Pavement - Things Get Old

  I love Pavement, I grew up with their records, I idolized them. My friend once said it best, “What I like about Pavement is that they seem to know me better than I know myself.” As silly as that seems given SM’s obtuse lyrics, that ambiguous Pavement energy, a mixture of cocksmanship, pranksterism, nostalgia, and even a bit of darkness, seemed to resonate with my youth more than most of the bands out at the time. Whereas the Strokes and the White Stripes served straight up retro revival for us too young to remember their forebearers, Pavement was smarter, more nuanced. I felt like they were actually like us, full of anarchic energy as well as a smart-ass knowing. They were too cool to be cool, too smart to be hip, but in the margins they could be incredibly affecting.
  I first heard heard Slanted and Enchanted around 2001, only months after they’d broken up. They were my first introduction to the concept of indie rock and remain my ideal of the form, so much so that I internalized their failures as successes. I even had the notion that me and my smart-ass rock friends could make it just by being our smart ass selves, even while living in the middle of nowhere Indiana, hanging on the idea that someone out there (possibly Thurston Moore) would inexplicably find us and launch us into semi-stardom. A decade of fandom later I’ve become older and wiser. I’ve read Perfect Sound forever, watched the Slow Century, watched my contemporaries rise and fall, played in bands of my own and been thoroughly demystified of the glamour of independent music, or hell, the glamour of music in general. No love lost really, in fact in the place of my youthful idealism is a real love (I hope) for the music that sountracked my maturation and a more nuanced perspective on how bands and the music industry in general work. And after all these year, I still love SM, Spiral Stairs, Nast, Ibold, Westy and Young. But at the ripe old age of 24, and even though I never saw them the first time around, I am getting my first dose of reunion tour blues.
  Malkmus has been openly ambivalent about this reunion. First there was the GQ piece with Chuck Klosterman who, like Malkmus, cares more about sports than music these days and is about just as uninterested in Pavement. Then there was a more exploitative piece in Mojo featuring the whole band, another non plussed SM, and some sad moments when Kannenberg lets on how much more the band means to him than Malkmus. Put together with Perfect Sound Foerever and you can pretty much get the picture: Malkmus is kinda a dick and kinda aware of that, the rest of the band are kinda not dicks but maybe kinda not as talented and no one in the band really wants to talk about it. So my expectations for this Pitchfork performance were kinda secretly not so high, despite my really wanting them to be.
  I only went to one day of the festival this year, for money reasons and due to my work schedule. So many of my old pitchfork pals didn’t go at all, having either moved away, moved on, or completely lost interest. Whereas in the past the fest had always seemed like a sort of like a homecoming or gathering of a disparate community, this year everyone looked unfamiliar. I tried to summon the spirit, but it was hot, the sound was often shitty, there was no 312, and everyone looked if not young than childish, as if some shift into real adulthood had occurred unnoticed in my life this past year and I was just now realizing it. I wasn’t hating on anyone, my worst criticism of the day was launched Washed Out, saying they were a little boring. Beach House put on a great set, Major Lazer made me dance, Big Boi sounded good while I waited for Pavement in the setting sun. I was having a reasonably good time. And then the sun went down and Pavement sauntered on.
  And the set was, well actually quite good. The sound was awful for half the songs (the lighter half), the guys were so completely unenthused to be there it hurt, there were about 5 false starts, and the crowd was exhausted as fuck and pretty sick of standing face to armpit in the hot sun waiting for them to play. And yet, somehow, it was worth it. When the band was on, they delivered. There were several moments were I thought they’d fall apart but they’d swing back into cohesion, making the high points matter so much more. They played the songs faithfully but changed them up enough to make them sound if not new, then at least like living songs. It wasn’t slike the Slint show, where they played note for note but with no energy or spontaneity. It was by all metrics a real Pavement show. Compared to the footage from their last show before their breakup, maybe even a really good Pavement show. And since this will probably be the only Pavement show I ever see, I’m glad for that much.
  Perhaps it was disappointing for some. To be honest, I didn’t walk away in a blissful haze, and I don’t think Pitchfork fest has ever had such an anticlimactic end: no encore, no announcement, everyone just slowly walked out a little puzzled. And maybe I am so prematurely old, so jaded, expectations so low and so willing to forgive that I couldn't actually be disappointed. But Silence Kit killed, and it killed in that sad longing way it did when I first heard it. And when Malkmus replaced “shitty-life” for city-life the second time, instead of feeling sapped or slighted I kinda felt on the same page with him. It was unexpected and cathartic, and it revealed something I love about Pavement that no one talks about that much, that they’re a kinda dark, depressing little act when you get down to it. So many of their best songs are colored with loneliness, misanthropy, loss, anger, bitterness. It’s by far not what this band is about, but it’s all there. There were definitely more uplifting highlights of the show: Conduit for Sale, Trigger Cut, Frontwards, Spiral Stairs’ songs actually sounding really good to me for the first time maybe ever. But for all their attempts and all their thank-yous and all their practice (really, they sounded pretty tight), they couldn’t put on a convincing face of gratitude, they couldn't fool any of us into thinking that they were at all as excited to be there as we were to see them. Whatever wasn’t working for them before is still not working. But they were themselves, they played well together, and there were enough moments where they looked like they might actually be really enjoying the music they were playing, if not the people they were playing it with.
  And I think it was all very fitting. The era that birthed Pavement is clearly over, Pavement as a living entity is clearly over. They sounded out of context, out of place, and out of style at the fest. They aren’t some returning heroes getting their long lost due from a generation that finally “get’s them.” Although, I would have loved for them to say “hey kids, you Pavement fans are alright, I’m glad you still exist” But they did their job and they tried hard for us, for the kids who weren’t there the first time around, or maybe it was for our money. Who cares? I got to see Pavement, the real deal, in all their hapless glory. They gave me an unrepeatable performance, they surprised me, and I still feel like those songs I’d heard a million times meant as much to me now as they did ten years ago.

