new blog post. Sub Pop: the True Story
Thought some of you might enjoy this. And those that won't, aren't even looking at this thread - right?
http://everetttrue.wordpress.com/2009/08/14/sub-pop-the-true-story/
- Relevant artist taggings:
- Latch »[x]
- Ned's Atomic Dustbin »[x]
- Gaynor O'Flynn »[x]
- Gloria Gaynor »[x]
- Marvin Gaye »[x]
- Skrewdriver »[x]
Latch
Thread not appearing correctly? Click here to rebuild | Report this
Twitter
Facebook
Last.fm
SoundCloud
MySpace
Friendster
RSS
wrong.
im on a post-monotonix high. any music writing in which the writer makes himself a part of the story, or talks about anything other than the sheer joy of music can go fuck itself, as can most things.
actually
thats far more offensive than i meant to be. i stand by the general points though.
So Monotonix in Reading tomorrow,
should I go? I'd have to get a train. But I should, right?
yes
ahahahaha
I am not one of those Rolling Stone guys who rate their own importance. I am not an NME head. I am certainly not a hack with delusions of literary grandeur. I am not a fucking music journalist. I am Everett True. Read my CV, it tells you right here –
“Insurrectionary, tastemaker, loser”.
He.
Its a good read
Hack!
So this isn't an exposé on Sub-pop being a bunch of racists and homophobes?!
I thought you only did investigative jorunalism now! ;-)
1
I was making light of the way you felt the need to copy the entire thread to your blog.
It was a joke. What the hell does 1 mean?!
it was a delayed build-up to a really terrible joke
but i've lost the thread now
:(
As a fan of terrible jokes, I must say I'm disappointed.
don't worry
I'm sure I'll think of another one in a second.
Knock knock.
Who's there?
Everett
Everett who?
That's showbiz
and now i love you
that was easy
heh
It's a classic.
True, you fuckin' gayboy
i'll have you and your poncey blog
I know you're being ironic
but I expect this will just prove his point to him... don't bother
don't be such a woman, guttersnipe
...
now you're a casual mysognist too?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1NupxasQWs&feature=related
2
n-n-n-n-n-n-noooooooooo!!!!!
Everett
In NME this week one of Pearl Jam (Stone? I think?) said that you were merely a 'tourist' of grunge and suggested you were a bit of a Johnny come lately on the scene, and seemed a bit resentful that you were now considered a 'historian' of it?
What do you think about that? Can you see where he is coming from or is it some sort of personal vendetta he has against you? I'd be interested to know your thoughts.
Thanks.
surely you can be a historian on a subject..
and not have lived through it?
Ultimately your take on things will always have a slightly different angle to people who lived through it but in someways that might even be helpful (rose tinted specs and all..)
did he really?
That's quite funny.
1. To a certain degree, he's quite correct of course. No journalist writing about a scene from the outside is ever going to be more than a Johnny-come-lately... it's built into the scenario. The music has to be there before they can write about it. And it is certainly true that grunge was gestating in Seattle for a couple of years before I showed up that snowy winter's morn. Jack Endino is the man who knows all about that. Applying the same criteria, however, you could certainly argue Stone's own singer in Pearl Jam was a Johnny-come-lately too - he showed up on the scene a good couple of years after I'd been documenting the music.
2. But his band really need to make their minds up. Only a couple of years ago, I read an interview in one of the Guitar magazines where they credited me with starting the whole caboodle. (Why they'd want to give such props to a critic who they can't stand is beyond me - unless, of course, they were doing a double-bluff, knowing my public aversion to grunge, as defined by PJ and MTV.) I suspect some of the confusion arises, because Stone and his mates really weren't part of the scene I was documenting - hence, yes he's right. I was certainly a Johnny-come-lately to the music he was playing!!!
3. I don't think I'd go as far to call it a "personal vendetta". I sincerely doubt if he thinks about me more than once every few years. It's just mutual dislike.
Thanks for the reply
he also said that a lot of the shit Kurt said about them was him speaking for Mark Arm, and that he tried to be friends with Kurt and Kurt wasn't interested.
It's funny that even though they are millionaire rockers they still seem a bit hurt about the petty politics of their scene.
any chance someone can send me a copy of that article?
i'd be interested to read it. (or is it a reprint from that recent Oral History Of Grunge or similar?)
