- What is the context in which this review was written (you can figure this out through the footnotes in the beginning of the article, a Google search, and clues within the text.)
- What is the overall purpose of the review (critique, defend, describe, etc.)
- How does the author approach their subject?
- Describe the author's overall tone.
- What is the author's overall thesis (they probably don't have a "thesis" but what is the take-away)
- What (types of) evidence does the author use to defend this interpretation of the text?
- Ultimately, what do we learn about music from reading the article?
- Now that you have answered all of these questions, write a 2-3 sentence summary of the article that expresses the nuance of the author's engagement with the music. Do not include any of your opinion on the article, try to be as objective as possible.
- Give your opinion of the article in 2-3 sentences. Consider all the elements that were discussed above
Thursday, January 19, 2017
Approaching the Album Review
In your groups answer the following questions about your reading. Remember the goal of this exercise is not to get it done quickly but to learn something about writing about music that you can bring into your own writing. That said, try to provide thorough, evidenced, and well thought objective answers. Post your answers as comments to this blog post.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Group 2: Joy Division
ReplyDelete1. Reading Paul Morley's excerpt at the beginning of the chapter expresses his belief that reviews shouldn't be about the music itself, but what happens because of the music. This is shown in the first half-page of his review as he discusses his odyssey through the hallways of the school before finding Joy Division's performance.
2. "Joy Division will tear you apart, still" is the final line of this review and sums up the entire review quite simply. Whether his goal was too, or not, Morley discusses almost the entire past of Joy Division's music and praises their "simple music, but not simple minded" pieces.
3.
continued further down :)
DeleteConnor Hutt, Taylor Diveley, and Chloe Rafferty
ReplyDelete1. Lou Reed is an artist that is critiquing Kanye West, someone who is in a completely different genre of music, which is the point of the website "The Talkhouse".
2. This article is simultaneously critiquing and defending Kanye. In the beginning, Reed is harsh on the album and points out its shortcoming and why he doesnt like it. Later on, Reed admits this album isnt his preferred style, but says that if this is someone else's style, then it is art to them.
3. Before diving into the album, he introduces Kanye as a person and an artist. Then Reed dives into criticisms.
4. Reed is really blunt in this article, he is straight up about how he feels about the music. Overall, this article is openminded while also giving personal opinions.
5. Kanye is not my cup of tea, but I appreciate him and respect those who like his music.
6. He uses evidence in the music and quotes the music when he is critiquing and also complimenting him.
7. We learn that any kind of music can be appreciated by everyone, even if they dont like it. Music has an incredible amount of genres and you dont have to like them to appreciate them.
8. Lou Reed goes into critiquing Kanye West's Yeezus album with an open mind and he does not only critique nor defend him.
9. oops
The context of which this review was written is The Talk House. The overall goal of this review is to defend Kanye. He starts off most paragraphs with critiquing Kanye but then ends them by praising his creativity. He approaches the subject as if Kanye was reviewing Kanye. He bounces back and forth from praising him to showing his faults. At the end of the day he knows it's good, but he's not going to let everything slide by. It's quite neat how Lou Reed has the same "IDGAF" attitude in this review that Kanye has always had. His tone is the same. It's blunt but still intelligent. He is obviously smart and has very clever things to say about most every aspect about the album, but still jokes around while critiquing various things, like the lyrics. He says his lyrics come off as if Kanye made them last minute, but then praises the energy behind them. The general takeaway is that Kanye is still Kanye. He's still tearing up tracks by bringing very diverse samples. Lou Reed is saying that Yeezus is what makes Kanye himself. If you don't like it you can get out of the way. The evidence he uses is lyrics, sounds, samples. He shows exactly what is actually happening in the different tracks.
ReplyDeleteAlex Pressley, Lelia Rice, Frank Tkach
Claire Spence, Mikayla McCord & Jack Hall
ReplyDelete1. She wrote a book about Led Zeppelin for people who want to understand about culture in an academic way and this is an excerpt from it.
2. The purpose of this review is to offer a cultural look at Led Zeppelin's music for people who want to know about culture from an academic standpoint.
3. She breaks the subject down analytically and uses historical context.
4. She had an informative tone - it seemed like her just listing facts. She takes an academic voice, just due to the fact that she wrote this excerpt in a book.
5. Led Zeppelin was able to make the journey of going up the "Stairway to Heaven" into a song.
6. She uses pictures and diagrams of sheet music of the lyrics, melody and harmonies as evidence. She also makes sure that all of her words are describing the diagrams.
7. We learn that popular bands used complex methods to create their music.
8. Susan Fast tries to explain the rhyme and reason of "Stairway to Heaven". She does this through explaining how the lyrics and the instrumentals connect to the feeling of going up the stairway to heaven. She talks about the placement of the song (the end of the album) and how the stairway to heaven is the end of one's life.
