From: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org (loud-fans-digest) To: loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Subject: loud-fans-digest V3 #273 Reply-To: loud-fans@smoe.org Sender: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk loud-fans-digest Friday, September 19 2003 Volume 03 : Number 273 Today's Subjects: ----------------- [loud-fans] Dave Marsh: Tool or Wanker? ["Rex.Broome" Subject: [loud-fans] Dave Marsh: Tool or Wanker? Marsh also has a vendetta against Neil Young, trashing even some of Neil's really great records essentially for being what they are. Really gives the impression that he's just trying to be cantankerous. Whut-evvvah. Over-earnest Springsteen worship seems to be a real hallmark of sloppy rock journalism that's all about the journalist himself and his wacky sense of What Rock Is and Why It Matters. Other case in point, LA's own Robert Hillburn, who can't write *anything* without mentioning Bruce (and probably U2 in the bargain). - -Rex ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 13:41:31 EDT From: LeftyZ@aol.com Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Dave Marsh: Tool or Wanker? In a message dated 9/18/03 9:20:53 AM, Rex.Broome@preferredmedia.com writes: << Over-earnest Springsteen worship seems to be a real hallmark of sloppy rock journalism that's all about the journalist himself and his wacky sense of What Rock Is and Why It Matters. Other case in point, LA's own Robert Hillburn, who can't write *anything* without mentioning Bruce (and probably U2 in the bargain). >> Don't forget Eminem....... ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 13:31:36 -0500 (CDT) From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Dave Marsh: Tool or Wanker? On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Rex.Broome wrote: > Marsh also has a vendetta against Neil Young, trashing even some of Neil's > really great records essentially for being what they are. Really gives the > impression that he's just trying to be cantankerous. Whut-evvvah. When Miles returns from his sojourn to Lower Swobovia or wherever, he'll be able to tell you some good stories about Marsh's behavior on the Springsteen list... > Over-earnest Springsteen worship seems to be a real hallmark of sloppy rock > journalism that's all about the journalist himself and his wacky sense of > What Rock Is and Why It Matters. Other case in point, LA's own Robert > Hillburn, who can't write *anything* without mentioning Bruce (and probably > U2 in the bargain). What does Robert Hilburn know about rock'n'roll? Springsteen himself has done some excellent work - but is there another musician in rock whose imitators are more horrifying? Pseudo-Bruce reaches depths of awfulness others can only have nightmares about... - --Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society www.uwm.edu/~jenor/ADS.html ::The more you drive, the less intelligent you are:: __Miller, in REPO MAN__ np: DJ Spooky - I forget the title - the one with the long, poststructuralist essay in it. Oh. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 11:35:07 -0700 (PDT) From: "G. Andrew Hamlin" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Dave Marsh: Tool or Wanker? > Over-earnest Springsteen worship seems to be a real hallmark of sloppy > rock journalism that's all about the journalist himself and his wacky > sense of What Rock Is and Why It Matters. Other case in point, LA's own > Robert Hillburn, who can't write *anything* without mentioning Bruce > (and probably U2 in the bargain). Oh I dunno. Lester Bangs, one of the founding fathers of what I prefer to think of as the "revelation from the personal to the global" style in rock writing, certainly wasn't much of a Springsteen-worshipper. In fact got the Boss in a headlock for one famous photo, Andy "An important minor artist or a rather flawed and inconsistent major one." - --Robert Christgau, from his review of DARKNESS ON THE EDGE OF TOWN (B+). ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 14:46:10 EDT From: JRT456@aol.com Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Dave Marsh: Tool or Wanker? While it can be argued that Marsh is both, he certainly qualifies as a "tool" for running errands for Springsteen...although I guess he's officially on the payroll through marriage. That said, Marsh certainly wasn't the only critic who was literally taking corporate commands to glorify Springsteen as an important artist during the '70s. You just have to get the old guys drunk before they'll admit it. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 20:29:56 -0400 From: "jer fairall" Subject: Re: Re: [loud-fans] Dave Marsh: Tool or Wanker? > Springsteen himself has done some excellent > work - but is there another musician in rock > whose imitators are more horrifying? Maybe stretching the definition of "rock" but, Madonna? Jer np: Ballboy, CLUB ANTHEMS (Sarah Records fans take note) Help the planet each day! It's free and easy: http://www.Care2.com/dailyaction/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 22:42:00 -0400 From: Stewart Mason Subject: [loud-fans] Dave Marsh: Tool or Wanker? (Answer finally revealed) Charity and I were just watching a documentary on WHO'S NEXT -- really, Netflix is just the best thing ever -- and naturally, Dave Marsh was all over it, his book on the band being one of their surprisingly few decent bios. About two-thirds of the way through, Charity said, "Who does he remind me of? He looks like somebody." The next time, she said, "Oh! He's Stewie from FAMILY GUY in middle age!" And, you know...he is. In every possible way. S NP: CHUTES TOO NARROW -- The Shins ------------------------------ End of loud-fans-digest V3 #273 *******************************