Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [thewire] All this acrimony

Expand Messages
  • Jawed Ashraf
    I subscribed to this list because I really enjoy the magazine and I hope to widen my understanding of the kind of music it covers by talking about it with you
    Message 1 of 6 , Dec 2, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      I subscribed to this list because I really enjoy the magazine and I hope to
      widen my understanding of the kind of music it covers by talking about it
      with you lot.

      It's years and years (like about 14 or 15) since I subscribed and
      contributed to a net music discussion group (rec.music.x back in the good
      ol' days of the internet - I have an archive on 5.25" floppy disk somewhere)
      so for me it's really great to find a place where the common interest is, in
      theory, so interesting, and so common to all of us (though in truth the
      music up for discussion is so huge in its breadth that I wouldn't like to
      pretend I'll discuss any and all of it).

      It would be nice if this list has a sense of community on it. I'm a member
      of a private list (18 people, different sort of scale) which has a really
      great feel. That can't be matched here, but I'm sure some humour,
      delinquency and rambling off-topic is par for the course. If we were sat in
      the Jon Snow in Soho (surely one of the coolest selections of music that you
      can find in a pub, including alt jazz and proto-click&cuts type stuff),
      talking about these things, we'd be happy to go anywhere topic-wise.
      Surely?

      I haven't been around long enough to get a feel for the overall quality of
      discussion here. I could have rummaged through the archives, but I'd rather
      search them on specific topics (that's already been quite useful, thanks!).

      Yes it is Marxism, to take responsibility for yourself - your perspectives,
      what you say and do. What you let others do around you. What action you
      take to contribute/control. The internet's for adults, but that doesn't
      imply we're all equally (and perfectly) savvy, unfortunately.

      It's also true that any group like this has a core of very few hardcore
      contributors, who get virtually nothing back "directly" (unless it's
      ego-development to post in the first place). There is a reward, but it's
      subtle and I think it's ultimately strongest in the bonds amongst the
      people, rather than in the content of what's said. A collective mind
      exists, "lead" by a few, and the best of these few are those without an
      agenda or a big ego.

      Oh and if we're really lucky, it develops into a cult...

      Jawed


      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: D. M. Letham [mailto:dannyl@...]
      > Sent: 02 December 2000 14:19
      > To: 'thewire@egroups.com'
      > Subject: [thewire] All this acrimony
      >
      >
      > Christ what have I started? A throwaway remark about a Divison
      > Two muso escalating into world war three. (WW3 on a chat-group?
      > Talk about self-important!)
      >
      > I stand by what I said about people taking themeselves too
      > seriously, and there have been several posts subsequently that
      > underline the point.
      >
      > Do I care that any "contributors" have ended up unsubscribing?
      > Let me answer that with a question: Does anyone care that after
      > spending a year trying to use some fair amount of the profit
      > from my "dayjob" business to contribute to music lover's lives -
      > list members or not - I've decided to throw in that particular
      > towel? LivHouse Records is calling it a day due to a mixture of
      > disinterested attitdes, unpaid bills, and just plain robbery -
      > and I dont just mean the BMGs of this world crying wolf while
      > planning mergers with napster, suckering lots of you good folks
      > in the process. (Another factor was the temperaments of some
      > people who make you lot look like Perry Como).
      >
      > Now to answer my own question.. Answer 1: of course I care or I'd
      > never have bothered, but actually it doesn't make any difference.
      > Answer 2: why should you care? I took a chance and it didnt't
      > work out for me. So goodbye LIvHouse records and dont shed a tear.
      >
      > Initially I subscribed to the list for reasons similar to Jawed's
      > ad-creative, but as I'm also a music user I though it might be
      > nice to induldge in a bit of banter. If my banter offended you,
      > it was the other list members I was writing to, so I owe you no apology.
      >
      > To Manuel and any other the socio-economic theorists among you.
      > Have you ever theoretically released an album? Is that a bit like
      > hammering in John Lennon's imaginary nail? (He got shot, you
      > know) Maybe I'm stereotyping many of you just as I was
      > stereotyped by whoever assumed I was some bloody youngster that
      > thought there was no music worth listening to before 80s
      > technobeat (actually I'm 46 but I've spent a lot of time on
      > another planet from him apparently), but here goes: I agree with
      > JasonJay, who I guess HASNT fallen for it, and that's exactly his
      > point - so do smash your TV. Or watch the ad-free BBC and let the
      > goverment poison your mind instead of letting the corporates do
      > it. If you could really think for yourself this stuff wouldn't
      > make you so nervous. He's right when he fingers the creatives who
      > "know a bit about music". They are the ones sitting on salaries
      > spoiling it (and I mean more than music) for the rest of us, but
      > only if we let them think for us. So who are YOU spoiling it for?
      > Not me, I'll keep subscribing beacuse I believe capable of
      > filtering the out the bollocks. If you don't think you can, then
      > unsubsrcibe and go back to sleep.
      >
      > And Manuel, I think my email is longer than yours.
      >
      > Going back to the label. I haven't announced it on the
      > "wire-announcements" list and wasn't necessarily going to Yes, I
      > am doing no more releases for two reasons. First, and principally
      > because I'm not going to make any money. If that makes me a
      > corporate whore, so be it. But actually it was my fucking money.
      > And it's your loss.
      >
      > The other reason? It's easier to rant at fuckheads than it is to
      > work with them. (Rob Paul and Craig, I'm especially NOT talking
      > 'bout you guys - my compliments to you)
      >
      > -----------------
      > Danny Letham
      > Liverpool House, High Street, Dyserth, Denbighshire LL18 6AB, UK
      > Tel +44(0)1745 572000 Fax +44(0)1745 572007
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > UNSUBSCRIBE = mailto:thewire-unsubscribe@onelist.com
      >
      > TheWire List Info Page: http://www.msu.edu/user/forddavi/wirelist.html
      >
      >
    • Jawed Ashraf
      Criticism. It s a fascinating subject in itself. On the one hand you have the public ( oh, any old fool can do that - it s rubbish ) and on the
      Message 2 of 6 , Dec 2, 2000
      • 0 Attachment
        <Ramble on>