Take off those clothes, you're one of them.

    I'm excited to see that the Nitsuh Abebe has his own column over at p4k.  I've been following his excellent and always thoughtful blog, A Grammar for a couple weeks now so I'm excited to see  his missives in a more well trafficked site. (Although, are p4k columns really read that often?)  On his first outing he compares Lady Gaga and Joanna Newsome while taking on the neurotic self conscious politics of cool in the indiesphere.  Definitely worth a read if you even remotely care about any of the above topics.  I'm still very interested in this debate about the politics of who we find clever or innovative and who we find trite or escapist, but it's personally losing it's relevancy in my day to day life.  Maybe my circles have changed but it's not often I find myself in a place where I'm actually embarassed to admit my fondness for something because of hip politics.  Interning at Thrill Jockey certainly presents those moments, but the mocking tone there is more like dudes at a bar talking about basketball players than some deleted scene from High Fidelity.

    It's hard to really spot a time or place in my life where I ever really felt threatened by other people's tastes.  High School had it's moments, but the cool-indie-rock-kid crowd was small and pretty self consciously not very hip and most of them were my friends and bandmates.  I felt the war for what's cool was always being fought online or in New York or some other place where I had no voice.  Even if I really cared (and I did) about the micro trends of New York, it was  so beyond my control or influence, a world that only meant something because I decided it did.  And in small ways it still does, but the ground level arguments about what's hot and what's not never seemed to be as crucial or as mean spirited as they did online.  Actually watching people get riled up and pissy with each other over personal tastes is not usually all that fun or productive.  As much as I like a good spirited debate, once someone get's smug or self important or just plain condescending, I'm usually out.  And living in a place as fractured and contentious as Chicago, I feel like it's more beneficial to be open minded and curious than to have an entrenched viewpoint.  If there's something dilettantish about that, I don't see why that's a particular problem, what's a scene without enough people who are willing or naive enough to try to walk in as many circles as they can?  As long as your interest is genuine, what do you have to worry about?
    I'm not saying this just because I want everyone to be friendly and pat each other on the back.  No, if anything we need to expect more from performers than to just pick a sound and stick to it.  If bands want to narrow their focus and dig deep into a sound (The Walkmen) that's totally credible, enjoyable and rewarding.  But bands who tap into more material, who are taking more risks and seeking out different ways of making music are essential to "the fringe" or whatever you want to call it.  This is why very good bands who make very enjoyable and impressive albums (Surfer Blood, Real Estate, Smith Westerns) can ultimately be a letdown when compared to their influences.  They don't seem to mean much?  I'm on the fence here.  Not every band should straddle themselves with the expectations of recreating music or being utter visionaries and I'm willing to look for originality and fresh ideas from bands who don't tout themselves as THE NEXT THING.  But I agree with Abebe, if you're going to wear your tastes as a merit badge of adventurousness, then I don't see the point in mocking bands for their misadventures. 
    If that makes a lick of sense.  There's also a refreshing Liars interview up and it's good to hear these guys in in top form once again.  A HL review is in the pipeline.