Stone never quite understood why folk might like Mudhoney and not his band. (Even though, patently, loads more people like his band!) Remember that he and Arm have shared history.
it was in this week's NME.
yeah but
...any idea how much the NME costs out here?
me neither.
DAMN THOSE ARE SOME FLY SUB POP NIKES!!!
I need to get those STAT! That picture is the best thing you've ever posted!!!
ease off now
let him reminisce.
he was there..give him that for fuck sake
pray it isn't you in 20 years
I am
3
i wonder what's going to happen when he gets to 10
He'll post a blog about how he invented blacks and gayism.
4
shhh
I'm counting
I was hoping for a Ramones song to kick in.
reassuringly however,
this thread is the odd one out. well, this one and the little joy one. and the
"If I said I loved this track would it make me a member of the gays?" thread.
Still I was reassured by the 'cunts in the noughties thread there "Kele Whateverthefuck" from Bloc Party elicited universal support and sympathy. He is shy, he wants to make music not be public property, and he may or may not have issues relating to his sexuality. And the good old completely non-homophobic DIS community got together and showed their support.
But no, I'm wrong, the rights of morons to say whatever crap they feel like overrides the rights of minority groups who constantly face discrimination to live a life free of having (at best) that discrimination rammed down their throats by "non-homophobes".
But sin of the week on DiS! Standing up for the underdog! Or was it slagging off a bunch of white, male, middle class millionaire tossers?
Does anyone know any decent music discussion forums free of this bigotry?
oh boy
ps
i would argue that bands who are "shy" and don't want to make their music "public property" probably don't sign to major labels.
pps you could've got some mileage out of him being black as well. YR NOT TRYIN HARD ENOUGH
Kele might wish to be a musician not 'public property'. He might have the view that he wants to sell records and make a living, whilst not having to discuss his sex life with thousands of people. Or does that make him weird. Oh, yeah, thanks for misquoting me BTW.
who even said anything about Kele's sexuality in the first place?
apart from you?
by your logic it is entirely reasonable to go queer-bashing so long as you don't tell anyone that your homophobia is how you choose your victims.
:DDDDDDD
please go away
well argued dickweed
i wouldn't dignify that with an argument, son
ever heard of YouTube? they've got a great comments section there, it'd be right up your alley
my apologies,
i didn't intend to misquote you, i simply misread what you wrote.
doesn't change the fact that you're reaching considerably though.
I don't think standing up for Bloc Party really equates to standing up for the underdog.
They're quite a successful band you know. I'm not really sure what you're point is.
The trouble with this website appears to be that quite a lot of people have no idea what anyone is one about who actually makes a point based on intelligence and compassion. You are far from alone.
My point was in no way about Bloc Party (Bloc Party were not 'cunts' according to the thread) my point was about Kele (who is according to the thread).
You might not have noticed but people can be very successful in many ways, yet still be in an oppressed minority victimised for one aspect of their being.
But still, we can all stick up for radiohead - part as they are of the most victimised minority of all, white, middle class, male millionaires.
oh boy
misogynist
hahaha
i sincerely hope you're trolling, because i find it hard to believe anyone could be this stupid in reality and still manage to use a computer.
it was a joke.
That's not a joke, your blog is a joke
http://wildeyemusic.wordpress.com/2009/08/16/a-definitive-history-of-radiohead/
You've even indicated that radiohead practice homosexual acts with each other as part of your insults. You homophobic hypocrite, fuck off.
:D
See my comments above
so suddenly homophobic jokes are OK?
i'm confused
good defence...
it's ok to be use homosexuality as an insult if the victims are "white, middle class, male millionaires"...ok you're a homophobic hypocrite with a massive chip on his shoulder, fuck off.
Mental note to self
Every arguement Wildeye ever makes if officially null and void.
it's ok though
he's fighting the CLASS WAR.
I think the reason I was unclear is I couldn't believe you could possibly be making the point I initially thought you were making.
But it seems you are.
