There is something punk in the air. I feel it, and I think you do, too. A creative revolution is upon us, and we need a place to commune to create context beyond social media. I've grown tired of the corporatization of everything, the meaningless overconsumption, and the loss of originality. I want to live in a world that values and enables weirdness, art, creativity, and the ability for creators to live well enough not to worry about anything but expression. I've been kicking around some ideas for creative tech solutions, so I was excited to hear that you're already up to new tech shenanigans. I'm looking forward to the future of Metalabel.
I had never heard of or read Trow’s No Context (subsequently leading to more reading and critique). With stepchildren who are the middle of Gen-Z I have been watching the disintegration of context. They have little, and also little interest. The generational wars, discussions, etc have put an unnecessarily heavy weight of importance on these groups. And without any shared context across generations, no one can really talk about anything aside for the latest political or pop culture news.
The value of criticism is often hard to pin -- but at Pitchfork's best, it's meant sharing of delight or a marvelous shellac-ing that's meant a lot to me as a listener / reader / art consumer. And losing this as a profession might not impact the number of people sharing their opinions about the art -- but it'll definitely cut down the number of people who can take it seriously.
Great message; thanks, Yancey. Metrics can seem to trump content/context in determining cultural values. But factor in Thoreau's observation that "any [person] more right than [his/her] neighbors constitutes a majority of one."
Great thoughts here. Thanks for sharing them Yancey. You mention how political critics are flourishing, and I wonder if the general retreat of musicians and songwriters from writing about politics has contributed to the decline of art critique? That and the way critics often talk about themselves. Take books exploring the history of… eg Mozart, Mahler or Morrissey [insert your preferred musician] that bemoan how critics of the day slated what we now consider to be indisputable masterpieces, or ridicule how critics fawned over mediocre works by flash-in-the-pan one hit wonders or bland popular artist of the time - casting the critics as snobs or ignorant fools. More enlightened writers see the story worth exploring of why did the critics get it so wrong about / misunderstand X? Do art critics have a role today? In a world of exponential content, you don’t just need as your guide any old curator. You need a critical, discerning curator. There’s still a place for critique of art. But I guess it’s only ever as good as the art available to critique: something that speaks to what’s actually happening in and to our lives.
There is something punk in the air. I feel it, and I think you do, too. A creative revolution is upon us, and we need a place to commune to create context beyond social media. I've grown tired of the corporatization of everything, the meaningless overconsumption, and the loss of originality. I want to live in a world that values and enables weirdness, art, creativity, and the ability for creators to live well enough not to worry about anything but expression. I've been kicking around some ideas for creative tech solutions, so I was excited to hear that you're already up to new tech shenanigans. I'm looking forward to the future of Metalabel.
I had never heard of or read Trow’s No Context (subsequently leading to more reading and critique). With stepchildren who are the middle of Gen-Z I have been watching the disintegration of context. They have little, and also little interest. The generational wars, discussions, etc have put an unnecessarily heavy weight of importance on these groups. And without any shared context across generations, no one can really talk about anything aside for the latest political or pop culture news.
Interesting and thought provoking, with a beautiful meta... you are keeping cultural critique alive in lamenting its decline 🙃
Great piece.
The value of criticism is often hard to pin -- but at Pitchfork's best, it's meant sharing of delight or a marvelous shellac-ing that's meant a lot to me as a listener / reader / art consumer. And losing this as a profession might not impact the number of people sharing their opinions about the art -- but it'll definitely cut down the number of people who can take it seriously.
Exactly how I feel anytime I read a great piece by an art critique on something that moved me but I couldn’t explain how and why.
Great message; thanks, Yancey. Metrics can seem to trump content/context in determining cultural values. But factor in Thoreau's observation that "any [person] more right than [his/her] neighbors constitutes a majority of one."
Great thoughts here. Thanks for sharing them Yancey. You mention how political critics are flourishing, and I wonder if the general retreat of musicians and songwriters from writing about politics has contributed to the decline of art critique? That and the way critics often talk about themselves. Take books exploring the history of… eg Mozart, Mahler or Morrissey [insert your preferred musician] that bemoan how critics of the day slated what we now consider to be indisputable masterpieces, or ridicule how critics fawned over mediocre works by flash-in-the-pan one hit wonders or bland popular artist of the time - casting the critics as snobs or ignorant fools. More enlightened writers see the story worth exploring of why did the critics get it so wrong about / misunderstand X? Do art critics have a role today? In a world of exponential content, you don’t just need as your guide any old curator. You need a critical, discerning curator. There’s still a place for critique of art. But I guess it’s only ever as good as the art available to critique: something that speaks to what’s actually happening in and to our lives.
I absolutely love this. Don't have time to comment more, but thanks for sharing this.