Tim...

[gator]

Of course opinion is influenced by aesthetic - how could it not? None of us are omniscient. My own opinion is shaped by my aesthetic(or lack thereof) and I find that as open hearted as one tries to be - you are positioned somewhere between your gut reactions(if any), your knowledge and expertise(if any..see article that kicked off this discussion),and your considerations toward the music of others - and that shapes your opinion.
I dont think you are an exception to this Tim, and I believe that is a very good thing, because your honest and rigorous enquiry into the music juxtaposes with some strong views aesthetically.
Most importantly you engage in an analytical approach rather than just commentate, which is a rare thing in any review these days(and difficult to do).
There is often an assumption that the aesthetic that is 'perceived' in ones own music completely dictates the mode by which one listens to the music of others.. I consider that to be an artistic agenda which while it shapes ones perception is hopefully a component of a more global aesthetic when dealing with the music of others.
For those critics of musicians who review the music of others, its absurd to pretend that musicians dont review the music and playing of others as a matter of course. Try putting it on paper and having it subjected to that same scrutiny from your colleagues..

[cartman]

Tim dude do u like ever write bout stuff u think is totally cool? i havent read anything u reviewed & when guys here tlak about ur reviews its like they think u only say bad stuff. is that true or are they totally gay? if i read ur reviews anyways could i even understand what you said dude?

[timothystevens]

See for yourself.

www.mca.org.au/index.php?id=79

[mim]

Yes, I see what you mean Tim, I think conflict of interest is probably a term often used incorrectly. I was just referring to the likelihood of a knowledgeable jazz writer having some kind of a relationship, professional or otherwise, with people about whom they would have opportunity to write. Not whether it makes any difference to the writing itself, or to how a piece is perceived by others. Which I suppose are the real issues. And they may be non-issues with a lot of writers.

[vickibonet]

Such an interesting thread. Writing about music for me is usually motivated by music I love. I wouldn't be bothered spending a lot of time on music that I didn't really connect with for an audience wider than a small community forum!

As a 'reporter' on music festivals it has always been a dilemma for me, if I don't enjoy someone's work , why would I bother to write about it? If I didn't enjoy it, I'd probably get up and leave the room or whinge on OJF. My intention in writing about music is to help other people to hear it and hopefully enjoy it as much as I do.

If you really are 'critiquing' to add value to the art form, that is another matter, but many writers who cover jazz don't seem to have the opportunity and space to do that in popular publications these days and that's something to whinge about.

[alimcg]

Now that I've read the review, I can't see that there really be much fuss about it. It seems a well written, carefully thought-out, fair, and honest review. I know a few, but not all, of the musicians involved in those two albums, and I think it would be fair to say that those guys would all welcome intelligent debate on the style and substance of their work.

From my reading of the review, it appears that Tim is making no huge stance on the style of the work, but has a well-made argument around the substance. Seems fair to me. I think it is hard to write fairly about something when you have a clear like or dislike for the style, but Tim overcomes any such problem by writing eloquently about the substance of the work, avoiding prejudiced judgements or exaggerated exclamtions (or proclomations as we sometimes read) regarding style.

The nature of his writing in this instance would in itself negate to a degree any perception of a conflict of interest, and I imagine most people reading such a review would already have some sense of who Tim is, who the musicians are, and the relationship between them all.

Tim's review is in clear contrast to the "worst jazz-writing ever" thread, where we are bombarded with poorly used metaphors and analogies that poorly disguise the author's lack of understanding of the style and substance of the work. Lazy writing and impenetrable rhetoric is of no help to the music or our community.

[jazzwife]

The problem with Tim's reviews is not their honesty or conflict of interest - it's that they are poorly written. In what seems to be an attempt to appear learned and cerebral, Tim masks simple ideas with very long sentences and pompous vocabulary. He seems to want to tell us more about his own knowledge and thoughtfulness than the actual recording in question. Say what you think Tim but for god's sake do it with clarity, brevity and perhaps even a touch of humility.

[alimcg]

what a lovely first post jazzwife...

[glean]

disagree jazzwife....... i think tim writes pretty well & has a real honest approach....... its refreshing in todays world........ i think his reivews are worth the trouble hes taken to write them & worth reading too.......... tho i would have been much meaner myself

[ironguts]

lets face it, you're better off listening to music than reading about it. The best spot for opinions is where they came from.

this post just got rammed in my arse!

[jazzer]

Glint wrote: "disagree jazzwife....... i think tim writes pretty well & has a real honest approach....... its refreshing in todays world........ i think his reivews are worth the trouble hes taken to write them & worth reading too.......... tho i would have been much meaner myself "

I think that really is funny. A post supporting good writing that is so badly written!!!!! No capitals," reivews" "hes" "tho"

You may have been much meaner, but perhaps you could make an effort to actually use the written word properly if you would like to be listened to. This argument is all about the 'written' word. There is an art form to good writing, and jazzwife hit the nail on the head. Poorly written, obviously subjective music reviews serve one purpose; the elevation of the writers ego. That is the cold hard truth. The writer may try to hide behind bad prose, but thats what is often going on. Music exists because it is not always easily defined by language, and it flourishes in its diversity. Therefore, James Morrison gives many people tremendous amounts of joy, while most people have never heard of Kenny Wheeler. Do we just constantly assume people are stupid? Uncultured? When James and Joe put there heart and soul into their music, and people respond to it, is it ok for Tim to denigrate that on purely musical terms? Whether Tim likes or dislikes a type of music is purely his point of view, and therefore not to be treated as "lore". The fact is that a bad review IS hurtful. It does not matter who you are. We all seek to be appreciated and 'liked'. Tims 'bad' reviews will hurt Sam, Joe ,James, Peter. That is a fact. It is however , only one biased point of view, even if it is informed with a tremendous amount of knowledge. Music speaks to people from the heart, not just the brain.

[ironguts]

sob sob, is no one allowed to be critical now, and as for bad riting on here, fuck off.

soft soft soft.

there will always be agendas and sus opinions, espesh in this industri,
lets face it, not many people actually know much anyhow, at least Tim knows some shit

[andrewh]

jazzer said:

Glint wrote: "disagree jazzwife....... i think tim writes pretty well & has a real honest approach....... its refreshing in todays world........ i think his reivews are worth the trouble hes taken to write them & worth reading too.......... tho i would have been much meaner myself "

I think that really is funny. A post supporting good writing that is so badly written!!!!! No capitals," reivews" "hes" "tho"

....

jazzer said:

When James and Joe put there heart and soul into their music

Pot, meet kettle.

[ironguts]

I think the music reflects their efforts fabulously.

[captain]

troll troll troll troll troll. Don't bite Tim.