-
jsperber4 09/22/2006 10:47:00 PM
Elvis Presley, Madonna, Eminem and the Black Keys are all "allowed" to appropriate Black music, and are monetarily encouraged to do so; the writer doesn't argue this point. But when these artists achieve a commercial success that those they've co-opted could not have achieved -- due to their Blackness -- it's significant. Moreover, when the appropriation of an artform that was "dirty" and "authentic" is done in a particularly "inauthentic" manner (for instance, via the introduction of "sexiness," as the writer suggests) this further points to either commercial pandering or mere superficial self-indulgence, perhaps both: either way the band in question isn't looking very impressive. Finally, the previous poster's equation of Black music and its distinct historical origins in mass collective oppression with something he or she calls "White music" (that is, the dominant musical form, something hardly belonging to white people) reveals that he or she is indeed stupid.
-
szirotnyak 09/22/2006 2:34:00 PM
I live in Ohio (Toledo), I'm white, and I like The Black Keys. I saw The White Stripes well before the "Let's Shake Hands" single came out, and I like them too. In fact, I remeber driving up to Dearborn just to buy that single. I also like The Sights (especially when Eddie's really, really drunk). I think maybe I saw this Cavalieri guy play keyboards with them at a converted warehouse in Toledo. It sounded pretty crappy, but Eddie was good.
Ok, since I'm from Ohio, I'm really dumb, but this Black Keys review got me to thinking, and I decided I don't think Black people should be allowed to play European symphonic music, because it just sounds contrived when they do it. So I think they should stop. I think they give Black people a bad name when they try to play some Gyogy Ligeti piece and you can hear, like, a hint of a hambone-type beat creeping in. It's just so fake. They're obviously just trying to make money.
In fact, if I were a music critic working for The Village Voice, I'd probably use my position to make fun of Black people for trying to play White music, and maybe even call 'em names and use some naughty words just to get my point across.
Anyhow, Oberlin is pretty much the Pretentious Snot Capital of Ohio (although they did let chicks get officially smarter there a long, long time ago). But I can definitely see whence this Cavalieri dude may have picked up some extracurricular wienerisms. New York is very likely the most appropriate place for him, so it worked out pretty well for all of us.
-
jsperber4 09/22/2006 11:33:00 AM
A critic being critical? The audacity! The reviewer's point is that the band's essence is inherently false and shoddy, making any closer theoretical analysis of the songs irrelevant. If anything, perhaps the writer should have ignored the band. But if he could bring to light larger social-political tendencies manifest in this stupid-sounding band (as he does), then more power to him. It's called criticism. And the groupies of the stupid-sounding band who seek to annihilate the critic via malicious ad hominems? You're called nazis.
-
fpbfilms 09/21/2006 7:56:00 AM
Christgau would have NEVER let an atrocious piece of insubstantial fluff like this get through. Sub-Pitchfork, college newspaper-level reviewing. I still visit the music section out of habit, but find myself doing it less and less. The quality of music criticism - and farmed out film and book criticism - at the Voice continues to drop at an alarming pace.
And, to clarify, unlike most of the posters below, I don't particularly like the Black Keys - I'm merely appalled that New Times has been allowed to destroy what was once a significant institution.
-
benway2002 09/20/2006 8:25:00 PM
Whose bright idea was it to hire this guy in the first place?
Oh, right...
-
wadej3598 09/19/2006 11:43:00 PM
What a convoluted waste of screen space. This review sucks in too many ways to mention.
Hoped to find some real feedback about the Black Keys new release. Instead I got a dissappointingly misguided romp through Shakespeare.
Mr. Cavalieri may know literature, but he clearly doesn't know much about real music or how to review it. Your readers and above all-else, the band, deserve something a whole hell of a lot better than this.
-
tflance3 09/15/2006 2:37:00 AM
Lear: This review is weak.
The Fool: I like it!
-
yourbandsucks 09/14/2006 9:32:00 PM
WHAT BADN ARE YUO IN?!?!
-
theonlyjamieanderson 09/14/2006 6:31:00 AM
Nevermind. I get it.
-
theonlyjamieanderson 09/14/2006 6:26:00 AM
Lear's fool is a commentator and a tragic figure in his own right, but since he is the "wise fool" it seems to be making a defense of the Black Keys. What I don't understand is weather the writer is using the king to criticize the band or to criticize people who criticize the band. But I went to a Plattsburgh.