  

Snap Judgements

So I took a sick day and decided to vegetate around the house while the -10 windchill made everyone else miserable. To pass the time I decided to listen to some of the Pfork Best New Music picks I haven't yet heard and write some initial thoughts. The rule was one or two sentences a song. Here's what I found:

Real Estate-S/T
1. Like this a lot, not too overdone
2. A little plodding by second track
3. So the first track is uptempo for this band. Still like the tone and aesthetic, 'cept for the drums. This is somewhere between slow Pavement and early Shins.
4. But still pretty winning. Damn guys.
5. Oh, I get it, they don't have a drummer. I Like Springsteen's Atlantic City better.
6. Oooh. They do wrangle maximum emotion out of minimal technical skill. Not a slight.
7. Meh.
8. This has a cool blossoming Jim O'rourke style beginning. Yeah, this one's good. Little long though.
9. Ok guys, where's your jam switch? It's time to find it and turn it off. Also, this does not sound like a beach being rocked.
10. Like the song, still hate that drum sound though, and the voice is getting to me. Feel a little underwhelmed.

Alright, the album does have a cohesive sound, and is pretty well sequenced. And there is something romantic about coming back to your hometown and making an album with your old friends. Creating romance for a place you once thought was miserable, I can get behind that. But there's a way better album that does the same thing, and it's Spoon's Girls Can Tell. And as far as hazy pop albums, do we really need another one this year?

Bear in Heaven-Beast Rest Fourth Mouth
1. Bongos, why did it have to be bongos? Dude's voice has that thing that makes it sound thin with reverb, like the guy from Band of Horses or Getty Lee.
2. Pheonix + Isaac Brock's guitar. You didn't work for that chorus. Who mixed this?
3. This could be a lot better.
4. Wait, is this Rush?
5. Ok, so it's like Wire without the tension or restraint. Truly bored.
6. Favorite song so far, much simpler and economical. Ok, you earned that crescendo.
7. Bored.
8. Ok, so this album has an admittedly impressive sound. Good sound design that is, meticulous textures, and a dedication to being weird.
9. But even that awesome drum track is falling flat. Not enough room to breath.  Sounds like a dull headache, in space.
10. This album makes me itchy.

Ok, so amazing chops, very adventurous band. But man that sound is dense, too much future shock. Maybe exactly the opposite of Real Estate. I prefer Real Estate.

Skipping the Hyperdum comp cuz reviewing comps aint fun.  Ah yes...

Fuck Buttons-Tarot Sport
1. Sweet.
2. Sweet.
3. Awesome. Oh yeah.
4. Still really awesome.
5. These guys can do whatever they want with sound. My only complaint about Fuck Buttons is that normal life doesn't allow nearly enough proper contexts for their music. It takes a lot out of you.
6. Little too close to My Girls in the intro. My ears are a little fatigued.
7. The Fuck Buttons make me wish I was at a rave.

More dense than the first album, which I might actually like a bit more. More holy-shit moments on this one though. Listening casually while writing sentence length reviews is not how you should listen to this album.

Skipping Atlas Sound becuase I've already heard it and like it. Skipping Mountain Goats because I truly dislike them.  Oh what's this, a new Beck single?  Oh chillwave, this is gonna be quick...

Neon Indian-Psychic Chasms
1. Alright, cool intro
2. Ok, I'm on board.
3. Quirkier and more fun than the other so called "chillwave" or whatever, stuff like Memory Tapes or Washed Out.
4. Tape phasing, glad hipsters decided to save you.
5. Ah, this is the low budget Daft Punk part.
6. Thumbs up.  High fives all around.
7. This is a great long lost GBV song title, I'm sure. Oh yeah, nice. Good job dude.
8. An arpeggiater and drum machine on tape, some vocals.
9. RIYL: Listening to Chromeo without the icky feeling of actually listening to Chromeo
10. Still on your side man.
11. But will I buy your album?

