To my awareness there has only been one book that has dealt exclusively with
Detroit techno. That is Dan Sicko's 'Techno Rebels'.
There are a handful of music or recording guides on the topic, but the only
other major book I know of that has discussed Detroit techno at length is
More Brilliant than the Sun By Kodwo Eshun.
Dan obviously has a long and direct contact with the scene. He takes a
historical, just the facts approach and is especially strong on the origins.
I was so glad to see this book come out for several reasons. One is that
there actually _exists_ a book about this music. It's so easy for things to
be
forgotten with the passing of time. Another reason is that I think many
people don't know the true story and this book, in its no-nonsense approach,
is the simplest way to set the record straight. Despite the books clarity,
there are still people who have read it, and think that it is 'just' a book
about Detroit's post-disco scene, or that it should have covered more on
'goa trance'. [see amazon.com customer reviews]
Sure, the book doesn't talk much about techno's later development in Europe
and elsewhere, but I think that is the book's strength. There will be plenty
of other people out there who will write those stories. The book doesn't
really talk much about the equipment and techniques. Same again.
The other thing we might want a music book to write about is the music's
structure and what it is like to listen to. Well, this is the difficult one,
isn't it?
I'm reminded here of something Brian Eno (I think) said. It was 'writing
about
music is like dancing about architecture'. Also, Wittgenstein said 'of that
which we cannot speak, we must pass over in silence'.
A moments reflection on this topic reveals to me that the best way to get an
idea of what the music is like is to actually listen to it, of course. That,
by the way, is not to say that reading about it is fundamentally flawed, or
not useful or desirable, just secondary in many cases to careful and
repeated listening.
Some obvious examples when we need writing about music is with reviews, when
we are trying to decide what to buy, when we are trying to explain to people
unfamiliar with the music, the kind of reasons we are on this list, or
perhaps when we are trying to make a more permanent record for the purposes
of history, as in Dan Sicko's case.
Since most (but not all) of the recordings are readily available, it makes
sense in the case of Techno Rebels to put in a good discography and leave it
at that.
Kodwo Eshun's book is very different, on the other hand. The subject matter
is mostly about D'n'B, dub, hip-hop, jazz, with Detroit techno one style
among many. I got excited about this book because it brought together a lot
of music, primarily black music, that I was really into.
[I'll talk about this book a little here, but forgive me, my copy is in
another country right now.]
In the 1st chapter Kodwo says something about most dance music journalism
being a mean and insubstantial list of names, labels and DJ charts. I tend
to agree. He goes to a kind of opposite extreme to Dan's book, I think
attempting to recreate the experience of listening in words. He also coins a
whole lot of new scientific sounding compound words (e.g.
technorhythmachine) and seems to be aligned with postmodern methods of
analysis. This, at least for me, is fun to read to a certain extent, but I
think it runs into the problems that are hinted at in Eno and Wittgenstein's
thoughts.
Jared Wilson wrote:
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2000 10:21 PM
Subject: Re: [313] UR in Europe
Also check out More Brilliant than the Sun By Kodwo Eshun. I would say
a
much more sophisticated and postmodern view of techno, electro, jungle,
etc.
Has an excellent section on UR. I would recommend it over Techno
Rebels.
Well, maybe postmodernism is more sophisticated in a way, but sometimes I
think at the expense of clarity and common sense.
A few months ago I read 'Fashionable Nonsense: Postmodern Intellectuals
Abuse of Science' by Sokal and Bricmont. I regard this as absolutely
essential reading to anyone interested in postmodernism. In this book a
number of leading postmodernists (Lacan, Baudrillard, Deleuze, Virilio, etc)
are roundly criticized for the following:
1) Holding forth at length on scientific theories about which one has, at
best an exceedingly hazy idea. The most common tactic is to use scientific
(or pseudo-scientific) terminology without bothering much much about what
the words actually mean.
2) Importing concepts from the natural sciences into the humanities or
social sciences without giving the slightest conceptual or empirical
justification...
3) Displaying a superficial erudition by shamelessly throwing around
technical terms in a context where they are completely irrelevant...
4) Manipulating phrases and sentences that are, in fact, meaningless.
I think Eshun is guilty of at least a few of these failures. The only way
out then is to say that his
