Is It Really Real, Son?
Monday, February 13, 2006
The invective issued by Chris from Gorilla vs. Bear toward another blog (to remain nameless) last Friday, brings to the fore that good old fashioned debate bound to emerge out of any music (sub)culture: authenticity. My initial reaction when reading the post was surprise—that the initial, bold accusation of falsity was coming from the genial, funny, and typically blogger-supportive Chris (whom I really like, both as a blogger and person, and toward whom I’m obviously not directing any ill-will). I can’t, off the top of my head, think of a time where I’ve seen Chris write a bad word about anything, let alone anyone, which gave me pause. Further, the content of the accusation was pretty darn bold—Chris trashes a poor kid because his tastes dubiously align with those of Filter and Capitol Records. But what I quickly realized was, and this is the interesting part, Chris wasn’t demeaning another blogger as much as he was attempting to pull back the curtain on a fraud. Chris exposed his fangs not necessarily because he thought another blogger was bad and needed a public de-pantsing, but because he thought the blogger, in a manner of speaking, didn’t exist.
A few weeks ago, a similar debate emerged from Dodge MOKB’s own comment boards, where he was lambasted for “posing” as a hip-hop “purist.” Dodge was called out by another blogger for his lack of hip-hop authenticity, and although he held his ground for a while (the fight spilled over to the accuser’s blog), it eventually ended amicably. In the same way as Chris called bullshit on what he thought was a label front, this guy tried to “expose” Dodge as not “real.” I find this interesting, to say the least, and, more importantly, evidence of a larger trend at work within music blogs. (Point of clarification: the guy who came after Dodge was an opportunistic knob-job trying to buffer his cred by setting up a scarecrow and taking a lighter to it. Chris doesn’t, in my opinion, fit that bill.)
A unique situation for those of us who spend a great deal of our time virtually interacting with others is that while this musical social imaginary can be incredibly exciting, it can also lead to misinformed opinions that, when negatively acted upon, can turn ugly. In the same way that virtuality offers us access to previously untouchable music, it can play havoc with our ability to characterize someone’s personality. Ergo, it often happens that those on the other end of the line become archetypes—representative of much, much more than they’d probably like to be.
For instance, when I recently met Dodge face to face for the first time, it took me a while to get used to his Kentucky accent—not because it’s anything out of the ordinary, but because I’d only been communicating with him through a keyboard that speaks with no discernable dialect. Our interactions had taken place completely by way of e-mail and mutual blog-visiting, which had led me to independently construct a personality for him based on how he writes in blog posts and e-mails. And this “personality” was constructed in the same way that readers of this site have probably done for me—there’s no getting around the fact that here, my words and choice of topics construct who I am (the most frequent comment I get is “pretentious”, btw).
The kid with the blog that Chris called bullshit on is most likely real, and, like most bloggers, has precious little experience writing about music, but, also like most bloggers, has an unmanageable zeal to do so. The fact that this guy might resort to descriptions of music that don’t reach the status of haute critique, and that his music freebies are limited to a certain few PR firms and music corporations was transformed into a slimy corporate plot to siphon music to listeners. Which it’s probably not. It just looks that way, though.
No, this kid’s blog is more than likely one of thousands that adhere to a similar template as Chris’ own—driven by label and artist freebies (and some legalistic language that does scan as a little over-protective). Which is totally fine, of course—everyone has his or her own methodology to determine what he or she deems “good” music, and it only follows that everyone would seek out individualized ways to acquire music and formulate their own style of publishable critique.
Frank from Chromewaves said something, somewhere, at some point (testament to the sheer nebulousness of internet social transactions) about how he’s hesitant to actually tell people in person that he has a blog. I couldn’t agree more. It doesn’t come from a fear of sounding pretentious or unpretentious as much as so much internet discourse just sounds bizarre when actually spoken, instead of typed. The first time I said “Gnarls Barkley” aloud was about a week ago, and just saying the names of other blogs during my conversation with Dodge was somewhat surreal, as if I was learning a new language and just figuring out how to form strange new words. And this, for me, is what led to Chris’ post (re-printed below)—a bit of animosity over perceived inauthenticity (the post was titled “Exposed: The First ‘Fake’ Music Blog“) that was wholly enabled by the physical invisibility of both involved. Testament to the ease with which we construct virtual identities and disseminate feelings about them within the negative space of the internet.