A surprise. Very fun listen, not sure of the staying power. It does have a good sense of humor and fun while not diving headlong into novelty, it remains both warm and wry. I might actually buy this.

Anomie, hyperlinks, parantheticals, commas...

   While trying to flame Amazon.com reviews which I disagreed with (a new manifestation of my misanthropic web identity), I casually tossed around the word anomie in a rebuttal to a poor review of Don Delillo's Underworld. I had to double check my sociology terms via Wikipedia to make sure I wasn't making a total ass of myself. While rereading some snippets of Durkheim, I realized how much his theories still ring true for me. Here's a lil bit:

When solidarity is organic, anomie is “impossible whenever solidary organs are sufficiently in contact or sufficiently prolonged. In effect, being contiguous, they are quickly warned, in each circumstance, of the need they have of one another, and, consequently, they have a lively and continuous sentiment of their mutual dependence. For the same reason that exchanges take place among them easily, they take place frequently, and in time the work of consolidation is achieved.”^[4] Their sensitivity to mutual needs promotes the evolution in the division of labor “because the smallest reaction can be felt from one part to another. ... they foresee and fix, in detail, the conditions of equilibrium." ^[4]"Producers, being near consumers, can easily reckon the extent of the needs to be satisfied. Equilibrium is established without any trouble and production regulates itself.”^[5]

Durkheim contrasted the condition of anomie as being the result of mechanical solidarity: "But on the contrary, if some opaque environment is interposed, then only stimuli of certain intensity can be communicated from one organ to another. Relations being rare, are not repeated enough to be determined; each time there ensues new groping. The lines of passage taken by the streams of movement cannot deepen because the streams themselves are too intermittent.”^[6] “Contact is no longer sufficient. The producer can no longer embrace the market at a glance, nor even in thought. He can no longer see its limits, since it is, so to speak limitless. Accordingly, production becomes unbridled and unregulated.”^[7]

linked from ANOMIE

   For a little bit of background, Emile Durkheim is a superstar founder of modern sociological thought. In the midst of the industrial revolution, he wrote about divisions of labor, and the above passage explains the difference between two systems: organic solidarity (think of small towns, farms, preindustrial world, or your local modern day commune) and mechanical solidarity (obvs: industrial labor, scientific management, bureaucracy, probably your first job).
   This passage is stuck in my head for a couple of reasons. To start, I was thinking that for all the possibilities and new horizons the internet presents to us, it's still completely dependent on interpersonal engagement, not just interaction but active engagement, to be at all 'organic' in it's growth. For all the brouhaha over web 2.0 (or whatever we're on now), the web is not a shining example of a self regulating structure. As the powers that be get wise, there's no reason to believe that the interwebs won't become the opaque environment Durkheim warns of.
   I'm not saying things will get all Upton Sinclair suddenly. I just know that this unwieldy and seemingly anarchic nexus of human communication is being methodically figured out by those who stand to make tons of cash or wield expansive power and influence. Which means that for all our interfacing, for all our online love-ins and congratulating, I still doubt how much more interdependent we've become. Sure, we get the feeling that our actions effect others, that the world is getting smaller. But has the balance of control shifted dramatically?
   Even forgetting the powers that be and my dire forecasts, what about the way we view each other? I think the most important point Durkheim makes, if I'm not misinterpreting him, is that mechanical solidarity doesn't just mean no fun at work. It changes the way we interact with each other on a larger scale. This system of labor encourages you to think of people as a means to an end, as a quantifiable value (known quantity to borrow disgusting business parlance). That person my be a threat or an ally or totally worthless to you given circumstances that are apt to change at any moment. And the web is full of ugly examples of this, and I don't mean gossip. At least gossip can be (and has been read) as a community maintaining exercise. I mean the constant posturing and reevaluating that something like say, oh, Pitchfork engenders. You could say that the site is a healthy and vital organ for the independent music community. But, it's not really a community driven entity. It reports and analyzes, but it doesn't open itself up to response, and deals with outside criticism in a roundabout way. It operates like old school media in that way, not always reflecting the democratic, collaborative element of the web. Hell, as Chaz pointed out, they don't even have a letter to the editor/mailbag/comment board. (and yes Chaz, this is me finally admitting you had a good point, a year late). But then again, they put on a sweet festival, and I can't really speak to the inter-workings of the site. Am I the only one who's still mystified as to how they operate? Oh, and I realize how brazenly guilty of this I am. It's one thing to talk about an art object, but to talk about people as art objects, even in praise, is actually despicable now that I think about it for more than a second.

