Thought some of you might enjoy this.
I mean, I read your little post and everything, but still. How in the hell does Jack White come up as number eight on your indefensible list, let alone at all?
I like it.
Irrefutable points there.
what would it achieve? Music is great in the way that nobody needs to justify their opinions, being the subjective art form that it is.
has been toss.
Actually, some of what he did in the Stripes was toss too...
this article is hardly a defence.
Yet again another pointless, poorly written, narcissistic and self-serving article by Mr True.
I say pointless, but this isn't strictly true, he writes them purely for us to comment on them, giving him the attention is so desperately craves, which is an understandable act for a teenager (i.e. the majority of the ‘controversial’ posters on here) - but is rather pathetic for a 48 year old man.
It's because either:
a) Defending the Indefensible is just a snappy title for the blog and doesn't really refer to the actual content of the articles. Or
b) Mr True doesn't know what Indefensible means.
Either way these articles are still utter cack. They're like when you're in a pub and some pisshead staggers over to your table to interrupt your conversation with a tide of rambling bullshit that's REALLY important to him. The Raconteurs aren't "dangerous and exciting", but "crap". DEEP ANALYSIS THERE. The last Bond film was going to have Amy Winehouse do the song: Research direct from the Library of Tabloid and Celeb Rag Studies there. Even better is the ludicrous suggestion that Winehouse wasn't picked because it'd freak out the mainstream. Newsflash: The only sections of our society who listen to Amy Winehouse are twats and your mum - known collectively as 'the mainstream'.
The only mystery left to solve is: Who are the people reading and liking these blogs to such a degree that thingy continues to write them? Or is the point that he gets off on posts like this one venting about how shit they are.
Andrew Mueller was heaps more entertaining/enlightening.
Though credit where credit's due, ET did do a very decent job pulling together the Music Journalism RIP series.
Why aren't you a writer?
Or are you?
Where he was getting angry at someone defending Coldplay, but I don't remember the other articles having a go at people who defend someone he hates so it's just a confusing title.
I objected to the notion that anyone wanted Winehouse to do anything but shut the fuck up and disappear. That Keyes/White track is fucking class.
There are just things about them that suggest they're wind ups given ET's track record?
Hard to argue that anyone with that beard / hair / face combo isn't a dick though.
However Everett, you slag off The Kills I notice too. Therefore you are now dead to me...
That they're wind ups is his only hope. I wouldn't apply for a job with crap like this on my CV.
This is an Outrageous thing to say!!! - Weller/The Jam/Style Council have always been irredeemably, astronomically, offensively overrated bum-gravy! - and now we've got a grey, alien glove-puppet trying to suggest otherwise! Ban request please! >:/
but isn't promoting and enthusing about bands you DO like an ultimately more interesting and worthwile way for a grown up music journalist to go?
Just a thought.
Oh and 'The White Stripes'? Contraversial. As has been pointed out many many many times 'Defending the Indefensible' makes no sense on any level whatosever; a better title would be 'Shooting Fish in a Barrel'
but the writings still thin on the ground. It reads like the ill-prepared drunken rants of a bitter man. And he looks more like a non-melted Michael Jackson than Holly Golighty. But in fact, the more i think about this whole thing the more I think balls to it all. If you're gonna jag yourself on the forums then get something substantial to jag about. Otherwise you're just leaving yourself open to some serious rinsing, as I'm sure you remember from the Animal Collective debacle.
Jack White is still a multi millionaire popular music icon who undoubtledly doesn't give a shit about what everett true thinks of him.
that last comment is entirely true.
um, and sunbakedsnowcave, you really haven't LOOKED at my blog if you think all i do is slagging bands.
Do you also do children's parties?
in fact you did start a thread on here a while ago saying 'I've got a lot of flak for slagging bands, so here's a link to a band I do like'. Fair enough.
To be honest my point is not about your blog. Reading the last couple of 'indefensible' bits has guaranteed that I will never ever read your blog ever again.
My point is this: when jagging on here you focus primarily on tearing down bands rather than focusing on ones you like. You could have a lot more positive stuff on your blog for all I know but, to be honest, it could have the secret to eternal life and happiness on it but I still wouldn't read it if it was written by a trolling dignityphobe like you.
I love the White Stripes, but outside of that band he's managed a grand total of one decent song by my count.
Shouldn't diss the Kills though. Is that actually Alison Mosshart in the comments?
Focus on the positive! Liechtenstein! Liechtenstein!
and yes, it is Alison. One of my (former, presumably) Facebook "friends"
its the nature of the slagging.