The post in question, with the “accused” blogger’s name replaced with asterisks:
Filed under: Chromewaves Dodge Filter Gorilla vs. Bear me ranting about stuff Music/mp3 blogs My Old Kentucky Blog publicistsOkay, I’m going to start this post off with a little disclaimer: the following is the theory of one or three idiots (me and a couple of my friends), but I think it’s pretty solid. There is a chance I’m WAY off-base and out of line here, but I kinda doubt it.
The accused: a new-ish blog called ****. As I was perusing some of the blogs that link to mine, I came across ****. There are many aspects of this “blog” that have convinced me to call bullshit, so here we go.
Exhibit A: What exactly is the the dealio with all the legal mumbo-jumbo, man? Disclaimers are common on blogs, sure, but check out the bottom of the site for the seperate “legal” section and various copyrights. Just seems bizarre to me.
Exhibit B: Virtually every single post on the site is for an artist that is being pushed by Capitol or Filter. Now let me make this clear: I have no problem with a label or promo company setting up a blog to promote their artists. In fact, I read Filter online just about every day. But to do it under the guise of being a “legit” blog is not only annoying, it sort of compromises the “integrity”, so to speak, of all blogs.
Exhibit C: The writing. Come on, man. Here’s an example of a quote from a post about the Walkmen: “They have a good indie alternative sound that is kind of addicting.” Or how about this gem about gorilla vs. bear faves The Black Angels: “It’s psychedelic alt rock that really does make you think about the 60’s”
Now I’m no pro writer, but this seems slightly manufactured to me. I don’t know why I felt the need to publicly call out this site in particular, it just kind of irks me. And if I’m totally wrong, **** then I apologize. But your blog seems seriously lacking of any “personal” flair or opinion, and if you are in fact legit, I think you are a little misguided in your efforts, so take that for what it’s worth. Let me know what you guys think.
Great write up. Crazy how people get some ignited by blogs, a true testament to the power of language. I know I’ve had some very disagreeable comments in my time and it’s hard to know what to make of it, but hey, you gotta roll with the punches I guess.
Keep on bloggin’ everyone.
excellent post. I hope everyone realizes, as you do, that I geniunely felt like I was attacking a commercial entity, and not another individual “blogger”. I wasn’t ripping on anyone, personally. of course, I was wrong…but in any event, my harsh language was never meant to be directed at an innocent kid. as you mention, it wasn’t a personal attack, but an attack on what I felt was a complete lack of personality. I can’t explain it fully, but before I posted, I discussed the issue and the unnamed blog with a few other friends, and they agreed.
you’re the best writer i know…
the internet is so weird i can barely wrap my head around it at times. Chris really was only attacking the idea that a promo company might run a blog under false pretenses…i hope everyone knows that. i know he feels bad that Dan’s “blog persona” got caught in the attack. he really is one of the nicest guys i know.
Geez, Eric, you’re just pretentious. Ha! I kid.
Really, well done on what seems to be (all of a sudden) a very, um, ‘real’ topic. (And you were quoting Wu-Tang for your post title, weren’t you?)
You guys have pretty much said it all, but there’s not a chance Chris was trying to be malicious. What bothers me (and what Eric has clarified here) is that Chris was exposing a potential idea, but in return his character as a person was attacked. The math doesn’t add up there. Chris is a good dude.
Great post.
Wait. I was wrong. It was a Method Man song from which that post title originated. “Bring the Pain.” Great track. Just wanted to correct myself. Carry on.
great post. i just hate it when people feel the need to rain on everyone’s parade and do stupid shit like this. i’m glad chris had the tenacity to call bullshit on this one. i really am.
people need to lighten up and stop causing drama. bottom line.
