On Tue, 3 Feb 2004, Thomas D. Cox, Jr. wrote:
> my conclusion that he doesnt deserve the hype is just that, my > opinion. the list of artists i could point out that i think > rightfully deserve some hype is also my opinion. however, i wasnt > the person who designed that nice sticker thats on the matt dear > album that says "4 stars - rolling stone". obviously someone is > miscontruing this endorsement as being meaningful, and that really > only serves to further undermine the credibility of people who are > actually into this music who dont say the same thing about the > album. fair enough. but what about the MASSES of people who DO have good things to say about the album? arent you undermining THEIR opinion at the same time? by the way, ironicly, i had a conversation a couple weeks ago with derrick may and he said he likes the ghostly stuff. not sure his thoughts specifly on matthews work, but i just found it ironic that the topic (which shouldve been changed many replies ago) has come full circle. youre whole argument is reminding me of myself, working at recordtime, when the first daft punk lp came out. i friggin HATED it with a passion. then, one day, claude young and shake came in and told me i was crazy. at that point, i took another listen (mostly because they defied my argument....which was coming from almost exactly the same stance youre coming from). still didnt like most of it. over the years, ive grown to love almost all of it and would still play alot of it out to this day. point being, i didnt know sh*t back then, apparently. all i know, is i never took the same argument again. i started to listen to things that had this much controversy to it completely before i started judging it. > you say its good, you have rolling stone behind you. i say > its not, i have a bunch of people whose knowledge of this music > drowns RS's. to the uninitiated, your case will outweight mine > because they know what RS is. this perception can only be a bad > thing, because perception can ultimately become reality. some kid > who might otherwise be into someone like kenny larkin or kdj or > derrick may if he heard them might intead check out matt dear > instead and from that point on his perception of "detroit techno" > will be skewed. sounds to me like your perception is already skewed. and you dislike matthews stuff for political reasons. >> but once again, i have to ask why do you care? its rolling >> stone! > > i care because RS hits more readers per month than any 313 list or > techno related mag is going to hit in any few years combined. > ok... BUT do you really think that everyone who gets the magazine, reads EVERY review? i dont think its readers would read the review and then say "oh! so THIS is what that detroit techno stuff everyones been talkin about for so long is all about!" i think the decision from ghostly to put that on its sticker was mainly to point out "wow! a mainstream media publication took notice!" i think thats pretty cool acctually. besides, i didnt read any of these personally, so i have no proof.... but im willing to bet $20 on each release that either spin or rolling stone reviewed carl craig's "more songs about...." and/or "designer music vol 1." and last time i checked, my man carl is pretty black. > >you might be right, but i highly doubt that kenny sent a copy to > rolling > >stone for them to review in the first place. maybe rolling stone > should be > >going out and buying the moodymann record and reviewing it on > their own, > >but thats rolling stones fault. > > here's exactly my point, boiled down to its essence: rolling stone > doesnt go out to find a moodymann record because theyre clueless > racists. it is these clueless racists who are beaming their > misinformed opinions into the minds of tons of kids who might > otherwise discover better techno if RS was more responsible. and > ghostly/spectral chooses to put a sticker on their record showing > how great the ignorant racist white media likes their record. this > is all bad news. derrick desiring to reach people with a better > rounded version of what detroit techno is through the festival is > a good thing. he's not ignorant of matt dear, didnt he play the > festival this past year? however he is not the end all be all of > detroit techno. and derrick may wants to take initiative to make > sure people can still get the real deal from somewhere, namely the > festival. > ui didnt read the whole derrick may arguments stated in previous posts, so i have no insight to the last part of your statement, but as for the first part..... you can say alot about the writers at rolling stone, but saying theyre racists having not had an actual event of out and out racism thrown in your face from them, is just making your whole argument even sillier. > >if you want them to review it so bad, send > >em a copy, include your email address, and see what they say > about it > >afterwards. > > i dont feel like its my responsibility to put a record into the > hands of someone who wouldnt know what to do with it. id prefer RS > just shut their mouths instead of trying to overhype something > that really isnt that exceptional. well, then i guess im saying prefer you shut yours, instead of discrediting something that alot of credible as well as uncredible people say is groundbreaking and yes, innovative. if you dont get it, you dont get it. but basicly youre saying the record is awful, and youre wrong. period. like i think i stated before, you can dislike something and respect it at the same time. > > >fair enough.... but wtf do YOU know? wtf do *I* know?? it sounds > more > >like your not liking his music even more, because some > publications took > >notice and like his stuff. thats a pretty crappy chip to have on > your > >shoulder. > > i was underwhelmed by all his music i heard before this (first > spectral 12" being the exception, and i didnt like it enough to > buy it). now that he's getting props for average music it makes me > mad for sure, mainly because of the reasons that more deserving > people are being overlooked. right, but most of the people you have stated are being overlooked probably dont want the attention or press in the first place, or they wouldve sent it to RS to get reviewed. and if it really was exceptional (as well as underground, and presented to them in a professional manner), they would probably mention it somehow. but i highly doubt its racially motivated. > > >i dont know. look at it this way, i guess.... wether you like his > music > >or not is up to you. but, i feel that anything coming from > detroit that is > >of a certain quality getting good media coverage, can only help > the > >artists in detroit who havent gotten the attention they deserve. > >cant something be said for supportting an artist? > > if there wasnt any racism in the world, i would wholeheartedly > agree with you. unfortunately, the reality is that more deserving > black artists are getting no press because they dont fit into > major music label and media's perception that all black people > should either be thug emcees or "neo soul" crooners. hyping > another white artist isnt going to help things. damn... i was right. that chip on your shoulder must really slow you down. whew. derek.