9. We think Fast should have used more personality in her piece. The review makes sense for the context it is in, but we personally did not enjoy the piece. We feel like it looks too deeply into the lyrics and the conventions of the song, yet this is helpful for someone reading her book who wants academic look at the music theory of Led Zeppelin.
1.) The review was written in a book “Masters of Reality”, part of a series of books dedicated to individual albums.
ReplyDelete2.) The piece is written to give defend the album, giving it much praise and appreciation.
3.) The piece was written as a holistic journal, a step by step of the music.
4.) The piece is written from the heart, the tone is obsessive and almost scary.
5.) Black Sabbath is my only joy in life.
6.) For evidence, he quoted black Sabbath and talks about his therapy, his arguments are so loaded that it can almost seem like you should take it heart.
7.) We learn that despite how absolutely crazy the author is, the music has helped him in his life.
8.) The article being objective by nature, is cataloging the man’s intimate experience with the band as a whole. He takes his own life and applies how the music and the band has changed his influenced his behavior and lifestyle.
9.) This man obviously has a very obsessive personality and does need to continue to seek help. With that being said; this person is very passionate about his work and wants people to enjoy it as much as he does.
marshall w, Zach s, noah d
Ben and Samar
ReplyDelete1. Writing through the ears of someone who is locked in a psychiatric center
2. To tell a story of how it is affected him
3. Through the ears of Roger Painter
4. The tone is pretty laid back. Almost conversational.
5. The authors thesis was that Black Sabbath helped him get through life
6. Character opinion, album names, song lyrics, stories about the band
7. Music can be very personal, and can mean a lot to someone.
8. This article is basically a diary that shows the how much Black Sabbath music meant to this person. This person believes that Black Sabbath was "made for [him]," or more precisely, "waiting for a person like [him] to come along."
9. This article was very personal and cool. He analyzes the music and provides a new interpretation for the music.
Haley Strunk & Mary Ashley Boykin
ReplyDelete1) This review was written by Paul Morley as one of his reviews for the New Musical Express in 1980 on an upcoming band called Joy Division.
2) Overall, the review's purpose was to describe the new band to readers. It just so happened that he had been heavily praising them as well.
3) The author approaches this review and the band by describing the setting of one of their concerts as well as the history on the band.
4) The overall tone of the article was astonishment at the decency of the band.
5) The author's overall thesis is that Joy Division's music is equivalent to Pink Floyd and their music is something to not miss out on.
6) The author describes their music as having "extreme paramelodies", as well as improving consistently throughout their growth as a band.
7) Readers ultimately learn that the band Joy Division is exciting and innovative.
8) The author states Joy Division as the new Pink Floyd. Their music has intensity and strength that mirrors that of an escapable nightmare. Overall, the band's music and live experience is extremely recommended.
9) This article was not only interesting but was also enjoyable to read. The depth in which the author writes makes it seem as though he is in a love affair with the band.
3. Repeating what was originally said, he goes through the journey of Joy Division and also his journey of finding them as a band.
ReplyDelete4. Morley is extremely supportive saying virtually nothing negative about the band and their music.
5. Going back to his excerpt in the beginning, he focuses on what is going on around the music and the concert rather than the music/concert itself. He makes sure that his personal experiences and other surrounding peoples experiences are the highlight and overall theme of the review.
6. He analyzes their sound in deep detail; outlining the drums and guitar as a personal experience.
7. He perfectly describes Joy Division's music as "cryptic but not impenetrable."
8. Morley is describing the setting in full detail to the reader in order to ensure that the reader's get the same experience that he had. The review was positive and optimistic of the band's future.
9. The article was extremely informative and showed the simplicity yet complications of the band's lyrics. We enjoyed seeing the author's stance on the concert
Emily Anderson, Jacob Mcleand, Katherine Zeller
Delete
ReplyDeleteSusan Fast, the reviewer, is a professor in the Department of English and Cultural Studies at McMaster University. This review was published in a Bloomsbury Thirty Three and a Third. This is more of an analysis than a review. Focusing mainly on musicality, it is mainly a description. The review resembles a research paper. The author approaches the subject with a great amount of respect. Almost as more of a historical document than a piece of music. The overall tone is heavily analytical. The biggest takeaway is that the musicality of it was unlike any other band of its time, with the use of genre bending instrumentation. The social impact was heavier than the crowd's initially expected to get out of it. The author makes heavy use of the sheet music. We learn a lot about the musicality involved in classic rock that is initially overlooked.
There was not much nuance in the article; it was very analytical. There was very much a intellectual connection to the music rather than an emotional connection in reference to this particular review.
The article was really facetious. It seemed to dive far too deep into the musicality of it while overlooking the emotional impact of the actual music.
John David Rinehart