-
Anyone else not sold at all on the new Dirty Projectors album?
Here's my take: http://24hourpartypooper.blogspot.com/2007/09/so-goes-nation.html -
i'm sold
-
Saw 'em live and left midway through their set. And I never do that to a band. While outside the club, one of the guys from Vampire Weekend tried to convince me to go back inside and give them another chance. That didn't work.
Or to put it another way, I haven't had such a strong negative reaction to a critically acclaimed album since Joanna Newsom's Ys. -
I love it and them (the DPs), but Vampire Weekend? YEOWCH!
-
And Gordon, I think you think that you maybe are misrepresenting the project, which you seem to find opportunistic and I find purely revelatory. I like the idea--quite common in hip-hop--of using someone else's ideas as a foundation to further explore some artistic exploration of your own. I don't see anything wrong with it. On a side note, I once recorded a piano-and-me tribute to Neutral Milk Hotel which shall remain unreleased, but it was really fun to do. Also, I can't find the tape I did it on.
-
yeah i dont dislike it because its a black flag covers album. i just dislike it because i dislike the dirty projectors in general.
-
hey 24hourpartypooper.
i do not understand the main criticism you are making. is it this?
"So what Longstreth has done is use music from artists most of his audience is unlikely to have heard and, however loosely, align it with a group that is almost universally respected and admired, if almost totally unfamiliar to his target." -
the thing me and my friends agree on is that they are spectacular live, but listening to them is a bit like coming up against a brick wall.
-
24.....
While, I am not a big fan of the new album....the George Dub-a-ya/ 9-11 parallel seems a little harsh.
Breaking down your argument to its* most basic level (you drew many more strings than this)....a dude tried to get attention and gain credibility for his stuff by using something meaningful in the collective memory. It seems like you do the same thing by using 9/11 to add power to your argument that the dude made a shit move.
I mean, I'm not trying to insult you personally. I'm just saying...many artist use many ways to get attention and it usually bastardizes the memory of something. So, if it was a PR move...way to go. Dude got attention for his art. That's the struggle right? Especially now....there's a zillion records....but you (and I) listened to the Dirty Projectors....
Next Record: Released as the Ole' Dirty Projectors....a from memory rendition of Return to the 36 Chambers
*can't believe I got caught...I still catch myself on their and they're all the time. -
Hey guys. Thanks for the comments! I really didn't think anyone read anything that was posted here but, obviously, people do.
To answer everyone's question about what my main argument was, it's this:
The moral underpinnings of George Bush's White House and Dirty Projectors Rise Above are identical. They both work via the exploitation of an audiences fuzzy memory (or no memory) and are, in reality, only marginally authentically aligned with the very thing they are exploiting.
The appropriation of musical styles, etc is, obviously, nothing new but Longstreth does not create anything new from his appropriations. Rise Above hides behind what it has appropriated.
Gotten publicity? Sure. But so what? I'm talking about art not marketing. Sure there's zillions of albums out every year but the fact that this one is so utterly exploitative, yet has garnered almost universal praise, is the reason I chose to write about it.
-
"Utterly exploitative"? Really? Is the band going all out to hide behind this as a gimmick, without putting any art whatsoever into the project? I don't think so, not at all. Black Flag is a creative device, a spur toward something else, sure, but Longstreth, love him or hate him, is one of the most unique, hardly classifiable musicians currently working! I mean c'mon, you don't need to have even the slightest familiarity with Damaged to enjoy this record. You can, however, use "punk" music (or some purer-than-pure exemplar of its righteousness, etc.) as a reason to take swipes at it, but is that the best use of time?
Comparing the two works, as if this was a "cover album" (which clearly, it's not) is setting up a straw man, plain and simple. Longstreth doesn't create anything new? That's wholly, patently, false! I mean, the music is 100% new!
I mean, I see the vague point you're driving at, but I think you're WAY overshooting here, trying to make an interesting argument out of a really vague and tenuous connection.
