Dead links

It's great to see that the Guardian has copped on to this minimal lark: they're only about three years too late. Still, they're insightful enough to note, without a hint of irony, that Booka Shade make some of the best minimal around, especially the 'it's not at all like an epic Eye Q trance release by say Zyon from 1993 called 'No Fate' with some modern clicky, glitchy beats added in' 'In White Rooms'. Then there's the usual pop psychology psychobabble about people like Villalobos and those incredibly bland Romanian dudes railing against their upbringing in oppressive states by getting frazzled off their nuts. Please. Ricky V left Chile when he was a young kid and grew up in Germany, one of Europe's most liberal, forward-thinking progressive societies - that tells you more about why he is a party animal, rather than a vague memory of Pinochet's time. And those Romanian guys look way too young to have been traumatised by Ceaucescu's regime - they were probably only 10 at the oldest when the country's dictator got a bullet in the head in 1989. I'm sure the newspaper's organic parsnip-munching readership will lap it up and remind Amelie or Theodore to zip down to the local Tower in the Range Rover (or better still, log onto Amazon) to pick up Michael Mayer's last Fabric mix.
That said, the piece made more sense and was more articulate (and accurate) than this rubbish. Seriously, where do Slate get their writers from? The piece fetes the 'return of electronica' ( five years after the brilliantly insightful Alexis Petridis of the Guardian declared that 'dance music is dead': yes Alexis, the minute the phrase left your lips, it withered - the last five years have been a desert of inertia), a decade after the last wave of electronica faltered. What really rankled with me was this par:
"Besides the fact that no real artists self-identified under the electronica banner, the genre's moment evaporated because many of the accusations lobbed at the kind of electronic music on sale were more or less true. It trafficked in texture and ambience, shunning traditional songwriting techniques. It worked better in dance clubs than on home stereos, and was rarely created with album-length intentions."
I see that the guy who wrote the piece is on his way to college, and I sincerely hope that he stays there for a very long time, because it'll mean he won't get the opportunity to write this kind of drivel (or maybe he'll need to to pay his bills? Expel him already and make him get a day job!). I appreciate that the Yanks' use of the term 'electronica' is more focused on 'bands' like the awful Crystal Meth and the Chemicals and that electronic music operates in something of a cultural vacuum stateside, but what the writer is suggesting is that all of a sudden, techno music's more esoteric side died a death because no one was able to write lasting pieces of music. How about Boards of Canada, Rhythm & Sound featuring Tikiman, Plaid, As One, Junior Boys, much as I hate their more commercial stuff, Octave One, Zero 7, even Drexciya at their less abrasive - these are all acts that combined electronic production techniques with songwriting that recognised the need for substance, lyrics and melodies, and these are names that came into my find at this late time of night - I'm sure there are countless others. I have no idea how well or badly the Guardian or Slate pay their journalists to write these kind of inaccurate, lazily-researched pieces - my guess is that they are interns or juniors who are dazzled by seeing their own bylines - but there's still no excuse for what is perceived to be the quality end of the mainstream press to peddle such fodder.

Comments

[SoulFunkLifestyles]

First a relevant (but kind of an aside-the-topic-at-hand) question: So, Brophy, this online publication called “Slate” is mainstream press in your opinion? Just wanted clarification as I recall in a previous online exchange we had you wrote: “SoulFunk - not sure that these stories [such as the gossip surrounding the dude who slept on the couch while Derrick May scored ‘Strings…’] were in the mainstream, more the preserve of the specialist press and the internet” // So what exactly is the difference between “mainstream” and the “preserve of the specialist press and the internet” in your opinion? // What I’m leading to here? I think “the specialist press and the internet” is the NEW “mainstream” media – as opposed to an alternative or extension of traditional mainstream media.

