Pitchfork v. Ryan Adams
I had this pithy entry written on Thursday, which involved the ongoing Pitchfork vs. Ryan Adams dispute. Pitchfork has been kvetching about the stupidity of the latest version of Adams' web site (which, admittedly, is v. lame - go see for yourself and turn up the volume) telling him to STFU already. ANYWAY, I was going to comment on the inherent ridiculousness of the whole debate, because Pitchfork's main issue with RA seems to be that he once fronted a credible alt-country band (Whiskeytown), then released a very, very respectable alt-country album (Heartbreaker), and was infamous for his rambling performances that occasionally lapsed into moments of drunken genius, but that he somehow left all of this behind to release a bazillion albums a year of which 10% of the songs are great, 40% are pretty good, 30% are listenable, and 20% are self-indulgent crap.
Now, Pitchfork writers might just be pissed that Adams is an NPR darling, or that he still draws more people to his concerts than Art Brut or Xiu Xiu or Yo La Tengo, or whatever "we're greater than thou" band that only record store employees and hipster kids that hang out at the Cha Cha swear by, or it may be that Pitchfork thinks that Ryan is really a tool of the devil who will forever ruin music for the next 50 years. It seems Pitchfork is really angry at Adams, not for being really bad or making totally unlistenable music (because they don't seem to have the same issues with Britney or Jessica Simpson or a million other "artists" who consistently release junk), but for squandering his talent with an inability to self-edit and an annoying predilection/desire for media attention.
The irony of all of this, of course, is that Pitchfork's blog posting that moans about Adams' hip-hop pretensions (and, don't get me wrong, I'm not defending his need to yell "New York CITY" at the top of his lungs over some sad beats, but I don't think the world will end as we know it because of his insatiable need to be noticed by doing something stupid), means that his site is probably getting more hits, and, thus, Adams is getting more attention. Maybe this is what irks Pitchfork about Ryan Adams: he's the hipster kid who sold out.
Of course, the entire hipster culture thing is predicated on non-consumer/ironic consumerism (ask me to explain this in person sometime, since it seems to be too obtuse for written consideration), so when you think about it, Ryan Adams is hated mostly because he embodies all of the things hipster culture (and the writers at Pitchfork) secretly represents: he's an elitist, pretentious urbanite, who revels in his own self-indulgence and almost autistic-like fascination with the culture of the 70s and 80s (see his shifting adoration of Neil Young, Gram Parsons, and the Smiths, among others, on his last few releases), who while protesting the bland, corporate nature of contemporary music, has few qualms about playing events like Austin City Limits Music Festival and/or Bumbershoot (which, while great, aren't exactly promoting the "underground" aesthetic to which hipsters seem to aspire) because it means the masses are finally “getting it”. Hipster "culture" is predicated on the idea that mass culture is worth rebelling against, and that there is a lot of cool stuff going on in the "underground" that has merit, but this whole Pitchfork-Adams conflict is hilarious, because it really underscores the fact that the whole hipster culture meme is just another way to sell stuff. Or whatever.
So, yeah, that was a part of what I was supposed to have posted last week, and would have had everything gone according to plan. The problem is that Comcast has decided that they need a cherry picker and a flagger to actually hook up my cable/net connection (long, but true story) and so I'm without both until mid-October. So, instead of posting this from the comfort of my own apartment, I'm relegated to wander the cafes of Seattle in search of free wifi. This isn't a total problem, but it's not really fun, either.
Therefore, postings will be probably infrequent over the next couple of weeks. Fortunately, I have Chuck Klosterman IV (which is good but uneven), Lost on DVD (also good but uneven), Scott Mcloud's new book, and Emily Haines' solo CD to keep me occupied. Prayers for connectivity are appreciated, however.
