The lastest person to get it wrong is David Raposa from the Pitchfork Media [dot com]. Being a new kid on the Pitchfork block I was going to cut him some slack, however when you are writing for such a reputable publication there shouldn't really be any tolerance towards ignorance and laziness.
Last week Raposa wrote a review of the new Mary Timony album (or The Mary Timony Band, as the album is released as), The Shapes We Make. Unfortunately for the readers of Pitchfork, his review has some major flaws. It becomes very difficult for me retain composure when an artist I hold very dear is reviewed by someone who has a limited understanding of their back-catalogue. One of the reasons why I no longer read any music press (Pitchfork being the exception) is that the ill-perceived inaccuracies and blatant ineptitude of most music writers frustrates me considerably. My mental health dictates this avoidance.
An appreciation of the first two of Mary T's solo albums is a significant criteria for any potential love interest of mine. Not that I'm considered getting involved with David Raposa (definitely not now anyway), but I'm just trying to illustrate what an impact these two albums have had on me, and basically how completely awesome they are. Sure, they both might be a little too "Rory Gilmore" for some people. Timony might refer to herself in the third person as Ms Charming Melodee and befriend a forest full of furry friends throughout the songs, however, they both are musically inventive albums which not only demonstrated her knack for a good tune, but also construct interesting and challenging arrangements on a variety of instruments. Furthermore, anyone with even a passing knowledge of her work with Helium knows that she's not all sunshine, lollipops and rainbows.
Raposa beings his piece by stating the the collaboration between Timony and her current drummer, Devin Ocampo, "has given her music a beneficial kick in the ass". The implication of this statement is obvious, however it could be justified if one was to view the statement through Timony's third solo album, and first Ocampo collaboration, Ex Hex. This album was a marked shift from her first two solo releases. On Ex Hex Ocampo's brutally awkward rhythms were the initially confronting, but subsequently brilliant companion to Timony's unorthodox and obtuse riffing. However, that has not continued on The Shapes We Make. Ocampo's drum-work is muted and much more conventional. He isn't kicking anybody's arse on this record.
This claiming of an improvement is a standard writing tactic employed by most music writers. It's the old diss previous albums to praise the current one trick. It's such lazy and incompetent journalism, especially as it is not only a cliché move, but is frequently poorly researched. Raposa displays this lack of research by making the implication that what Timony required after her first two solo albums was "an honest-to-goodness drumkit" and making the aside that Christian Files was "the sporadically-used drummer on those two albums". In fact on both Mountains and The Golden Dove Files is not only has a large presence, but her stuttering off-beat rhythms are essential components in what is so great about those albums. Songs like Musik and Charming Melodee and Dr Cat, both from The Golden Dove, are first rate rhythmical adventures. The tracks where Files' presence isn't so great is due to her drum-work not being a necessity in the arrangement of the songs.
Raposa has a major problem with Timony's lyrics on this record. This is fair enough, gone is the post-Riot Grrl feminist poetry of Helium, as well as the amusingly twee medieval imagery of Mountains and The Golden Dove. nowadays Timony lyrics are in obvious decline. However, Raposa contrasts this lyrical vacancy with what he hears as her musical depth, claiming her success will come "as long as she has music this strong doing the talking for her". This is extremely perplexing. I will love Mary Timony until the day I die, however this is obviously her weakest album. It's her least inventive and is definitely also lacking in major hooks. For anyone to praise it in favour of her previous work shows a distinct lack of understanding of the artist.
The reason why Pitchfork is the only music publication I read now is because I trust in the competence of its writers. Obviously, I will occasionally disagree with their opinions, however, I expect this to be on grounds of taste rather than lack of research and lazily constructed pieces.
1 comment:
That Pitchfork review bothered me, too, for all the reasons you point out, except I couldn't quite articulate it.
I have seen this lack of research/effort before in reviews of her work and it's always made me angry. The critic's main purpose is to offer a more articulate understanding of things for people who DON'T have that ability (I am one). The laziness here smacks of MISOGYNY for sure. I have seen the exact same thing with PJ Harvey's work. I always thought it was absolutely bizarre that music journalists wrote off "Is This Desire?" Again, they just didn't like that she wasn't being the angry guitar goddess they expected (/fetishized?). They missed the more subtle but entirely coherent anger on that album. Her narratives on that album were fascinating and sophisticated, and I was always disappointed that I didn't find an insightful discussion of it. This sort of "I just don't like it" attitude is acceptable from a fan, but not from a journalist.
It's obvious that he is simply one of those people who haven't liked Timony's solo forays (and perhaps nothing after "The Dirt of Luck"). I was always frustrated that reviewers didn't even TRY to understand how her forays into medieval/Renaissance/fantasy imagery (lyrically and musically) was linked to the more overt feminist imagery of the first two albums. I always saw it as a poignant way of alluding to radical feminism, which envisions pretty much destroying society and starting over sans patriarchy. "Under the apple tree, we can all be free. All right!"
Post a Comment