This is certainly the greatest theoretical defense of bad singing -a subject near and dear to my heart- that I've ever read -probably the best defense of it ever written ."What one is given to hear"
should,I think, be the crucial issue critics-not the singer's cultural image . I guess that makes me a "formalist",unable, or unwilling , to get to and appreciate the places on the map that good singing can never reach. Is the ability ,to appreciate bad singing, something worth cultivating -even if those places on the map aren't reached by most bad. singing? I have been deeply moved on some occasions by what most people would no doubt consider to be bad singing-but on all those occasions, not coincidentally , the singer is someone who is an utter anonymity...
I know G M doesn't like Patti Smith's Just Friends -but without that book would she have ever gotten the sort of Village Voice review G M mentions in this piece, and which offends his sensibility -quite rightly,I think,- which is to say -when music is made by someone who doesn't fit the listener's social identity or aspirations when it's just about what one is given to hear-how does it sound to the"non-partisan"listener? (if there even is such a thing)Can such a pristine listening environment exist-has it ever existed? Probably not - My defense of bad singing :Bad singing takes the listener into the bad singer's psyche, and raises fundamental questions about meaning, humanity, art, aspiration that take the listener through song beyond song itself- not to mention how bad singing can uplift the singer (who doesn't listen to him or herself if it's recorded-who just enjoys the act. ,the process with no necessary concern about the results, or for listeners who are subjected to it )... What of the bad singers who think they're terrific ? I loved the movie Florence Foster Jenkins with Meryl Streep ,who has handlers chase down bad reviews in newspapers and destroy all the copies -until she finally finds out after making a fool of herself in concert halls for years -Her dying words are something like People can say that I couldn't song -but they can't say that I didn't sing - affirming the value of singing itself as a primal form of Life -of intrinsic value no matter how bad it is . As long as it's not hyped up and foisted on the public as if it's of momentous cultural/musical worth and importance . But no appreciation of bad singing should obscure the great singing that needs no defense.
This is certainly the greatest theoretical defense of bad singing -a subject near and dear to my heart- that I've ever read -probably the best defense of it ever written ."What one is given to hear"
should,I think, be the crucial issue critics-not the singer's cultural image . I guess that makes me a "formalist",unable, or unwilling , to get to and appreciate the places on the map that good singing can never reach. Is the ability ,to appreciate bad singing, something worth cultivating -even if those places on the map aren't reached by most bad. singing? I have been deeply moved on some occasions by what most people would no doubt consider to be bad singing-but on all those occasions, not coincidentally , the singer is someone who is an utter anonymity...
I know G M doesn't like Patti Smith's Just Friends -but without that book would she have ever gotten the sort of Village Voice review G M mentions in this piece, and which offends his sensibility -quite rightly,I think,- which is to say -when music is made by someone who doesn't fit the listener's social identity or aspirations when it's just about what one is given to hear-how does it sound to the"non-partisan"listener? (if there even is such a thing)Can such a pristine listening environment exist-has it ever existed? Probably not - My defense of bad singing :Bad singing takes the listener into the bad singer's psyche, and raises fundamental questions about meaning, humanity, art, aspiration that take the listener through song beyond song itself- not to mention how bad singing can uplift the singer (who doesn't listen to him or herself if it's recorded-who just enjoys the act. ,the process with no necessary concern about the results, or for listeners who are subjected to it )... What of the bad singers who think they're terrific ? I loved the movie Florence Foster Jenkins with Meryl Streep ,who has handlers chase down bad reviews in newspapers and destroy all the copies -until she finally finds out after making a fool of herself in concert halls for years -Her dying words are something like People can say that I couldn't song -but they can't say that I didn't sing - affirming the value of singing itself as a primal form of Life -of intrinsic value no matter how bad it is . As long as it's not hyped up and foisted on the public as if it's of momentous cultural/musical worth and importance . But no appreciation of bad singing should obscure the great singing that needs no defense.
The Book is JUST KIDS, and it came out in 2010, so it's pretty safe to say it didn't have anything to do with a Village Voice piece from 1996.