-
tmalliso 09/14/2006 1:36:00 AM
First of all, if Nate Cavalieri is trying to deride the Black Keys, the "King Lear" parody is a poor attempt. His tenure at Oberlin seems to have been ill-spent.
For one, in Shakespeare's King Lear, the fool is the voice of reason to Lear's madness. It would seem, then, that everything the Fool supposedly says in this little take-off is meant to be REASON, and yet, clearly it is all for the sake of irony. We are supposed to assume tthat Kine Lear is the voice of the author, but King Lear was mad! The whole thing is just very confusing, but the title of this article says it all. Nate Cavalieri accuses the Black Keys of co-opting black music for profit. The truth is that Nate Cavalieri has co-opted High English Renaissance theater for the sake of sticking it to a band he has a personal vendetta against.
As a reader of the village voice for over 20 years, I'm appalled that this "review" slipped through the editing process.
-Douglas Mulhenny
-
froggybusiness 09/13/2006 9:37:00 PM
Is it really worth it to write a critique of a band this harsh when all they've really done is put out records and tour? Since your review did not in one instance actually explain why you hate them so much (which is a critique of the band, not the record in question), we are left to ask these questions ourselves...
Are you such a blues purist that you hate anything that isn't "authentic?" I bet you probably have a Rolling Stones record somewhere in your collection. They certainly give white people a bad name.
Are you mad at their politics? They don't really include any in their songs, so that would be tough to do.
Do you hate their hype? That's a shitty excuse because that's what the entire music business is built upon. Any band you're reviewing got their cd to you through a healthy dose of hype.
Are you mad that they tour and have made a little money? By that standard you should be scratching out music reviews on a paper bag in a back alley and giving them away for free if you want your writing to remain "pure."
I guess what it comes down to is that this is a really poorly written article. I don't know if you were in some band that had a fight with them or not. All i did was check the Village Voice sight like i do once a week and read this article, and was disappointed to see this. This article is listed as a record review, but it's not. You don't even mention any songs, which is actually kind of amazing.
I'm all for writing a bad record review when you don't like an album. It's part of your job as a critic, and i've been there and done that job. If you've never reviewed a film, perhaps you have never been privy to one of the greatest comments ever made about reviewing someone's art, made by Roger Ebert. "It is not what the thing is about, it is how it is about it." How about the next time you review anything, you keep that in mind?
dave rich
akron, oh
-
rharvilla 09/13/2006 1:28:00 AM
aloha. voice mgmt. here with a message from the honorable nate cavalieri, author of the piece in question. have at you.
--
Ouch! And from a Village Voice Media colleague as well! The indignity!
I was a sometimes member of the Sights between 2002 and 2003, and played a whole bunch of gigs with them. The band exists and is touring still. They've likely played with the Black Keys somewhere along the way, but I don�t recall sharing a bill with the Black Keys during my tenure.
Also, I graduated from Oberlin College in 2000, where I studied music and creative writing, but my folks didn't have to shell out the entire 80k, thanks to a generous financial aid package. According to "the Goog," Denise graduated in 2003, but I don't recall meeting her there.
Finally, I've written about the Black Keys one other time professionally, in an article published in Detroit's Metro Times three years ago called "White Destriples," which reflected negatively on various two-piece garage/blues acts. I�ve written about them in my tear-soaked diary numerous times.
-
echoreturn 09/13/2006 12:03:00 AM
This is the letter I sent in response to the piece, "As You Loath It," by Nate Cavalieri:
Nate Cavalieri has the right to write whatever he wants about whatever band he wants. If his journalisti c instincts tell him to slam The Black Keys ("As You Loath It"), so be it. But I've got more than a hunch that this so-called music critic has a giant axe to grind.
It would have been at least semi-responsible for Cavalieri to give full disclosure as to his personal issues with The Keys. Mr. Cavalieri used to play keyboards with a Detriot-based band called The Sights. The Sights played with The Black Keys on various occasions. One particular evening, Mr. Cavalieri made it clear that he wasn't a fan of his Akron colleagues, just a jealous and insidious rival. Soon thereafter, Mr. Cavalieri left the band, but the relationshi p has been tenuous ever since.
This isn't the first time Cavalieri's written about The Keys, and it certainly isn't the first time he's made sure to drag them through cow shit. It's almost uncanny how often he's pitched alt-weeklies on stories about the Akron band. Almost obssessive.