        Criticism. It's a fascinating subject in itself. On the one hand you have
        the public ("oh, any old fool can do that - it's rubbish") and on the other
        you have the folks who truly live and breathe the object (under criticism).

        Manuel, I think we are talking about post-modern capitalism, here. Back in
        the 18th century, say, capitalism was rather more brutal and didn't rest on
        cultural signifiers (I made that all up for the sake of provoking someone
        who knows this subject to give us some insight.) Things like the Guinness
        pelican show us that capitalism developed cultural signifiers
        (accidentally) - but the point is that capitalism kept its house in order by
        not stepping on the toes of anyone else's signifiers. Post-modernism tore
        up that particular rule.

        Some would argue that capitalism led to the creation of post-modernism
        (society able to look at itself, having the ability to do so due to
        imbalances of wealth - bearing in mind that capitalism is not remotely a new
        thing), which has in the latter half of the 20th century fed-back into
        itself, creating something that truly has run out of control. It leads to
        things like Intel using those grim blue guys (and probably owning the
        copyright to their image/material now, knowing the acquisitive nature of
        Intel).

        Post-modernism is a critique of the essence of society and it's pastimes.
        It's a broad approach that tears down barriers and squashes conservatives.
        (Though how it's used can be deeply conservative - look at how much
        post-modern advertising lazily re-cycles art (especially Brit Art in the
        UK - though some might argue that Brit Art has merely borrowed one-liner
        conceptualism from British advertising, after all British advertising is
        pretty famous for its conceptualism).)

        Part of post-modernism is that anyone can join in. Sure it has its rules,
        conventions, well-trodden paths of re-discovered novelty. The internet is
        like the second-wave of post modernism. Adroite magazines like The Wire
        seemingly understand their place, which includes the daily rags and the
        internet. They set-up their stalls with a unique selling point, because
        they are a business. If they weren't they'd be fanzines, I guess.

        How do we choose which reviewers to rely upon, when we scan the available
        media? I could read the Guardian's music reviews (I do read Time Out's) or
        Uncut magazine's. Most I don't because the pay-back for the effort expended
        just seems too low.

        How do we know the reviewers are giving us a fair cut? Don't we sit there
        sometimes wishing "if only x had reviewed this".

        I love the The Wire's unofficial sub-title "we listen to these records so
        that you don't have to".

