|
|
Post by alimcg on Aug 3, 2006 22:07:01 GMT 10
Dang, I thought everything was da blues. Shoot.
|
|
|
|
Post by aj on Aug 3, 2006 23:37:38 GMT 10
FWIW, I think you're both right, to an extent.
A review of a gig or cd might provide some objective info/background, but will be largely personal opinion/assessment.
A feature story can be written in various ways. The intro/background might be written objectively or subjectively ; it might concentrate on known facts, or on the writer's opinion of the artist in question. It might involve the use of quotes, or a Q&A format.
To the extent that an interview or feature allows the artist to speak for themselves, it's a less subjective form of 'criticism', and rather different to a straight 'review'. But of course, the writer's views (or prejudices, some would say) are an important factor, in deciding which quotes to use, or even which questions to ask.
|
|
|
|
Post by bodgey on Aug 4, 2006 0:21:49 GMT 10
I agree Mark, an interview is a completely different beast to a review (for example).
A review is always, naturally, one person's opinion. An interview is (hopefully) a chance to gain an insight into the artist's work, life, creative process etc...to my mind a successful interview is devoid of the opinion of the interviewer (although there is always potential for bias in some sense i guess).
There is an immense amount of 'jazz literature' (read: theses, doctorates etc) that deals with the deconstruction/analysis of certain artists and genres. Much of this consist of pure analysis without the weight of opinion.
Shit storms seem to emerge all the time when the topic of 'music writing' comes up...to me reviews simply represent one person's opinion, and the more objective writing styles are always interesting because someone has taken the time to absorb, analyse and deconstruct music - read them, digest them, think about them, weigh them up, make up your own mind....but don't be reactionary.
I'll finish with a quote that Rae Marcellino passed on during my time in his music theory classes: "Writing about music is like dancing about architecture." I can't remember the original source...
|
|
|
|
Post by glean on Aug 4, 2006 1:45:06 GMT 10
aj rocks and Rae was right  |
|
|
|
Post by timothystevens on Aug 4, 2006 7:06:37 GMT 10
That quote is usually credited to Elvis Costello or Frank Zappa, but it's still a dumb thing to say. Zappa was much more on the money when he said that rock journalism is people who can't write, interviewing people who can't talk, in order to provide articles for people who can't read.
|
|
|
|
Post by bodgey on Aug 4, 2006 9:25:53 GMT 10
...as usual Tim, nail on the head. Much more appropriate.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kenny on Aug 4, 2006 9:50:16 GMT 10
Mark is 100% right - IMHO.
When I interview an artists - for a print story or on air - the SOLE aim is to let the artists tell their stories, digging deep to get into their motivations, aims, influences, likes, dislikes, cooking abilities, family life, football allegiances and all that and more.
And AJ is right, too. The choice of questions and quotes is up to me. And the choice of who to cover generally is, too. Not just any old body get on The Pearls.
But by and large, once the interview is going, I like to think that I am as objective as possible. One thing that pleases me is that some guests on The Pearls express surprise that I encourage the interview to go way, way beyond a bit of talk about the latest album and its launch. I like to let things ramble for more than an hour. My journalistic cure-eeeosity demands it.
I can understand Miriam wanting to consider admin aspects of running a competition. But in my view having it based solely on reviews is a sad restriction of what jazz writing can be, one that possibly limits the very endeavours the competition seeks to encourage.
To repeat: I believe it fully possible to be a really good writer about jazz without ever writing a review.
I also wonder about the judging panel. I entered last year and only found out the judges names when I asked after closing date. Had I known the name of one of the judges, I would not have bothered.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kenny on Aug 4, 2006 9:51:15 GMT 10
you can not, repeat,can not write about music without reviewing some aspect of it i.e. writing your opinion , there has never been writing about someone else's music without an opinion in it, they are therefore all reviews This is just plain wrong. IMHO. |
|
|
|
Post by aj on Aug 4, 2006 9:53:45 GMT 10
Sure ; but much as the idea is to let the artist speak for themself, don't you think your own opinion of that artist has to color the story to some extent ?
|
|
|
|
Post by Kenny on Aug 4, 2006 9:59:43 GMT 10
sorry don't agree a feature contains views on the quality and validity of the music as does an interview as does CD and concert reviews Wrong. IMHO. |
|
|
|
Post by Kenny on Aug 4, 2006 10:02:06 GMT 10
Sure ; but much as the idea is to let the artist speak for themself, don't you think your own opinion of that artist has to color the story to some extent ? Sure. But having a comp based solely on reviews is wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by ladylex on Aug 4, 2006 10:05:14 GMT 10
Well.. then Im an outkast. I can perform AND write. ;D LOLs But I much prefer to write. I think it takes a great deal of strength to face an audience night after night. Id much rather just be self indulgent and forget the audience and play with the musos. The musos are the true storytellers. Punters scare me anyway.. staring at the stage and all that LOL
Yes - your opinion (as the writer) will always invade - as will your perspective. But, as people have been saying: the subject of the article has a story to tell, and its up to the writer to convey that message in words (not musically). If the writer can not - theyre merely being self indulgent with a massive jack up their arse. pfft to them. We (as the readers) dont care about the writers (i certainly dont care about myself hehe) - we care about the subject.
Its a great comp. *starts hunting thru jazz articles
|
|
|
|
Post by Kenny on Aug 4, 2006 10:21:26 GMT 10
its up to the writer to convey that message in words (not musically). If the writer can not - theyre merely being self indulgent with a massive jack up their arse. pfft to them. Great. Just what I needed. Another thread about Stanley Crouch. |
|
|
|
Post by timothystevens on Aug 4, 2006 10:38:18 GMT 10
I also wonder about the judging panel. I entered last year and only found out the judges names when I asked after closing date. Had I known the name of one of the judges, I would not have bothered. Goodness, who are the judges for an Australian competition on jazz writing? The mind boggles. |
|
|
|
Post by Kenny on Aug 4, 2006 10:42:09 GMT 10
Goodness, who are the judges for an Australian competition on jazz writing? The mind boggles. In answer to my query, Miriam told me that last year the judges were John Pochee, Allan Browne and John Clare. I won't be entering this year, but I'm still curious about who'll be doing the judging. |
|