You appear to be suggesting that any criticism of somebody who happens to be gay must be based on their sexuality. If that is your point then please refrain from calling anybody on this board, or anywhere else, prejudiced again. For nobody on this board has displayed anything like the level of prejudice towards gay people you are displaying now. It would appear, to you, that gay people have no personalities, qualities and flaws of their own and exist as nothing other than their sexuality. That is precisely the same ugly conclusion that homophobes draw and shows your views on gay people to be every bit as prejudicial as the people who insult people based on their sexuality. Ok, you've chosen to patronise rather than criticise but, by denying gay people the right to their own personalities and identities outside of their sexuality, you're being more offensive towards gay people than everyone else on this board combined.
Yes, a lot of people dislike Kele from Bloc Party. Perhaps some of those base it in homophobia. I imagine most base it on how po-faced, pretentious and humourless he frequently comes across. Because, believe it or not, he has a personality. In fact, believe it or not, all gay people do have personalities just like straight people. Please remember this.
this a 100 times.
"You appear to be suggesting that any criticism of somebody who happens to be gay must be based on their sexuality."
No, I was suggesting (1) that his personality may (not is, may) have something to do with homophobia or fear of homophobia and that maybe not making comments which are or could be seen as being homophobic may reduce the the likelihood of him continuing to be a miserable cunt (it certainly won't make it worse), (2) that criticism of his personality may (not is, may) be homophobic, either directly or because it is based on an aspect of his personality that derives from his sexuality.
The most fundemental point however is that people here seem happy to just slag the bloke off, and not consider that there might be a reason for his personality which warrants sympathy and empathy not criticism. He may hate fame. Hate it's effect on relationships sexual or otherwise). Hate racism or homphobia he may face. He may be clinically depressed for any number of reasons. I haven't a clue and neither have you, but I like to think that a starting point of 'hang the guy for being a miserable cunt' is the sort of response that does not reflect well on the hangman.
how are you getting on with derailingfordummies.com?
your argument is so stupid it makes my head hurt
^
http://drownedinsound.com/community/boards/music/4194848#r4822301
you were the guy who done a blog about radiohead being depressive wankers huh?
how are you getting on with http://www.flashcricket.com/topspinnerplay.php
288 is my top score
Same, I think.
IT'S A FUCKER, I TELL YOU, A FUCKER!
And by fucker, I mean, very hard. Not like, someone who derives their personality from fucking, i.e a nymphomaniac or maybe a porn star. I wouldn't want these things to be misconstrued, y'know?
Yeah, but people are slagging off Bono, Noel Gallgher and Tom Clarke from the enemy.
And much of that is to with their demeanor and personality. And yet you have selected Kele as an example has said 'it might be because he might be gay'. You've identified him as different to the other aforementioned people.
There maybe any number of mitigating circumstances why certain people act like the way they do. Maybe Tom Clarke had a shit education which has contributed to his woeful irritating lyrics and laddish attitude, that doesn't mean people who attacked him acted out of class prejudice...
He might be a miserable cunt for any number of those things but he'd still be a miserable cunt.
Most unpleasant people have reasons for their actions but it doesn't make them any less unpleasant.
I'm not quite sure where the derailing comment comes into this. It seems to be what you're doing rather than anyone else.
the last time I saw someone digging this deep
I was watching "The Core"
Everett, my boy,
what happened?
In the space of just over a year or so you've gone from editing a respected indie magazine to counting how many people have slighted you on an internet messageboard. Does Australia really do this to people?
At the risk of popping egos on the board we aren't really all that important - none of us who post on here - in the grand scheme of things. We're mostly a disparate bunch of bored students and office workers, some of whom know each other and some of whom do not, who post on here to kill time. You seem a bit unhealthily concerned with what we think.
5?
damn it
you've made me lose count now. where was I?
2?
I agree.
I was broadly speaking in support of you on the vs Little Joy thread, but it's obvious why re-printing and annotating the enitre thread on your blog is going to get peoples backs up. Making out the DIS message board is full of homophobes and racists and then coming back and linking to your articles if pretty irritating. In general attitudes here are far more liberal than your average demographic in Britain (and certainly Australia).
Fair enough if you want to question the semantics of some posters, I'd agree that some peoples terminology has negative associations, but don't go and post on your blog as though its of earth-shattering importance, you are no only making a big issue out of a very minor one, but you're also devaluing the music criticism of your blog.
The jokes people are making now are playing off the way you've reacted recently (including these pseudo-homophobic ones), rather than any actual malice or biggotry; people are unfornately parodying the ideas you seem to have created in you mind.