy advertising during an election cycle. A music magazine that crusades against corruption or crappy music risks the loss of ad dollars and goodies if it maligns the industry or pisses off the artists or labels.
Most strike an organic balance by keeping an acerbic grump on staff to make it clear that they aren't doormats but the rest sticking to an informative/promotional role with data thoughtfully provided by publicists and agents.
The reason the business side can seem cynical is because modern man has, like it has in other cases, used money to quantify an intangible, and create distinctions between "amateur" and "professional" (and even good or bad). Such distinctions can be confusing. One fan may think an artist is more popular than Jesus while another might consider that opinion as proof of early onset cretinism.
Which is sorta kinda sometimes true but often maybe in many cases not. Most parents, for example, prefer the technically inferior performance of their spoiled brat at a recital to a thousand dollar front row seat at a rock concert, which can be priced even higher if necessary to keep ordinary people from getting too close.
…the heart of rock and roll…
Fandom is the real heart of music criticism. Most reviewers are drawn to the business by a love for music. Also, though it was (and still is) common practice to have staff rewrite press releases to fill the news end, the classic formula is a mix of news and opinion that's ideally featured in discreet sections and clearly identified.
The most common critic stereotype is the snobby purist, which is so common in movies and TV that it hardly needs describing. It's a negative image, often deserved, but also misunderstood when always portrayed as a person who is just being toxic. It's easy to forget that even the worst hit piece is simply an editorial, even if the writer doesn't think so.
...on to Herman Hesse...
One of the interesting things about Hermann Hesse's classic "Steppenwolf" is that music, or the love and context of it, is one of the primary themes and the main character is an archetype music snob with all of the deep love and snobbery of an grouchy critic.
I should note that the book covers a wide variety of themes and meaning, so my narrower focus shouldn't be taken as a detailed analysis.
Hesse was a music lover who loved American jazz and was said to have based the musician character, Pablo, on the now legendary Sidney Bechet.
...three points of view...
There's three sensibilities at play here. The main character, Harry, is a Luddite with a deep spiritual view of music that centers on his love of Mozart and a hatred of what radio and phonographic technology has done to spread the music. It's a purist view that is often seen in audiophiles.
There's one scene where he sees Mozart queueing up a 78rpm record, and thinks "to my indescribable astonishment and horror, the devilish tin trumpet spat out, without more ado, a mixture of bronchial slime and chewed rubber; that noise that owners of gramophones and radios have agreed to call music."
It's overblown, of course, though I've seen music reviews with a similarly bombastic tone.
...there's Pablo...
Pablo the sax player is the universalist who says "We musicians must play our parts according to our duties and our gifts. We have to play what is actually in demand, and we have to play it as well and as beautifully and as expressively as ever we can."
That passage encapsulates what music is in the real world; a diverse form that includes ceremonial, leisure, functional, and artistic. Sometimes the lines get blurred, but many composers such as Mozart differentiated between the creative and functional (aka divertimento, now called background or elevator music).
...speaking of Mozart...
The third voice, the ghost of Mozart, is the aesthetic and tech view. In one key passage he states "When you listen to radio you are a witness of the everlasting war between idea and appearance, between time and eternity, between the human and the divine."
The Mozart character later makes an even more interesting observation while commenting on composers like Wagner who came after him, "Thick orchestration was in any case neither Wagner's nor Brahms' personal failing. It was a fault of their time."
Obviously there's an aesthetic there that can be disputed but in the modern era there have been judgements made about artists who, for example, put out psychedelic or disco cuts during those crazes that were attacked for being a lapse in integrity or greed. [Citation needed to confirm if there's other motives besides greed].
...Hesse's view...
Hesse's overall view is kinder, realizing the tension between artistic purity and the realities of the real world. He was too good of a writer to create a single character who would spew out a monolithic view, and had the various viewpoints expressed by different characters. Shakespeare's King Lear has a similar approach where many of the astute observations come out of the mouth of the Jester and not the King. It's an excellent way to illustrate nuance or contradictions.