Ok, my mistake. Fuck it, moving on.

   There's much more to the concept of anomie and to Durkheim's work that's worth knowing. It's a good counterpoint to classic Marxism (both Soviet Communism and Industrial Capitalism killed organic solidarity at every opportunity). That is to say, just because we have the means of cultural production in our hands, doesn't necessarily mean we're not all going to evil capitalists anyway. It also doesn't suddenly make us all interdependent.
   On a personal note, it's good to keep this in mind in the real world. For example, I just played a handful of shows with Abbott Smile. They seem like a blur to me now, and I'm incredibly happy and incredibly thankful for the experiences. But, if you're not careful, you can start to treat people like shit and not always realize it. Or, you start to think of this idea of an audience, like, how can we find an sympathetic audience? You can start to think of the venues, the people running them, your friends who came to see you, other bands, all as means to an end. I've tried to keep that at bay, because it does violence to just about all of my sensibilities. But there is that element to being in a band, or being in any creative endeavor, which leads to the desire for attention or recognition. Part of it is just conceit and selfishness, but part of it is that yearning for the other half of creation, the reaction, the response. And I realized the reason I envy Brooklyn bands, more popular bands, etc, is not the fame or attention. It's that they aren't working in a vacuum. What they do is responded to, debated, critiqued, sometimes appreciated, sometimes imitated. They're part of the larger cultural exchange. And, I guess that's what I want for us, and not just the band, but all of our friends who feel similarly about this. I hope that we can feel like we're in an ongoing conversation with each other.

Nigel Overreacts Again

   First, Pavement is reuniting next year. Oh shit. I don't know what to say. For some reason I want to hide even though I'm inexplicably happy and shocked and yet not shocked and then a little underwhelmed when I think of the reality of it. But what if they went into the studio? Oh shit oh shit oh shit. What the fuck am I going to do when I live in a world where Pavement is back together?