For instance, the animal collective article was poorly written hyperbolic nonsense based around unfounded presumptions (that they have beards, untrue. that they sound like Arcade Fire and Modest Mouse, also untrue. and other outlandish statements) that had nothing to do with music.
With Jack White the problem is the dismissive drunken rant-like nature of the article, like stealthy pointed out, it sounds like the shouting of an attention seeking pub drunk.
And with this one, the article supposed to justify the existence of the blog, its merely the band name repeated over and over.
Its the complete lack of content that pisses people off!
The only person who would put their real (I know it's not REALLY his name before you start) name as their username thinking people give a fuck or it adds some kind of gravitas to an otherwise dull load of ball dust, aka blogs in general.
GET A FUCKING JOB.
Also if it's 'defending the indenfensible' you're trying to achieve why not set your bar a little higher?
Like peadophile lifeguards. Or Hitler. Or music writers.
ET Recommends - 15: The Lost Girls
And that the Kills first album wasn't that much like PJ Harvey, whereas the second one was. How on earth... it's loads more dancey and upbeat than ANYTHING PJ has produced?
Has so far been a sad session of critics sitting down and drinking the Kool Aid delivered by Robert Christgau, in which anything experimental and not having a standard pop structure is decried as having "no songs." It seems that these "journalists" are trying to create controversy and make their younger readers hate them so they can maintain some sort of "relevance" which they probably never had in the first place.
I'm pleased to report that True has failed to create any controversy whatsoever, seeing as it seems that everyone knows that Jack White is a goofy character with a sporadic output, so as usual, the only target is the lousy writing.
For my two cents, I'd like to add that calling the Flaming Lips "REM lite" just makes no sense whatsoever. And I don't even care that much about either band. It's just dumb Everett (you don't mind if I call you that, do you?)
Give up, Stegosaurus.
Don't generally like Oasis, but thought Noel's comment (above) was funny.
The first 5 albums have some great stuff on, but are all too long and too same-y.
i like the way some people seem to react really angrily to all these articels and post loooong point by point comments about how they so disagree.
I say good work Mr Everett True., Nice articles, and a good read.
And that a professional journalist can stoop to peddling such pap and dreck. And if you think his blog is a good read, you're probably illiterate.
(1) If you are so happy to criticise ET can you please let us have a look at your superior music criticism?
(2) If you are so happy to criticise ET can you please let us know which magazines and websites display better writing? If you could point me to a couple of decent articles as well so I can check that would be helpful.
(3) There are 2 main purposes of music writing. 1 - inform people about new bands. This is less important now people can just listen on the net. 2 - provoke, educate, entertain, politicise. Basically write decent articles that happen to be about music. I prefer these type of articles. Many people on websites like this seem to just want an unbiased description. This is utterly pointless. Set your sights higher kids.
(4) Notwithstanding the above the Jack White article is a long way from ETs best. A long way.
1)If you provide me the opportunity to publish it, and supply me with an advance copy of an album, I will show you my far, far superior music criticism.
2)Pitchfork, Drowned In Sound, Tiny Mix Tapes...there's better writing on just about every site besides True's.
3)Everett True does not write decent articles. Everett True writes totally unreasearched blase garbage. I do set my sights much, much higher than Everett True.
4)The article you're referring to would be "far from the best" of a retarded gorilla.
It always has been. Ever since Thag dissed Ug's hit-a-rock-with-a-bone routine and Ug grunted back, "I'd like to see you do better," it's been bullshit.
You're only allowed to criticise something if you can do it better yourself? Fine. Let's hold up Jack White's musical output against Everett True's, and we'll see who comes out on top.
And for the record, I couldn't care less if Jack White retired tomorrow, before you accuse me of being a fanboy.
(1) You can pick any album you already own and publish it here.
(2) Any particular articles that illustrate your point?
(3) I fear that you make the fatal mistake of taking music criticism far too seriously, whilst not taking it seriously at all. You, I think, make the mistake of assuming that 'quality' and 'research' and 'thought' and 'balance' make a decent article, whereas in fact it is for example 'passion', 'wit', and 'provocation' that you should be looking out for. Either you are a boring person, or you will one day grow up.
(4) No it wouldn't.
(1) take everett's cock out of you mouth
(2) take everett's cock out of you mouth
(3) take everett's cock out of you mouth
(4) take everett's cock out of you mouth
(5) take everett's cock out of you mouth
is that enough 'passion','wit' and 'provocation' for you?
Your post is a better read than 74% of music journalism.
I'm Peter Pan mothafucka.
is a pretty ironic barb, given that I thought the article we're discussing was both boring and immature.
Report this thread