Brophy, you wrote in this piece “…but what the writer is suggesting is that all of sudden, techno music's more esoteric side died a death because no one was able to write lasting pieces of music.” // I've especially noted the phrase “lasting pieces of music” in this quote. // To me “lasting piece of music” means music that lives and breathes through generations and somehow reaches – even if just barely – those you would least expect it to reach. Electronic music/electronica music, even music by the most established acts, is hardly on the same platform as the music of acts such as The Rolling stones, Gamble and Huff, Motown, or the music of Fela Kuti, etc. … Lasting pieces of music” transcends boundaries (cultural, demographics, etc..). Electronic music – specifically techno, be it tech-house, minimal, progressive, etc.) hasn’t reached this level. (…Yet … But I certainly think it could or will …)

SoulFunkLifestyles Universally Converging !!!

[James]

I had reservations with the article but you sound so fucking right wing in this post (even moreso than usual) with your crazed ranting about Guardian readers, if I want that I'll pick up the Daily Mail!

How long do these bullshit diatribes take you anyway? 3 minutes while eating a sandwich?

[hum3]

From the Guardian-article: "...Now, "minimal" is an umbrella term covering a massive swathe of house and techno - much to the annoyance of dance connoisseurs, whose second favourite activity after dancing to techno is semantic hair-splitting, and who cannot bear to see the label "minimal" stuck on music they think does not merit it..."

Get the fuck out. I didn't mind this Guardian-piece and think it's an ok write-up for the uninitiated and semi-interested, but that quote is just really bad.

Couple this with the writer's list of essential "minimal-classics" (You only choose ONE 'classic' that's at least some years old and it's Luciano's Pepe Bombilla?? Aww, gimme a break!) and you can tell this writer loves the current hype and mythmaking just a little bit too much.

[Ronan]

Richard Brophy Littlejohn (born 18 January 1954 in Ilford, Essex) is an award-winning British journalist, broadcaster, and author of three best-selling books. His twice-weekly columns in the Daily Mail and The Sun earned him a place in the inaugural 'Newspaper Hall of Fame' as one of the most influential journalists of the past 40 years. He has been Fleet Street's Columnist of the Year and was named Irritant of the Year by the BBC's What The Papers Say awards. He has written for London's Evening Standard, Punch and The Spectator.

His extensive radio and television work has brought him both a Sony award and a Silver Rose of Montreux. Littlejohn lives in Florida in the United States for much of the year.[1]

Although he is sometimes praised as an antidote to political correctness, other critics see him as a bigot.

[Brophy]

@ James

I had reservations with the article but you sound so fucking right wing in this post (even moreso than usual) with your crazed ranting about Guardian readers, if I want that I'll pick up the Daily Mail! - erm James, what you have failed to grasp is that it's satire, so i'm exaggerating the stereotype of a guardian reader. Where else on this site have I sounded right wing (for the record, I'm very left wing, but I don't feel I need to prove this to an abusive poster)? And if I usually sound so right wing, why do you bother reading the site?

How long do these bullshit diatribes take you anyway? 3 minutes while eating a sandwich? - no, a bit longer than that, but to be honest, your tone sounds so offensive that it makes me wonder that you read them. either that, or you're secretly recruting for the daily mail - i'll send you on my CV later then.

[Brophy]

@ Romo/Ronan: thanks for the biog, Minimal Boy!

[Ronan]

it really is like reading the Daily Mail around here lately in fairness to James. I'm amazed you can't see it yourself, there used to be posts about music a couple of months ago.

[Brophy]

it really is like reading the Daily Mail around here lately in fairness to James. I'm amazed you can't see it yourself, there used to be posts about music a couple of months ago. -

Ronan, if that's the way you feel, why do you keep linking to posts I make here on your blog? The last post here was to announce the site's involvement with a music festival I have the deepest respect for and am thrilled to be working with and the one before that was taking to task two articles that I felt were misrepresenting music I feel passionately about. The one before that was about the way some music doesn't age and some does. Every post here is about music - I think you'll be hard pushed to find the kind of nasty right-wing propaganda that the Mail spouts about how we need to cut State spending or to curb immigration - but there is a lot of spleen venting because a) I feel passionately about music b) it is a blog and this format is conducive to ranting and raving. If you don't like the site, don't visit it I suppose.

[Ronan]

I link for the same reason I visit: cautionary tale.

[Brophy]

I link for the same reason I visit: cautionary tale. - what do you mean by that? and why do you post so many comments?

