the MAC
Yet instead of ranting about this
whatever I think about this, and I tend to think the problem this sort of journalism is obvious,
some people don't. All the talk about filth and homeless and crime and addicts and privilege and property rights and ownership and whatever; isn't it obvious the vocabulary used here is FUCKED (seeing NYC as a positive example is not a good idea); yadda yadda yadda, it's you and me, us and them, etc.
More importantly, and natural progression from championing mid-70's David Crosby, let's talk about Fleetwood Mac. No, not early Mac with actual blues credentials (though albatross is a good song), I'm more concerned with the late 70's super-blockbuster Mac: S/T, Rumors and most importantly Tusk. How good is Tusk? Pretty good. Does it matter that they were soulless coke-heads trying to bash out top 40 hits (though arguably in their coke-addled way they were making ART)? No. Haven't we learned anything in that the birth of the reader kills the need for an author.
I had my doubts, but upon listening to Tusk I was surprised to find that 1) it sounds great - in a production quality way and 2) it's totally weird. No real pop hit with proper verse-chorus-verse to be found and a lot of repetitive trance jams. Sure I can do without some of the schmaltz, but it isn't laid on that heavy. Some like to point at the song Tusk, with it's USC marching band and apparently someone's response to Go4 post-punk, as the rhythmic wierdo of the bunch but really the whole record is like that. Maybe it's just my ongoing love of songs that, if you lose focus, lose their center and feel as if they have/could gone/go on forever. (See luv of Reggae and Krautrock) I get caught in these songs not knowing whether it's coming or going and in fact ends & beginnings lose their importance. Shape becomes amorphous and sound moves to the front.
Erm, maybe that's over-stating it, but oh well.
whatever I think about this, and I tend to think the problem this sort of journalism is obvious,
some people don't. All the talk about filth and homeless and crime and addicts and privilege and property rights and ownership and whatever; isn't it obvious the vocabulary used here is FUCKED (seeing NYC as a positive example is not a good idea); yadda yadda yadda, it's you and me, us and them, etc.
More importantly, and natural progression from championing mid-70's David Crosby, let's talk about Fleetwood Mac. No, not early Mac with actual blues credentials (though albatross is a good song), I'm more concerned with the late 70's super-blockbuster Mac: S/T, Rumors and most importantly Tusk. How good is Tusk? Pretty good. Does it matter that they were soulless coke-heads trying to bash out top 40 hits (though arguably in their coke-addled way they were making ART)? No. Haven't we learned anything in that the birth of the reader kills the need for an author.
I had my doubts, but upon listening to Tusk I was surprised to find that 1) it sounds great - in a production quality way and 2) it's totally weird. No real pop hit with proper verse-chorus-verse to be found and a lot of repetitive trance jams. Sure I can do without some of the schmaltz, but it isn't laid on that heavy. Some like to point at the song Tusk, with it's USC marching band and apparently someone's response to Go4 post-punk, as the rhythmic wierdo of the bunch but really the whole record is like that. Maybe it's just my ongoing love of songs that, if you lose focus, lose their center and feel as if they have/could gone/go on forever. (See luv of Reggae and Krautrock) I get caught in these songs not knowing whether it's coming or going and in fact ends & beginnings lose their importance. Shape becomes amorphous and sound moves to the front.
Erm, maybe that's over-stating it, but oh well.
posted by furtanic at 10:55 AM
2 Comments:
what's the NYC example? the NYTimes has been publishing an ongoing series of articles about how hard it is to be rich in New York City. there was one about how hard it is to save up for buying a nice apartment in Manhattan while still being able to eat out most nights. there was one about the rising cost of owning a parking spot in the city---with an example family who have a second luxury whim apartment in the city, because they have to come in at least twice a week for modelling gigs for their children (ages 7, 8, and 9); the mother is quoted as saying---I kid you not---"sometimes we're out late at dinner, or we've been shopping, and we're tired. do you really expect us to walk a few blocks to get home?"
Most people who do not live in NYC cite the drop in crime and filth (see movies filmed in 80's NYC) as a positive effect of the Giuliani administration. People in SF hope for the same sort of change, although crime in SF is not that high and really the only problem is with the high visible number of homeless. The current mayor, Gavin Newsom, was elected almost purely on a platform of let's clean up the homeless problem.
Post a Comment
<< Home