― dqdq (dqdq), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 01:50 (seventeen years ago) link
yeah, really. although, i have given myself a self-imposed limit of two new york times-related rants per calendar year. so i only get one more in 07. i didn't read all of the obits in the magazine, but this definitely stuck out as the worst that i read. seriously, it reads like 5 minutes of google/wiki "research". it reads like he's never even HEARD barrett before. which could actually be the case. and, okay, a "fanboy" writing it might have been worse, but i doubt it. just somebody, anybody (david fricke, maybe?), who has some sense of why syd's stuff is so long-lasting and how his music made an impact on 60's rock and beyond. till today! prog, psych, metal, indie-rock and on and on. klosterman's cult of the artist bugaboo is almost as tired as artist as crazy-ass shaman anyway. and, yeah, like matos said, maybe most people do know barrett more as a myth and all that crazy diamond stuff, but this kinda article is the reason why! trotting out the same tired lore and anecdotes that will never ever be as exciting or as interesting as the music he made. so, that's all i hope for as a fan. someone who takes the music and art seriously and gives someone who was talented their due. in a remembrance anyway! and i get matos's point that landy is good material, but he's a footnote. a footnote that belongs in a wilson bio. syd doesn't deserve being paired with him. someone who has been giving people nothing but pleasure for over 40 years does NOT need to be remembered as someone who "couldn't do anything". and that's why i started this thread.
― scott seward (121212), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 04:35 (seventeen years ago) link
NYTIMES EDITORS HIRE THIS MAN INSTEAD OF KLOSTERFUCK NEXT TIME, PLS.
― Tyrone Slothrop (Tyrone Slothrop), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 04:55 (seventeen years ago) link
― scott seward (121212), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 05:15 (seventeen years ago) link
― friday on the porch (lfam), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 05:18 (seventeen years ago) link
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 05:18 (seventeen years ago) link
― sterl clover (s_clover), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 05:19 (seventeen years ago) link
― bill sackter (bill sackter), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 05:51 (seventeen years ago) link
^^^^This is basically my stance here.
But Stence, saying that Barrett's voice influenced people who didn't know of him is not a "wrong detail," it's demonstrably k-correct
It may be correct, and I obviously understand his implication I just protest the way he said it. No big thing. If I was his editor I would have said something like: I get what you are saying, but it reads pretty stupid and maybe you should change the wording around.
― Mr. Que (Party with me Punker), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 14:31 (seventeen years ago) link
― m coleman (lovebug ), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 14:58 (seventeen years ago) link
― Surmounter (Awn, R), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 15:26 (seventeen years ago) link
― nabisco (nabisco), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 17:55 (seventeen years ago) link
so not otm.
― Tyrone Slothrop (Tyrone Slothrop), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 17:57 (seventeen years ago) link
― Mr. Que (Party with me Punker), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 17:58 (seventeen years ago) link
― nabisco (nabisco), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 18:12 (seventeen years ago) link
― Tyrone Slothrop (Tyrone Slothrop), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 18:13 (seventeen years ago) link
― Mr. Que (Party with me Punker), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 18:17 (seventeen years ago) link
― scott seward (121212), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 18:23 (seventeen years ago) link
― Matt Cibula (Formerly, the Haikunym), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 19:04 (seventeen years ago) link
― Make a Beck Song #1 (wkwkwk), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 20:38 (seventeen years ago) link
― Make a Beck Song #1 (wkwkwk), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 20:41 (seventeen years ago) link
Damn, you're right, I'd forgotten about that! Something to catch up on.
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 20:52 (seventeen years ago) link
That's all.
― mh (mike h.), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 20:59 (seventeen years ago) link
Okay, I'm coming in late, but WTF? Of course it's about his tone and not his points. KLOSTERMAN is about his tone and not his points!
In the rare cases when he has any... Reading him can be mildly pleasant, in the way that having a VH1 list show on in the background while doing other things can be mildly pleasant, or intensely aggravating, in the way that a VH1 list show inspires atavistic blood-fury if you actually pay attention to anything the talking heads say.
― Name Not Found (rogermexico), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 21:31 (seventeen years ago) link
― Make a Beck Song #1 (wkwkwk), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 21:39 (seventeen years ago) link
Joan Didion wept.
― Name Not Found (rogermexico), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 21:50 (seventeen years ago) link