To clarify (off Kevin’s comment) I must reiterate my point that I don’t think Chris came to bring the pain hardcore from the brain.
i caught the original version of the post on gvb and decided to check it out myself and ill be damned if it didnt look like a fake to me too. i think i might have even left a nasty comment or two…i really dont remember. but to the man who does it, if hes reading this, im sorry dude.
and mad respect to chris. i just hope he doesnt ever call me out – i got nothing to hide man.
definitely a nice write-up. wayyyy pretentious. okay, but for real, this part made me laugh:
“The first time I said “Gnarls Barkley” aloud was about a week ago, and just saying the names of other blogs during my conversation with Dodge was somewhat surreal, as if I was learning a new language and just figuring out how to form strange new words.”
word up.
I’d not followed or seen any of this, so I’m glad for the report. I’m a little disappointed you didn’t go deeper into the analysis, as that’s what interests me – the “purity” thing you’re talking about, and the weird intersection between indie-dominated mp3blogs and the corporate PR machine. There’s a weird philosophy that seems present in a lot of musicblogs, distressing to me because of its ambivalence, and I’m still trying to figure out what shape I’m sensing. I don’t think this is it, but it all might tie together. I’d appreciate yr thoughts.
As for it being “pretentious”, I think that’s, as they say here, utter bollocks.
I do think there’s a common theme running through many (if not most) mp3 blogs of self-deprecation toward any larger social/cultural “role”, which, of course they all have (some much more than others). Ambivalence is a good way to put it.
If they’re taking a shape (to get even more pretentious), it’s one of incorporation on the part of the labels, both big and small. I mean, it was written in the stars that it would eventually happen, but it’s slightly distressing to the purist side of me that content is being dictated from outside instead of inside.
That said, I find equally interesting the forms that blogs have mutated into. There are the “mega-blogs”, like GvB, YANP and MOKB, the more high-falootin’, like StG and Fluxblog, and the stalwart daily papers, like LHB and CW. Then, all the entrepreneurs! In a lot of ways, blogs are a parallel form of promotion, and thus mirror, to a large degree, the fragmentative and niche-leaning tendencies of (post-modern) capitalism, broadly defined.
I share (or perhaps, feel more strongly) your disappointment about the “incorporation” of blogs into the existing musiccrit landscape. One of the things I most liked was this -new- editorial stage, set up between music production/distribution/marketing and the mass media that disseminates and covers this stuff. I liked that blogs weren’t just a quicker version of the mass media (PFM/Filter/Magnet/whatever). I’m not particularly fond of the way that’s changed.
I don’t think I expressed myself very clearly w/r/t “ambivalence”, because your reading wasn’t what I was getting at at all. Like I said, I’m still feeling it out, but it’s something to do with an ambivalence toward um… individual voices? individual tastes? Bloggers don’t seem to take much responsibility for anything any more – I’m not talking about taking responsibility for “breaking” bands or whatever. I guess it’s just that lots of bloggers don’t seem to take things as seriously as I do (or I feel Matt-Fluxblog, or John-Tofu Hut) did/do. That there’s something worth being proud about, in singing loudly and clearly the praises of the music you -truly- love; and not undermining that with bands you only kinda like or think others would be into. It’s easy to shrug off any criticism when you’re ambivalent about how much your blog -means-, even just to yourself, to your vision of the world.
I think it’s maybe this? That the blogs I most respect are -adding- something to the conversation, and not just providing more fora for the same conversations?
Sean–I see what you’re saying, and I can’t say I disagree.
I’ve always had the feeling with this site that it should represent with text and pictures as much as possible my true tastes on music and culture (and pretentiousness), as well as my methods for critiquing. I can see the appeal in mega-posting, but I just would not be able to verify that everything I posted would fall under the rubric of “music that I like, and can vouch for”. Sometimes that takes years to discover! The same goes for free stuff from PR people–sure, maybe the 1% of it that I like will go up on the site, but the other 99 goes in a stack next to my desk (or on my HD). I just couldn’t imagine being able to say, each week, that i ‘liked’ 20 new songs. Not saying that others don’t have that capacity, but I surely don’t.
And as far as trumpeting to the heavens one’s love for music, I think that’s a subjective area–I think a lot of bloggers see themselves as doing exactly that, but in wildly divergent ways colored by their individual personalities/relationships to the world/amounts of free time.
Along the lines of your last thought: My thing with marathonpacks, which is the only one about which I can objectively speak, is that I want each and every song/post/thing to seem important. So that people that visit, over time, can get a clear idea of what I value enough to rail on about.