"Moral underpinnings" identical between a) a self-conscious art project and b) an ideologically/politically-driven manipulation of voter sympathies by the circulation of iconic imagery related to a terrorist attack? Yikes. The more I think about it and type about it, the very basis on which you found this piece is completely flawed and reversed! -
Yeah, this is specious reasoning hyped up with haughty FOX News-style contempt. When you start saying things like "garnered almost universal praise" about a record from a basement band that hasn't even been reviewed by allmusicguide, nevermind Rolling Stone, you sound ridiculous; sentences like "It cannot be the case that those familiar with Damaged will find Rise Above a worthy companion" engage bizarre, sheltered logic.
I could see calling bullshit on the whole "This is what I think Damaged sounds like, from my memory" aspect of the story. (Unfortunately, without internal Dirty Projectors office memos, that's something only Longstreth and his collaborators could confirm/deny.) And, as Eric said, you could certainly make valid punk/not-punk arguments, though those would largely be irrelevant to just about everyone on the planet. But even as a covers album, how is it any more exploitive than any other covers album? Petra Haden's Who Sell Out, or Carla Bozulich's Red-Headed Stranger, or Booker T's McElmore Avenue (Was Booker T exploiting The Beatles? Aw, poor Beatles.)? Or any cover song, for that matter? No one's assuming Rise Above -- it's not even called Damaged -- is anything but Longstreth's own musical tangent. It certainly acknowledges its predecessor. It wasn't built to supersede Damaged. There's no snake-oil hucksterism at work. Any kid can go buy (or download) Damaged and hear the difference for themselves.
You know what might make for a pretty interesting record? Britney Spears' Damaged. Shit would pop.
Also, there's nothing on this record that sounds remotely identical to the other mbaqanga and mbabe music you mention. The guitar work might occasionally be very loosely reminiscent, but not certainly not to the extent that Longstreth's former bandmate and roomate, Vampire Weekend's Ezra Koenig's is. It does employ vocal harmonies! But they're totally, totally different. I'd love for you to dig up some side-by-sides that support your "so much so."
Also, again: The Dirty Projectors aren't using Damaged to actually kill anyone. Not that I know of, at least. If you're going to go over the top in such a ridiculous fashion -- Your article could be an insult to anyone living in the real world! -- at least make it funny.
BTW "it's" = "it is." "Its" = a possessive.
-
I like the Dirty Projectors. They make good music, and listening to it makes me happy.
-
Fuck you, Matt Picasso. Oh wait just kidding.
-
no seriously fuck picasso. dude called me at like midnight the other night just to tell me how ugly i was.
-
"Utterly exploitative"? Really? Is the band going all out to hide behind this as a gimmick, without putting any art whatsoever into the project?
Eric, I meant it's exploitative of its audience.
I mean c'mon, you don't need to have even the slightest familiarity with Damaged to enjoy this record.
Agreed, 100%!
There's no snake-oil hucksterism at work.
Disagreed, 100%!
You can, however, use "punk" music (or some purer-than-pure exemplar of its righteousness, etc.) as a reason to take swipes at it, but is that the best use of time?
That wasn't my intention at all.
Comparing the two works, as if this was a "cover album" (which clearly, it's not) is setting up a straw man, plain and simple.
I wasn't doing that either.
Fox news style contempt? No, not really. BUT...
sentences like "It cannot be the case that those familiar with Damaged will find Rise Above a worthy companion" engage bizarre, sheltered logic.
You have a point here. I should really change it to say "It does not seem likely the case..."
BTW, EricMarathonPacks, because of this thread I went and read a bunch of you blog and I really, really like it. I even like your take on Rise Above (even though I disagree, obviously
)
BTW "it's" = "it is." "Its" = a possessive.
Yep, you're right. Congratulations.
-
J Hoas:
When you start saying things like "garnered almost universal praise" about a record from a basement band that hasn't even been reviewed by allmusicguide, nevermind Rolling Stone, you sound ridiculous;
Um, do Rolling Stone and AllMusicGuide exist in our little indie universe? That was the "universe" I was speaking of.
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- All Discussions3,267
- General2,523
- Band Promotion217
- Blog Promotion259
- MP3 Blog Tips148
- MP3 Blog Tools120
- Private Messages0