Greil & Chuck
Sucede q em 1986 Phil Dellio entrevistou os críticos/ escritores de música americanos Greil Marcus e Chuck Eddy para a revista Nerve. O site RockCritics.com recuperou o artigo original para a era digital, com nova introdução do autor. Greil Marcus é do panteão dos escritores musicais, tal como Robert Christgau & + alguns. Chuck Eddy foi durante variadíssimos anos (i.e., até há escassas semanas, vítima da demolição do VV em curso pelos novos patrões) editor de música do The Village Voice.
Nas conversas, pode-se ler coisas como:
Greil Marcus:
But I'm not an interviewer--I'm not good with it and I'm not comfortable. What's wrong with me is I want the other person to like me. And that's fatal for an interviewer. The best interviews come when you ask stupid questions. You say, "Is it true your mother's really a dolphin?" And the guy says, "No! Where did you hear that? She's not a dolphin, she's a burrow. And let me tell you how she got to become a burrow..." And he'll tell you everything.
(...)
I suppose the subject of "Speaker to Speaker" is, "What does it mean to be a listener?" What are we doing when we listen? What happens? What doesn't happen? What could happen? I really am a critic in the sense that I don't give a shit what the artist intended, or what he meant. I couldn't care less. What I'm interested in is what happens when you listen. If the artist made a record intending to convince all right-thinking people to send money to the I.R.A., but the record is in Swedish and nobody can know that, it's sort of pointless to discuss the guy's intentions. What you really have to discuss is what is it like to hear a record in Swedish, and does it have a good beat?
Chuck Eddy:
Doug Simmons (Voice Music Editor) thought my Third Stage review was one of the better things I'd written. He pictured a whole city of people with their morning coffee and that review in front of them just spitting their coffee all over the table. And that's kind of what my intention was. I'm not gonna write about Boston and tear that album apart. I mean, why?--billions of people could do that. There's no use writing about Boston or REO unless I'm going to sit down and figure out what it is people like about Boston and REO. On the other hand, a big part of that Boston review was tongue-in-cheek. It was definitely aimed to piss people off. Rock criticism should.
Nas conversas, pode-se ler coisas como:
Greil Marcus:
But I'm not an interviewer--I'm not good with it and I'm not comfortable. What's wrong with me is I want the other person to like me. And that's fatal for an interviewer. The best interviews come when you ask stupid questions. You say, "Is it true your mother's really a dolphin?" And the guy says, "No! Where did you hear that? She's not a dolphin, she's a burrow. And let me tell you how she got to become a burrow..." And he'll tell you everything.
(...)
I suppose the subject of "Speaker to Speaker" is, "What does it mean to be a listener?" What are we doing when we listen? What happens? What doesn't happen? What could happen? I really am a critic in the sense that I don't give a shit what the artist intended, or what he meant. I couldn't care less. What I'm interested in is what happens when you listen. If the artist made a record intending to convince all right-thinking people to send money to the I.R.A., but the record is in Swedish and nobody can know that, it's sort of pointless to discuss the guy's intentions. What you really have to discuss is what is it like to hear a record in Swedish, and does it have a good beat?
Chuck Eddy:
Doug Simmons (Voice Music Editor) thought my Third Stage review was one of the better things I'd written. He pictured a whole city of people with their morning coffee and that review in front of them just spitting their coffee all over the table. And that's kind of what my intention was. I'm not gonna write about Boston and tear that album apart. I mean, why?--billions of people could do that. There's no use writing about Boston or REO unless I'm going to sit down and figure out what it is people like about Boston and REO. On the other hand, a big part of that Boston review was tongue-in-cheek. It was definitely aimed to piss people off. Rock criticism should.
Comentários