Sometimes it is hard not to think that music reviewing is a big load of shit. Case in point: the review I wrote on the Trans Am record Sex Change for a magazine in New Zealand. The review I wrote was tepid a best (all 120 words of it. Ha-ha). I wrote the review a long time ago. Subsequently, I have listened to the record consistently ever since. Now, today, ahora, I am not really sure of the value in my original criticism.
To contradict myself I have no desire to apologise for writing a less-than-flattering review; I do not think I necessarily disagree with what I wrote. At the same time it is hard to reconcile claiming to be indifferent about something while still listening to it regularly (i.e. gaining pleasure from the album repeatedly).
The only thing I can settle on is that you cannot listen to a record for a day, or a week, and be sure what the long term value or affect will be. Like the Mad Butcher says: the most precious gift you can give life is your own time. When you are reviewing something you have to make your mind up about something very quickly and spit out a response as rapidly as possible.
Perhaps my problem is that I have confused reviewing with criticism. The former is simply about style and estimation and as such it does not deserve a second thought once see the “your Email [to the editor] has been successfully transmitted” message displayed.
If I ever review again I am going to flip a coin on partiality and focus on style. Like a drunken joke at a party that you are not sure you meant or not.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment