Forum Home Forum Home > Progressive Music Lounges > Books and Miscellaneous Reviews
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - "Faking It" by H. Barker and Y. Taylor
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic Closed"Faking It" by H. Barker and Y. Taylor

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Message
Toaster Mantis View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 12 2008
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 5898
Direct Link To This Post Topic: "Faking It" by H. Barker and Y. Taylor
    Posted: October 23 2008 at 09:52
Right now I'm halfways through this book subtitled The Quest for Authenticity in Popular Music ... and though it doesn't use that many examples from prog, I sure as hell think it's relevant. It takes a rather critical look at not just the concept of authenticity but also genre classifications in general. However, it's not always equally neutral because instead of collaborating on each chapter the two authors split the bok between each other by chapter. Confused There are also times where the limits of the authors' musical knowledge become a bit too obvious, like pretty much every time it talks about metal. (which fortunately is a rare occasion! LOL)

The good stuff in the book is absolutely brilliant, though, and so far it's mostly good stuff. Especially its evisceration of Alan Lomax. For those who don't know: Lomax is basically the Johann Grimm of American folk music and is responsible for most of what is today known about it. That said: Faking It reveals that his definition of "authentic folk music" was so ridiculously narrow that the stuff making the cut to his compilations was hardly at all representative of traditional American music. The most prog-related chapter is probably the one comparing the Beatles and the Monkees, since its point is that it wasn't until the Beatles that only performing the songs you wrote yourself became a norm in rock. They might not have invented prog as such (that honour goes to Frank Zappa) but it's clear that prog wouldn't have become as big as it did if it wasn't for the Beatles getting the influence they did.

Anyone else read it? I'm curious to know other progheads' opinion on it...




Edited by Toaster Mantis - October 25 2008 at 15:46
"The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook
Back to Top
CPicard View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 03 2008
Location: Là, sui monti.
Status: Offline
Points: 10841
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 24 2008 at 13:14
Is this book available in Europe? It could be an interesting one to read.
About Lomax, I loosely remember having already read something about his definition of folk music a few years ago. When had "Faking It" been published?
Back to Top
Toaster Mantis View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 12 2008
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 5898
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 24 2008 at 13:28
It is available in Europe (as I found it at a public library in Denmark) and was published last year. Smile
"The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook
Back to Top
Toaster Mantis View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 12 2008
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 5898
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 25 2008 at 15:44
Today I finished reading it. As eye-opening as it is on a lot of levels (e. g. its dissection of punk rock), it's still at times rather amateurishly written...  and I feel like making this clear about Faking It: Though it criticizes a lot of preconceived ideas about authenticity people have when thinking about music, it does not say that there is no such thing as it. For example, one of the chapters is mostly about why Neil Young's early stuff (culminating with Tonight's the Night) is as truly authentic music as you'll ever find. Its points are more like:

1) Some criteria for authenticity commonly held by music fans and critics are rather shallow or just plain nonsensical. Especially the entire cottage industry around folk music gets skewered here since it's probably the worst about it, what with how the whole "real deal" thing is used as a marketing buzzword and people fall for it hook line and sinker.

2) Authenticity or lack thereof is not good or bad in itself. One chapter defends disco as a pretty intelligent genre, which in expression often got rather multi-faceted and had a lot to say about its surrending culture not despite but through being deliberately phony (among other things) but died a premature death at the hands of what you could call "genre chauvinism".

Though it's very far from perfect, I think it mostly makes a good case and certainly is a rather thought-provokign affair. It also gotten me more interested in Neil Young than I used to be, not because of how authentic he supposedly is but because it describes the style of some of his albums as similar to something I'd like.


Edited by Toaster Mantis - October 25 2008 at 15:44
"The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook
Back to Top
Queen By-Tor View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 13 2006
Location: Xanadu
Status: Offline
Points: 16111
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 25 2008 at 17:17
This sounds like something I should try to get my hands on since it's a topic I often find myself in heated discussions about.

Cheers, sir Toaster, for bring this to attention
Back to Top
Toaster Mantis View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 12 2008
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 5898
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 02 2008 at 05:51
Yuval Taylor also did a podcast about this book, which I think you should hear if you're interested in it because it summarizes some of the points he's making.
"The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook
Back to Top
Henry Plainview View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 26 2008
Location: Declined
Status: Offline
Points: 16715
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 02 2008 at 12:34
Have you read File Under Popular by Chris Cutler? I've been wanting to.
if you own a sodastream i hate you
Back to Top
Toaster Mantis View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 12 2008
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 5898
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 02 2008 at 13:05
Originally posted by Henry Plainview Henry Plainview wrote:

Have you read File Under Popular by Chris Cutler?


No, but now that you mentioned it I'm interested. How much does it cover the same subject matter as Faking It?
"The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook
Back to Top
Henry Plainview View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 26 2008
Location: Declined
Status: Offline
Points: 16715
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 02 2008 at 14:32
Originally posted by Toaster Mantis Toaster Mantis wrote:

Originally posted by Henry Plainview Henry Plainview wrote:

Have you read File Under Popular by Chris Cutler?

No, but now that you mentioned it I'm interested. How much does it cover the same subject matter as Faking It?
I haven't gotten around to reading it yet because I'm poor and it's not at the library, but I'm told it is "a stirringly aggressive antidote to contemporary pop cynicism". I found this essay on the term avant-garde fascinating, considering what I and so many others think of him. 
 
And I personally think the insights of one of the avant-garde's most accomplished musicians on "popular music" is much more valuable than...whatever it is those authors are. Then again, I do not think I am someone who cares about the "authenticity" they are referring to.


Edited by Henry Plainview - November 02 2008 at 14:37
if you own a sodastream i hate you
Back to Top
Toaster Mantis View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 12 2008
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 5898
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 02 2008 at 17:11
How "avantgarde" something is, that's something I more and more am thinking of completely irrelevant. All it's about is how different a work of art is from what everyone else is doing, rather than what it's actually saying.
"The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook
Back to Top
debrewguy View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 30 2007
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 3596
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 02 2008 at 21:11
The ultimate determinant of quality is the opinion of the listener. No "expert" is needed, nor relevant. No consensus, nor agreement with others, be they a minority or the majority is required as "proof" or support for one's taste.
Beauty is in the ear of the behearer (sic).
SO let the Celineophiles Vegas themselves to death, allow the Zeuhl to procreate, and keep your ears open for the next magical musical moment. That's all that should matter to you, eh.
P.S. I do enjoy essays such as the listed, and look forward to locating the books mentioned. I do like well argued opinions. I have no use for Proclaimed Truth.
"Here I am talking to some of the smartest people in the world and I didn't even notice,” Lieutenant Columbo, episode The Bye-Bye Sky-High I.Q. Murder Case.
Back to Top
Henry Plainview View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 26 2008
Location: Declined
Status: Offline
Points: 16715
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 02 2008 at 22:12
Originally posted by Toaster Mantis Toaster Mantis wrote:

How "avantgarde" something is, that's something I more and more am thinking of completely irrelevant. All it's about is how different a work of art is from what everyone else is doing, rather than what it's actually saying.
Well I would say that is what separates good avant-garde from bad avant-garde. I don't mind if the composer is just trying to sound different, but that will probably mean it sounds forced/terrible. Which is the problem. But I like to think that their musical visions are for the most part just radically different from conventional ideals.
if you own a sodastream i hate you
Back to Top
Toaster Mantis View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 12 2008
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 5898
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 03 2008 at 04:22
Henry, how familiar are you with "outsider music"? You know, music that's created totally outside the norms and structures of mainstream culture and its ideas of what good music's like. Stuff like Captain Beefheart, Joe Meek and the Blue Men, the Residents, Syd Barrett's solo albums and so on...  I don't think outsider music is synonymous with avantgarde music at all, though, because "outsider" is nowhere as self-conscious about doing something different. Not as much deliberately thinking outside the box as never even having gotten into the box in the first place, you could say, however I'm not sure that's a good description because the Residents are very consciously avantgarde but are definitely outsider artists. At least they prove there's some overlap. LOL

So, what the hell am I trying to prove with this? Well, if you ask me "outsider artists" are more genuinely artistic than those who put a lot of craft into being avantgarde. I think it's because usually with outsider music, the whole "different from everyone else" is incidental rather than the entire point of the exercise. But, as Barker and Taylor prove in their book, that doesn't necessarily make it better music.


Edited by Toaster Mantis - November 03 2008 at 04:57
"The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook
Back to Top
Henry Plainview View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 26 2008
Location: Declined
Status: Offline
Points: 16715
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 03 2008 at 10:48
Originally posted by Toaster Mantis Toaster Mantis wrote:

Henry, how familiar are you with "outsider music"? You know, music that's created totally outside the norms and structures of mainstream culture and its ideas of what good music's like. Stuff like Captain Beefheart, Joe Meek and the Blue Men, the Residents, Syd Barrett's solo albums and so on...  I don't think outsider music is synonymous with avantgarde music at all, though, because "outsider" is nowhere as self-conscious about doing something different. Not as much deliberately thinking outside the box as never even having gotten into the box in the first place, you could say, however I'm not sure that's a good description because the Residents are very consciously avantgarde but are definitely outsider artists. At least they prove there's some overlap. LOL

So, what the hell am I trying to prove with this? Well, if you ask me "outsider artists" are more genuinely artistic than those who put a lot of craft into being avantgarde. I think it's because usually with outsider music, the whole "different from everyone else" is incidental rather than the entire point of the exercise. But, as Barker and Taylor prove in their book, that doesn't necessarily make it better music.
I'm really big on "avant-garde" music (to the point that I do not listen to "normal" rock and roll, because I am unbearably pretentious), so I know what you're talking about. Although I have never heard of Joe Meek.
 
I agree that intellectually it's better if they are outsiders rather than self-concious, but from our perspective, is not the difference mainly whether or not we like it? And how much of a difference does it usually make? For example: people complain about how modern prog is self-conciously prog, while in the past it was unconcious and therefore better.
 
However, did Jon go "Holy sh*t guys! I just realized we wrote CTTE in sonata form instead of a 3 minute song!" Although the good ones pushed it, classical composers deliberately wrote in classical forms, does that dimish the value of their art? Did Penderecki accidentally have unresolved dissonances in Threnody for the Victims of Hiroshima? If you're trying to write in a style, unless you suck, that style is stil partially within you.
if you own a sodastream i hate you
Back to Top
debrewguy View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 30 2007
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 3596
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 03 2008 at 21:49
DIdn't the Turtles have a B-Side called "Can't you hear the Cows" ? No , really 
"Here I am talking to some of the smartest people in the world and I didn't even notice,” Lieutenant Columbo, episode The Bye-Bye Sky-High I.Q. Murder Case.
Back to Top
Toaster Mantis View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 12 2008
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 5898
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 04 2008 at 05:49
Originally posted by Henry Plainview Henry Plainview wrote:

However, did Jon go "Holy sh*t guys! I just realized we wrote CTTE in sonata form instead of a 3 minute song!" Although the good ones pushed it, classical composers deliberately wrote in classical forms, does that dimish the value of their art? Did Penderecki accidentally have unresolved dissonances in Threnody for the Victims of Hiroshima?


Well, they did consciously set out to make a long complex "rock sonata" that but it was still probably because that would be the best way of giving shape to this greater abstract concept, not because it would be doing something different from what everyone was or because it would one-up others in craftsmanship. Even if those were factors, I don't think at all they were their primary goals at all because Close to the Edge does not seem to fall into the worst pitfalls of avantgarde stuff. Smile

Also, I said "more genuinely artistic" not "better" and made it clear that was what I meant - as Faking It demonstrates, authenticity and quality don't correlate Wink.

Quote If you're trying to write in a style, unless you suck, that style is stil partially within you.


You have a good point there: Self-consciousness in art is probably less an "either/or" thing than a "how much?" thing. After all, by making something in an existing style you're already (indirectly) picking a target audience...
"The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook
Back to Top
Toaster Mantis View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 12 2008
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 5898
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 04 2008 at 06:02
Originally posted by debrewguy debrewguy wrote:

DIdn't the Turtles have a B-Side called "Can't you hear the Cows" ? No , really 


Perhaps. LOL
"The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook
Back to Top
Henry Plainview View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 26 2008
Location: Declined
Status: Offline
Points: 16715
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 04 2008 at 12:24
Originally posted by Toaster Mantis Toaster Mantis wrote:

Originally posted by Henry Plainview Henry Plainview wrote:

However, did Jon go "Holy sh*t guys! I just realized we wrote CTTE in sonata form instead of a 3 minute song!" Although the good ones pushed it, classical composers deliberately wrote in classical forms, does that dimish the value of their art? Did Penderecki accidentally have unresolved dissonances in Threnody for the Victims of Hiroshima?


Well, they did consciously set out to make a long complex "rock sonata" that but it was still probably because that would be the best way of giving shape to this greater abstract concept, not because it would be doing something different from what everyone was or because it would one-up others in craftsmanship. Even if those were factors, I don't think at all they were their primary goals at all because Close to the Edge does not seem to fall into the worst pitfalls of avantgarde stuff. Smile

Also, I said "more genuinely artistic" not "better" and made it clear that was what I meant - as Faking It demonstrates, authenticity and quality don't correlate Wink.
I really really doubt that Yes was not thinking about being different from AC/DC, but how is it possible for you to tell the difference? You think it was that way because you like it. I disagree because I don't. ;-)
 
You are assuming the pitfalls of the avant-garde is when it is forced, but I would say it's because you suck at that type of music. Or perhaps music in general.
if you own a sodastream i hate you
Back to Top
Toaster Mantis View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 12 2008
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 5898
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 04 2008 at 13:36
Could be. A lot of my opinions of music are, after all, more or less made up on the spot LOL and a lot of them I'm no longer sure in after reading that book. And I'm probably still putting too much judgement upon avantgardeness... or I'm making a mistake in thinking of "consciously avant-garde" artists and outsider artists as opposites because the best known outsiders are both. You know, like Syd Barrett and Captain Beefheart.

Also, fetishizing this "outsider-ness" is the kind of attitude that book eviscerates! Confused


Edited by Toaster Mantis - November 04 2008 at 14:00
"The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.137 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.