        <Ramble off>

        Jawed
        (I know nothing about slavoj zizek other than a vague understanding derived
        from Manuel's messages - so most of this email consists of pure conjecture)

        > -----Original Message-----
        > From: Manuel V. Cabrera Jr. [mailto:mandelc@...]
        > Sent: 03 December 2000 20:37
        > To: thewire@egroups.com
        > Subject: Re: [thewire] All this acrimony
        >
        >
        > D.M:
        >
        > my email wasn't intended to be a criticism of anyone's
        > complaints about commercialization. i was just trying to throw
        > in a perspective from an angle that i haven't seen discussed on
        > the list. no, i haven't released an album, but i don't see how
        > that's relevant to what i was saying.
        > my email was far too heady, i realize, and i'm the first one
        > to beat down on jargon-ridden theory, so i apologize for that.
        > that my comments on zizek were interpreted as you interpreted
        > them is probably a result of the lack of clarity in my last email.
        > one of the reasons i brought out what i think zizek's
        > response might be to certain styles of criticism of
        > commercialization was to see if anyone on the list is interested
        > in the kinds of philosophy and social theory i'm interested in.
        > slavoj zizek, in my opinion, has many interesting things to say
        > about how we should approach critique. now, you might say that
        > non-musicians don't have any place criticizing the music world,
        > but that attitude would bode very poorly for the project of a
        > critique of culture, since in our world of intense
        > specialization, no one would thereby be qualified to comment on
        > anything more broad than their own tiny little corner of the
        > global market.
        > in any case, i do appreciate greatly all the info and
        > opinions i've gotten on this list. i don't mind any of the
        > banter, and if anyone joined the list expecting nothing but
        > record and concert reviews, then they've obviously never been on
        > a discussion list.
        >
        > manuel cabrera
        >
        > >
        > >
        > > UNSUBSCRIBE = mailto:thewire-unsubscribe@onelist.com
        > >
        > > TheWire List Info Page: http://www.msu.edu/user/forddavi/wirelist.html
        >
        >
        >
        > UNSUBSCRIBE = mailto:thewire-unsubscribe@onelist.com
        >
        > TheWire List Info Page: http://www.msu.edu/user/forddavi/wirelist.html
        >
        >
      • Bill Ashline
        ... I enjoyed your comments on Zizek. I think he is very relevant to any discussion about music or any other aspect of culture. I m glad you brought it up.
        Message 3 of 6 , Dec 2, 2000
        • 0 Attachment
          >From: "Manuel V. Cabrera Jr." <mandelc@...>

          > one of the reasons i brought out what i think zizek's response might
          >be to certain styles of criticism of commercialization was to see if anyone
          >on the list is interested in the kinds of philosophy and social theory i'm
          >interested in. slavoj zizek, in my opinion, has many interesting things to
          >say about how we should approach critique. now, you might say that
          >non-musicians don't have any place criticizing the music world, but that
          >attitude would bode very poorly for the project of a critique of culture,
          >since in our world of intense specialization, no one would thereby be
          >qualified to comment on anything more broad than their own tiny little
          >corner of the global market.


          I enjoyed your comments on Zizek. I think he is very relevant to any
          discussion about music or any other aspect of culture. I'm glad you brought
          it up. Thanks.
          _____________________________________________________________________________________
          Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com
        • Jason Jay Stevens
          ... No Christ on this list ... I stand by you, King Monkey Sage-Equal-To-Heaven be my patron saint. ... I don t. Hahahahahaha!!! I ve seen it happen so many
          Message 4 of 6 , Dec 3, 2000
          • 0 Attachment
            On Sat, 2 Dec 2000, D. M. Letham wrote:

            > Christ what have I started?
            No Christ on this list

            > I stand by what I said about people taking themeselves too seriously,
            I stand by you, King Monkey Sage-Equal-To-Heaven be my patron saint.

            > Do I care that any "contributors" have ended up unsubscribing?
            I don't. Hahahahahaha!!!
            I've seen it happen so many times. It's this recurring phenomenon.
            Somebody on one of these big lists sends off an eMail to
            everybody,expressing their disappointment in the topic of conversation.
            9 times out of 11 they threaten to leave the list.
            It's really self-gratifying to send one of those things off.
            And nothing else.
            It sure as heLL doesn't make anybody smarter (<--whatever that means)
            by doing it.

            Big deal. If you don't like it, and you can't find the DELETE key to
            make the stuff you don't care about go away,
            than LEAVE THE LIST.