[tom/pipecock]

your current attitude is not conducive to partying. people who like dance music don't care about music being timeless or how people perceive their culture, they just wanna have a good time and party with villalobos. didn't know you that?

[Brophy]

@ Soul Funk: to be honest, I think that albums by As One, Black Dog, Aphex Twin, Orbital etc are every bit as valid and lasting as any other style of music. Just my opinion.

@ Tom/pipecock: incredible isn't it mate? Any analysis, satire or criticism of the music that forms the 'cosy consensus' and you get called a right-wing journalist. For your information, the Daily Mail is an ultra-reactionary, right-wing newspaper in the UK, so basically James and Romo are calling me an ultra-conservative (close enough to a Nazi) for having strong views about music and for not being afraid to express them. Of course if they had even a slight modicum of intelligence, they would realise that stifling debate and discourse as well as curbing satire were and still are policies of totalitarian/fascist regimes all over the world. Nasty stuff - just wonder when they'll slip on the jackboots.

[Ronan]

when did that happen you? 1994?

better not mention to Tom you actually like Villalobos, well apart from when you're in Diet Infinite State Machine mode and not being paid to be the opposite :)

[leeism]

I don't know if Richard and Ronan plan these little tussles but I must say it's all very entertaining. 'Have I Got Minimal For You', perhaps.

[Brophy]

Lee, in the same way that Ronan's writings are just a poor, pale imitation of whatever Sherburne is going on about at any given time - anyone else notice the entirely coincidental 'similarity' between Ronan's brilliant new RA column and a review of a Rekids compilation Sherburne did recently for Pitchfork? - his witty comments here are just an automatic reaction to whatever I post. He's a follower not a leader, or, to put it more bluntly, the bitch in the relationship.

[SoulFunkLifestyles]

I will respect your opinion in regard to our discourse about forms of techno as "lasting pieces of music" mainly because I think it's not quite there but can & more likely than not eventually will reach that plateau.

SoulFunkLifestyles Universally Converging !!!

[tom/pipecock]

"better not mention to Tom you actually like Villalobos, well apart from when you're in Diet Infinite State Machine mode and not being paid to be the opposite :)"

haha, so now he's biting ISM despite having been doing his thing long before we did? thats funny. aside from that, there's nothing wrong with getting down and partying (the concept of which is personified in mr villalobos), my point was that there is more to it than simply that aspect of dance music. its always good to examine what is going on and try to figure out *why* things happen the way they do. trying to get to the bottom of the real purpose of a piece like this one in the publication that it appeared in is very relevent to what is going on in dance music culture right now in 2007.

[Ronan]

"Lee, in the same way that Ronan's writings are just a poor, pale imitation of whatever Sherburne is going on about at any given time - anyone else notice the entirely coincidental 'similarity' between Ronan's brilliant new RA column and a review of a Rekids compilation Sherburne did recently for Pitchfork? - his witty comments here are just an automatic reaction to whatever I post. He's a follower not a leader, or, to put it more bluntly, the bitch in the relationship."

wooooo! sounds like someone's about to burst a vein.

lee I hope you enjoyed that. feel free to email me a retort.

[Ronan]

actually don't bother, I've emailed phil for advice.

[Brophy]

actually don't bother, I've emailed phil for advice. - while you're onto him, I'm sure he'll also be able to tell you what to write in your RA column next month. Sorry, couldn't resist that

[Brophy]

@ Tom, sure why bother asking any questions at all? It's much easy to perpetuate the cosy consensus and go with the flow. Anyone who asks questions is a right-winger. You've got to laugh at the thnking that can arrive at such a conclusion though.

[Ronan]

don't you have a wife and child...take a look at yourself! what an ugly person!

[Brophy]

..take a look at yourself! what an ugly person! - because I slag you off for being unoriginal? c'mon, be more original!

[philly]

hang on a bit lads till i get some popcorn

[Stef]

I don't know about blogs but all I ever read on messageboards, mailing lists etc is people bitching about minimal/the status quo (and in the time before that it was hard techno and before that progressive house and before that trance etc ad nauseum), so there's hardly anything revolutionary about going against the flow.