   Ok, second, anyone who hasn't read this or this, should if you're into that sort of thing. Nitsuh Adebe's passing glance at 'indie culture' is spot-on for the most part and Anna's addendum takes the debate out of the aesthetic ether and brings it into the real personal-political realm in which we live, and where most of these questions of good vs bad, twee vs hardcore, inde-cred vs indie-tastic are banged out. I had the privilege of knowing Anna during her indie years, making this an even more interesting topic. Because it's both a story about zeitgeist and personal histories.
   Everyone agrees that things have changed since those oh so distant pre 9/11 days where independent and mainstream music sat confortably on either side of the aisle. The change has been pretty massive, but it's happened rather subtle. Or maybe rather, in a herky-jerky and uneven fashion, leaving a pretty fractured music world in it's wake. Fractured, but also indelibly connected and intertextual, if I want to get all faux-academic, which I definitely do for god knows why. This is where I break from Nitsuh's argurment: that there are two warring factions. I know it's a streamlined thesis, a simple way of looking at a complex thing for a certain ease of discussion and summation. And suprisingly, he's on point. He's got a good point about indie having been a pretty uncomplicated term in England for a while. He also nails the early aughts desperate desire for propulsive and snappy guitar rock. It's easy to forget what life was like before the Strokes and the White Stripes. Which leads me to another pet project of mine: Although we think all indie roads lead back to Pavement, most roads probably lead back to the Strokes. More on that in some other post. But yes, a bunch of stylish rich kids on a major label living an impossible New York fantasy life kicked open the doors to a lot of minds. Lame but true, and also not totally lame.
   Which brings me to another much larger pastime of mine: bitching about New York. I think my major objection to Nitsuh's article is that he never mentions New York, let alone does he bitch about it. And bitching about New York or defending it has been a major topic of discussion this decade, so let's talk about it. New York has an unimpeachable music history, by far a towering meccah of cultural importance. But as many have pointed out so elequontly, New York doesn't exist anymore. That is, it is not a real place. Follow me here, CBGB's is a fashion outlet. The Village, Chelsea, SoHo, the Bowery, all impossibly priced and razed beyond recognition. Surely, history has not been totally scrubbed from the streets, but the narrative that starts there is dead, killed by gentrification or co-option or what have you. Totally inarguably dead. Brooklyn is maybe a place, but I have my doubts. Becuase I don't understand how it works. Does everyone's parent's pay their rent? Is there a 1:1 ratio of practice spaces to apartments? Does anyone have a real job? I ask these questions because from everything I see or hear, from the New York times to Pfork, Marnie Stern, to the lyrical content of Brooklyn bands themselves paints Brooklyn as fantasy world where everything and everyone is creative, vibrant, well dressed, in a band, an artist, a cloumnist, a dj, between 18 and 30. Whatever Brooklyn does is lapped up, documented, dissected, worried about, and praised. Like, this is where America's precocious navel gazing children go for life camp, and the media are their collective overbearing and exuberant parent's who force us to weigh in on every accomplishment and mishap. And the Times piece on the hipster paunch must be the watershed moment that forces a mea culpa on behalf of the media. Shit has to stop. Right? Homework assignment, someone tally up the Best New Music picks from the last two years, and see what percentage of the Americans are from New York. I took a passing glance, and it looks devastating.
   I'm not saying that New Yorker's aren't talented. Not at all, and the fact that Brooklyn's hegemony is so pervasive, just means bands will flock there, widening the pool of good music. But, there remains a serious lack of real life coming from Brooklyn. That is, most of these bands are deficient in speaking to any of the experiences of most of their fans. Either too vague and cryptic, or too ironic and overly clever.
   But enough about New York. Back to real life.
Let's talk about how we come into contact with new music these days. The Internet is the short answer, a longer answer would probably include our friends tastes, pitchfork, the New York Times, NPR, CW shows, Ipod commercials, blogs, etc. We can talk about the death of print music criticism, the dying music industry, obsolete physical medium, leaks and piracy. But what about the subtle personal shifts?
   When I was in high school, I had what is called an opinion leader, and his name was Andrew. By opinion leader, I don't mean that he made the opinions for his peer group, but he was the central source of information about music for a handful of his friends. Not only because he had good taste and intelligence, but also because he had a high speed internet connection, access to a credit card for online puchases, and a CD burner, all things I did not. I was what is called a low end technology user. A funny thing happened after I got my own computer and credit card and went to college, the balance of information and debate shifted. I had my own concurrent stream of new music and information, and began to stake out my own cultural individuality.
   I mention this because I think it's a nice little microcosm of the shift in the influence of music in social exchange. Andrew was like a record store clerk. He heard everything before you did, had access to albums you didn't, and his own opinions about what was good and bad. But like any record store owner, he was also curator to his friends and spread the gospel of good music, new and old. This was the story for a lot of kids interacting with music. There was a record store, an older brother, a cool friend, that girl you were interested in, etc. These people still exist for sure, and there will always be the guy or girl who just cares a little bit more than you, who will be more up to date. But access is more or less equal to all. This matters because it helps to obliterate time and place and the cognitive space of music culture. As Andrew deftly pointed out when talking about local music scenes, it's just as easy to have a scuzzy Philly noise rocker that actually lives in Minnesota as it is to have the Philly scene. Ok, Andrew I butchered your quote, sorry. But it's a good point.
   This is how Brooklyn exists in the minds of millions who have never been but dream about it. It is possibly even more real online and in our (my) fantasies than in physical space. Which makes the development of a local scene easier in one way, the fact that you can connect quickly and easily, and harder because why stick around your shitty town when urban escape fantasies abound. I know that people have always flocked to New York to make it. The difference now is that fantasy world is so reinforced by ubiquitous media, so much of it uncritical of the indie lifestyle, that anything outside of it irrelevant. There are exceptionms, but have you noticed how much these other scenes look identical to each other? What does this mean for independent music as a whole? Will kids chase the fantasy of bohemia and make the music of their heroes, or will they dig their heels in and say, this is where I am, this is who I am, enough with the bullshit?
   Nitsuh brings up another good point: what's at stake in taking a critical stance on an album or band. This has always been a part of the hipper than thou indie culture. But now, it's not just about taste, it's personal, it's political. You like Pains at Being Pure at Heart, fuck you, you're ruining music! You like the Black Lips, no you don't, not really, you don't actually listen to their records, fuck you, no one does. On one hand, as I get older I have the firm sense that I can listen to whatever the fuck I want more or less unapologetically.    And under the weird big tent-The Animal Collective, Deerhunter, Dan Deacon, No Age tent-this sentiment is the norm. You can like whatever, that's cool. As long as we're all cool about it, and politics of fame or influence aren't involved. But the problem is, those politics are omnipresent on the web, and to some extent, in real life.
   Consider Nathan Williams and his crimes. His biggest crime wasn't being an ass onstage, his biggest crime was being anointed by the hype-machine and not being genuflect about it. I don't mean to drag this episode out again, but I think it was one of the most interesting events this year. The scuzzy noisy rock guys (Psychedelic Horseshit, Black Lips) attacked him because he's a little spoilt bitch who can't handle his drugs. I also imagine a lot of those nice polite indie fans hated him for being such a rude little punk. And of all people, he would be the ideal mixture of the two camps Nitsuh talks about. Scuzzy, gruff, loud, noisy, on an honest to god inependent label(s), but also pop-accessible, popular, young and sorta attractive, sorta awkward. But instead, he was a mixture of the things both sides hated (so it seems), the unearned popularity, the self entitlement, the hipper than thou stance, the lack of technical proficiency, the hot chicks dancing absentmindedly at his show. And this is where I posit that the Nathan Williams Daytripping episode and subsequent breakdown (they are inseparable in my mind) act a cogent characterization of the indie world at that moment. Everything's there: the shit hot label showcase at SXSW, the hype, the token weird band from Philly with token unkempt hair that you're supposed to like, the burgeoning alcoholism, overly earnest MTV interviews, the vampirical bloggers, the insidious consumerism no one really seems to mind anymore, the awkward hip-hop fandom (and let's be honest, cool as it is, it's fucking awkward as all get out, just look at Jay-Z swaying to Grizzly Bear, awesome and awkward, which is I guess, what indie rock always kinda was).
   I watch this all and I think, this is real, this is what's really happening! The Smell, Todd P, Brooklyn, Baltimore, 'Loft Pop' are all real yes, but only for those who are actually there. For the rest of us in flyover country, they remain a distant fantasy. And yet something about the Kafkaesque spectacle of Nathan Williams failing to graciously navigate the unreal world of indie-rock hype strikes me as the unseen unheard underbelly to all this. He's was at the center of the disgusting circus, and just his ability to make people feel weird is admirable. That is, the argument about what's wrong with Wavves inevitably leads back to the argument about what's wrong with the music world that spawned him, and that's why I keep coming back to it. Also, god it's fun to talk about at parties.
   I think it's interesting that Anna has been pushed away from indie and towards Hip-Hop. Interesting because I've had my own initiation into Hip-Hop love and fascination. Interesting because lyrically speaking, Diamond District's In the Ruff has been the most relevant album I've heard (well, at least a tie with Merriweather Post Pavillion, which doesn't count cuz it's big and universal and stuff). And it hit's me that it's no longer hip-hop tourism anymore, and I feel oddly a participant. Oddly, because I know I'm outside the world of hip-hop fans and even further from street life. Then again, maybe not. I dunno. Maybe it's just a bit closer to my life than the aesthetic aloofness, niceness, and/or genre exercises of indie music.

The fuck happened to P4k?

Really?

This isn't a music crit website, this is an ipod ad.

WTF

It's not that I hate an independent musician for getting driven around New York while chugging Starbucks, picking up her $1000+ guitar, claiming Williamsburg is the best place in the world, impulsively buying recording equipment on credit, being aggressively boring, all to end the day in a prolonged photo shoot at her gorgeous Manhattan apartment with her pack of poodles in an inch of gawdy make-up.
It's that I get the impression that I'm not supposed to hate it.

Young Chicagoans are more than aware of the tired trixie/chad/Northside vs art school brat/scuzzy hipster/Westside dichotomy. But alas, New York has surpassed us uniting the above into an unstoppable late capitalist nightmare. Give me a tie and a blackberry and point me to my middle management job because I'm packing it in. Anyone want to buy some guitars?

Pitchfork.tv makes me wanna smoke crack

All in all, I find Pitchfork's venture into internet video pretty entertaining. I like that it's commercial free, I usually enjoy the content, and even its flaws usually aren't glaring or obnoxious. One small bone I have to pick with the site is the usually breathless fanboy interviews (see Justice, Liz Phair, Animal Collective). Not that I feel like these artists need the third degree, but the wide eyed puppy dog interviewers tend to deflate the interview pretty quickly. And then there's this...