            + From: JasonJayStevens
            + mediaArts&research
            + potterBelmarLabs
            + spoke@...
          • Manuel V. Cabrera Jr.
            D.M: my email wasn t intended to be a criticism of anyone s complaints about commercialization. i was just trying to throw in a perspective from an angle that
            Message 5 of 6 , Dec 3, 2000
            • 0 Attachment
              D.M:

              my email wasn't intended to be a criticism of anyone's complaints about commercialization. i was just trying to throw in a perspective from an angle that i haven't seen discussed on the list. no, i haven't released an album, but i don't see how that's relevant to what i was saying.
              my email was far too heady, i realize, and i'm the first one to beat down on jargon-ridden theory, so i apologize for that. that my comments on zizek were interpreted as you interpreted them is probably a result of the lack of clarity in my last email.
              one of the reasons i brought out what i think zizek's response might be to certain styles of criticism of commercialization was to see if anyone on the list is interested in the kinds of philosophy and social theory i'm interested in. slavoj zizek, in my opinion, has many interesting things to say about how we should approach critique. now, you might say that non-musicians don't have any place criticizing the music world, but that attitude would bode very poorly for the project of a critique of culture, since in our world of intense specialization, no one would thereby be qualified to comment on anything more broad than their own tiny little corner of the global market.
              in any case, i do appreciate greatly all the info and opinions i've gotten on this list. i don't mind any of the banter, and if anyone joined the list expecting nothing but record and concert reviews, then they've obviously never been on a discussion list.

              manuel cabrera

              "D. M. Letham" wrote:

              > Christ what have I started? A throwaway remark about a Divison Two muso escalating into world war three. (WW3 on a chat-group? Talk about self-important!)
              >
              > I stand by what I said about people taking themeselves too seriously, and there have been several posts subsequently that underline the point.
              >
              > Do I care that any "contributors" have ended up unsubscribing? Let me answer that with a question: Does anyone care that after spending a year trying to use some fair amount of the profit from my "dayjob" business to contribute to music lover's lives - list members or not - I've decided to throw in that particular towel? LivHouse Records is calling it a day due to a mixture of disinterested attitdes, unpaid bills, and just plain robbery - and I dont just mean the BMGs of this world crying wolf while planning mergers with napster, suckering lots of you good folks in the process. (Another factor was the temperaments of some people who make you lot look like Perry Como).
              >
              > Now to answer my own question.. Answer 1: of course I care or I'd never have bothered, but actually it doesn't make any difference. Answer 2: why should you care? I took a chance and it didnt't work out for me. So goodbye LIvHouse records and dont shed a tear.
              >
              > Initially I subscribed to the list for reasons similar to Jawed's ad-creative, but as I'm also a music user I though it might be nice to induldge in a bit of banter. If my banter offended you, it was the other list members I was writing to, so I owe you no apology.
              >
              > To Manuel and any other the socio-economic theorists among you. Have you ever theoretically released an album? Is that a bit like hammering in John Lennon's imaginary nail? (He got shot, you know) Maybe I'm stereotyping many of you just as I was stereotyped by whoever assumed I was some bloody youngster that thought there was no music worth listening to before 80s technobeat (actually I'm 46 but I've spent a lot of time on another planet from him apparently), but here goes: I agree with JasonJay, who I guess HASNT fallen for it, and that's exactly his point - so do smash your TV. Or watch the ad-free BBC and let the goverment poison your mind instead of letting the corporates do it. If you could really think for yourself this stuff wouldn't make you so nervous. He's right when he fingers the creatives who "know a bit about music". They are the ones sitting on salaries spoiling it (and I mean more than music) for the rest of us, but only if we let them think for us. So who are !
              > YOU spoiling it for? Not me, I'll keep subscribing beacuse I believe capable of filtering the out the bollocks. If you don't think you can, then unsubsrcibe and go back to sleep.
              >
              > And Manuel, I think my email is longer than yours.
              >
              > Going back to the label. I haven't announced it on the "wire-announcements" list and wasn't necessarily going to Yes, I am doing no more releases for two reasons. First, and principally because I'm not going to make any money. If that makes me a corporate whore, so be it. But actually it was my fucking money. And it's your loss.
              >
              > The other reason? It's easier to rant at fuckheads than it is to work with them. (Rob Paul and Craig, I'm especially NOT talking 'bout you guys - my compliments to you)
              >
              > -----------------
              > Danny Letham
              > Liverpool House, High Street, Dyserth, Denbighshire LL18 6AB, UK
              > Tel +44(0)1745 572000 Fax +44(0)1745 572007
              >
              >
              > UNSUBSCRIBE = mailto:thewire-unsubscribe@onelist.com
              >
              > TheWire List Info Page: http://www.msu.edu/user/forddavi/wirelist.html
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.