If one is trying to discern Hesse's own view of music, it's mostly likely an amalgamation of the three character's sensibilities which encompass aesthetics and context.
...the narrow road...
Reviews that express a single or uncompromising sensibility can be taken as a sign of purity but also seen as narrow or uninformed. A good critic, like Robert Christmas or Robert Palmer (not the singer) would pan a work, but there was always context and a clear identification of the sensibility. Both had low opinions of music I personally rated very high, but I could generally tell where they were coming from. In other words, it was almost always clearly one opinion and had the feel of an open discussion.
Which isn't the same thing as saying all reviews should be positive or open minded. There's no standard, but most people want to hear opinions that are thought out and informative (with the minor exceptions of politics, sports talk, cable news, nutrition, celebrity gossip, comparisons of guitar brands, movie reviews, anonymous comment sections that helpfully identify who's being really stupid, and legitimate attacks on other people's reputation or level of morality).
...Tolstoy and Shakespeare...
Orwell made an astute comment in his essay about Tolstoy's hated of Shakespeare, which was that one couldn't really judge art objectively as good or bad. The only criteria, and he made it a big "if," is survival and if later generations still enjoy it. In other words, there's really no single criteria.
The earlier eras were different and critics were more important. In the vinyl age, one couldn't easily sample music (except in old stores that still had listening booths) and the main conduit was radio or in-store play. A review was an important way to find out about new music.
Also, artists and labels sell a product with no money back guarantee. You pay up front, and if you don't like it, sorry dude. Unlike software, if the music is improved with a better mix (or with the care it should have been shown in the first place) you're expected to buy it again.
If that's the way the industry wants to do business, then they'll need to understand (and most do) that consumers, and critics who are one of their voices, will sometimes get tough with them.
A good thing to remember is that even the most acerbic critic is essentially on the consumer's side.
…lousy reviews…
Some of the best music I've ever heard had lousy reviews, and no industry figure (or artist) with an ounce of common sense will prefer no comments to criticism. When they stop talking about you, then you worry. Even a bad review that's well written with context can be informative. It can make the reader think about the record and come to their own conclusion.
Take a look at YouTube. It's full of channels where the owner will happily do a commercial for a seller for a fee and call it a review. On the whole, people will trust a bad review as much, if not more than a rave.
...abundance...
There are plenty of mean spirited reviews on the Internet, but mainly in user comment sections where a troll or someone trying to help people earn 2,000 a week in passive income can run wild. Most professional publications have higher standards. Maybe not much higher at times, but higher.
Once mp3's could be sampled online, that made music criticism less important from a consumer point of view, and streaming basically gives market power back to the consumer. It's more complicated than that, of course, but that's what the state of the music market and the critic's role in it boils down to at the present time.
...the music must change...
The beauty of music is that all that churn and turmoil in the marketplace doesn't change what it is any more than the Victorola player changed Mozart’s music in Steppenwolf and that it's sheer diversity and wealth of intangibles undergo constant change and cycles.
Your opinion may be wrong about a piece of music, but not for long. A decade later it may seem like a prescient vision from a prophet when another generation discovers it. At a minimum, any review can introduce an artist to someone looking for something new.
Like Hesse says in the book, it's best to just simply enjoy it. In the case of music critics, it's best to just try to inform or entertain, and avoid autocorrect errors that give people a reason to denounce the review or call you an idiot to a reasonable minimum.
As they say, everyone's a critic, and that’s the way it should be. It’s your time and money, and historically the music industry will waste both unless you and your friendly neighborhood critic demand the best.
The Al & Ivy Homeless Literary Journal Archive:
There are earlier blog entries on the Delta Snake Review section of this site that aren't on the On The Road page:
http://deltasnake.blogspot.com
http://deltasnake.blogspot.com
Cover Reveal For Hide In Plain Sight
This is the cover for the upcoming book, Hide In Plain Sight, hopefully out sometime in 2022.
-Al Handa
Also check out my channel on YouTube, The Electric Fog Factory!