I'm sure he didn't tell your music editor that he had a personal vendetta against the band when he offered to write them up. So I'm not blaming your publication for allowing itself to be played like some whiney hack's tear-drenched diary.
As a fellow Village Voice Media writer, I'm thouroughly disgusted at Cavalieri's total lack of ethics. As The Black Key's drummer, Patrick Carney's girlfriend, I can attest to the fact that I'm not talking out of my ass. And as someone who attended Oberlin College with Cavalieri, I find it funny that his parents shelled out at least $80,000 for him to study music, so he could join an underwhelmi ng Detroit band, only to fail miserably, and end up as little more than a struggling music writer who abuses the power of the pen to jerk himself off.
Sorry, Village Voice. But you've been punked.
-Denise Grollmus
-
davidejberger 09/12/2006 11:08:00 PM
Nick Cav-a-who-gives-a-fuck is exactly what's wrong with music criticism and journalism today. Not only is there no actual critique of the new Keys record, but it obviously comes from hateful place. I hate a lot of bands too and talk shit all the time. But not in a super gay and thinly veiled attempt to be clever like writing a lost scene by Billy S. It's called having a clear and coherent opinion coming from a place of knowledge. Nick is a bitter music major who had to move from Detroit to San Fran 'cause everyone hated him. Yeah. What a pussy. This isn't even about the Black Keys, really. It's about not being the music journalistic equivalent of Perez Hilton. Get a life. Get over it. Get an actual opinion. Save the shit talking to talkbackers.
-
jpudson 09/12/2006 9:41:00 PM
Nat Cavalieri�s King Lear parody is a passive-aggressive rant against musician with refreshing and real talent. Since he has little talent as a musician, Cavalieri criticizes that which he will never be. He�s a hater
Musicians as diverse as Robert Plant, Billy Gibbons and Thom Yorke have praised the Black Keys for their music and musicianship. I�ve seen the Black Keys perform many times and they put on a no bull-shit show that�s one of the best I�ve ever seen.
Ultimately, Cavalieri�s King Lear lampoon doesn�t work because the Fool in King Lear is the truthsayer that points out others lies and deceits. He�s not an idiot; he�s a sage. I don�t think Nat knew this when he wrote his piece, and so it seems, Mr. Cavalieri, that you�re a fool.
-
echoreturn 09/12/2006 7:02:00 AM
got this from the black keys forum:
"This is the letter I sent in response to the piece, "As You Loath It," by Nate Cavalieri:
Nate Cavalieri has the right to write whatever he wants about whatever band he wants. If his journalisti c instincts tell him to slam The Black Keys ("As You Loath It"), so be it. But I've got more than a hunch that this so-called music critic has a giant axe to grind.
It would have been at least semi-responsible for Cavalieri to give full disclosure as to his personal issues with The Keys. Mr. Cavalieri used to play keyboards with a Detriot-based band called The Sights. The Sights played with The Black Keys on various occasions. One particular evening, Mr. Cavalieri made it clear that he wasn't a fan of his Akron colleagues, just a jealous and insidious rival. Soon thereafter, Mr. Cavalieri left the band, but the relationshi p has been tenuous ever since.
This isn't the first time Cavalieri's written about The Keys, and it certainly isn't the first time he's made sure to drag them through cow shit. It's almost uncanny how often he's pitched alt-weeklies on stories about the Akron band. Almost obssessive.
I'm sure he didn't tell your music editor that he had a personal vendetta against the band when he offered to write them up. So I'm not blaming your publication for allowing itself to be played like some whiney hack's tear-drenched diary.
As a fellow Village Voice Media writer, I'm thouroughly disgusted at Cavalieri's total lack of ethics. As The Black Key's drummer, Patrick Carney's girlfriend, I can attest to the fact that I'm not talking out of my ass. And as someone who attended Oberlin College with Cavalieri, I find it funny that his parents shelled out at least $80,000 for him to study music, so he could join an underwhelmi ng Detroit band, only to fail miserably, and end up as little more than a struggling music writer who abuses the power of the pen to jerk himself off.
Sorry, Village Voice. But you've been punked.
-Denise Grollmus"
-
dbman5 09/12/2006 5:26:00 AM
If you get a chance to see The Black Keys perform live, don't miss it. Dan Auerbach is hands-down the best guitarist out there. Although he may not be the most technically skilled, he has the most unique style. It would take 3 guitarists to keep up with what he does on his own. The wall of sound that comes from just guitar and drums is amazing.