From the completely shrugged off show of fraternal physical affection, to his ability to be completely disoriented by a single word answer, Cosmo Lee steals this interview with his black hole of a personality. To Jesse's credit, his comic timing is unflappable. But it's as if his one liners and aphorisms just register a "DOES NOT COMPUTE" in the CPU of Cosmo's humorless android brain. Give this man an original series, or maybe just drop him into Tim Harrington's waste of server space, Beardo.

p-fest rebuttle

Any mixed feelings I may have had about Pitchfork or Chicago have been totally wiped away after Saturday. Atlas Sound, No Age, Animal Collective, all excellent sets. And to the band who hosted the No Age after party show, who's name unfortunately slipped my inebriated and heat-stroked brain, thank you.

I have some shaky cell phone pictures to post later. For now, some festival inspired pieces made with ableton. Or dedicated to the festival, as they were made a while ago. The first one makes a nice ringtone.

6-6

Festival

My apologies for long winded criticisms of Chicago.

P-fest

Pitchfork is coming to town, and I feel like the only boy I know who's still excited. I know I'm not alone, considering Saturday is sold out. And even the detractors are still somewhat enthused. It is Pitchfork, and the festival has established a firm reputation as a good time to be had by all (unless, you're the GZA last year).

I have a couple friends who always used to be two steps ahead of me in their record collection (playlists, sure) who seem to be lost recently. And I suppose I can't blame them. This year's lineup features so many names that would have been totally unrecognizable this time last year. Which I consider to be a good thing, a very good sign for the state of independent music. And dare i say it, an identifiable 'movement'? I suppose not.

It is safe to say that noise is back firmly into the musical lexicon. And noise as in noise music per se, but the shoegaze noise, the band that is loud and not incredibly tight and or well produced noise. Which is refreshing to hear after years of taught, angular music, dance music, free/freak/neo folk, and indie stardom. Artists like No Age, Deerhunter, Panda Bear, Animal Collective, and HEALTH have a very similar aesthetic although working with different ideas towards different goals.

My friend Andrew said that African is the new angular. And as far as Vampire Weekend goes, I guess they stand outside of the noisy trend. And whatever about hype and fame, they deserve the attention they get, even if they will be forgotten in the near future.

Either way, I feel like music has become a little rougher around the edges, and thanks for that.

And Mahjongg, thank god a Chicago band is on the bill. Pitchfork can sometimes be a mixture of pride and embarrassment for someone living in Chicago. Pride in being the host, pride in being a major hub for independent music, pride in our venues and labels and history. But, then a sense that there's something missing from the fest, Chicago bands.

There are definitely some incredible bands from the area that exist today, and a long artists from the cities history. But looking at places like Montreal, New York, Portland, Atlanta, L.A., Baltimore, it's hard to hold up the Chicago scene against them. I welcome angry responses from people defending our scene of non-scene, but I know I'm not alone in this.

One of the problems seems to be a very fractured music community. There's a big jazz/experimental scene, a noise scene, drone scene, psychedelic revival scene, punk revival scene, the never dying power-pop band thing, a growing number of excellent hip-hop acts, the also never dying folk/roots scene. And, what am I bitching about right? The problem isn't a lack of talent or opportunity. The problem is (and maybe this is only a problem, in theory, in my brain, for whatever selfish reasons) that they don't seem to be communicating with each other. At all. Even counting the alliances and shared friends between these groups, I don't see them informing each other. And that's the hope of a musical scene, or discernible movement. It's not that everyone is on the same page, or doing the same thing, or going to the same shows. It's the hope that by proximity, these disparate elements could inform each other.

Proximity magazine is a new arts glossy for the Chicago area that seems to recognize this hope. And reading through it, I could see an attempt to bring together the visual arts community in Chicago for the same reasons I want a more interactive musical community. The potential is there.

I'm falling into the second city mindset, I know it.

So, in light of that, here's to Mahjongg, and the hope that they make us all proud. There certainly a band to be proud about. A band that combines some of the best aspects of Chicago music, pretty effortlessly, while remaining entirely singular. And they're (psychogeographically, if not actually geographically) southsiders, which makes me proud.

Here's to good music, here's to Chicago, here's to summer.