There’s a lot to unpack here, so lemme start with the thesis of the second paragraph. I agree 100% with the problems of a lack of a critical culture. Earlier in his presentation, Weingarten noted that in the current leakblog culture, release-date reviews (even in online magazines) can no longer set the tone of the discussion but only reinforce (or to an extent tweak) the pre-existing popular narrative built from blogs, twitter, etc. And this is extremely problematic! Not that all critics live up to their duties, but the record review is basically the only point of intervention in the trajectory of a record at which to problematize issues of authenticity/post-authenticity, sexism, classism, othering, etc. If you have talked to me about music for any amount of time I have probably linked you to Brian Howe’s August 2007 piece for the blog Moistworks on Devin the Dude’s Waiting to Inhale, in which he explores the complicated navigation and reconciliation required when listening to the record and sharing his love for it. I don’t think the points he made could have been condensed to 140 words (no matter how snarky) so I take issue with Weingarten’s suggestion that Twitter is enough (although many, many reviews, blog posts, etc. could use some serious editing, and it’s also refreshing to see someone other than Ned Raggett talking about how shorter word counts are not all bad). That said, without this sort of critical examination, music tastes tend to be reduced to a facet of a personal lifestyle brand (♥ u carles). There’s never a “why” because the implicit “why” is that it’s “cooler” and “better” than whatever you’re listening to by its very nature. And as long as music is used in this way, i.e. purely as a Bourdieuian class signifier, then of course the “white people guitar music” is going to be most popular. Just look at the race, class, and (implicit) gender signifiers there.
On the other hand, Weingarten, intentionally or not, dismisses Fleet Foxes (in his example) by rehashing the rockist argument against “easy listening.” Fleet Foxes is “boring” and “bland” for the same “inherent” reasons that, say, Celine Dion is “boring” and “bland.” Basically he’s arguing against all lifestyle music. And lifestyle music is, for one, the way the majority of people experience music. Just because critics are no longer gatekeepers between music fans and their lifestyle music doesn’t mean that lifestyle music is a new phenomenon. Most music fans never interrogate their tastes, and never think about the “why” that Weingarten calls for. Not to mention that in the endless rehash of the reification of music (particularly indie rock) as a youth culture, the very music fans to whom Weingarten appeals have been incredibly dismissive of lifestyle music in ageist and sexist terms. Just as Eric Weisbard or Carl Wilson or anyone else analyzing the semiotics of adult contemporary. Weingarten’s argument against NPR music uses the same types of slander as are used against adult contemporary. (“It’s not the music that’s the best, it’s the music that the most people can stand, the music that the most people can listen to” sounds like the argument of the dude in the cubicle who’s mad that they’re pumping the Hot AC station through the speakers at the workplace!) Should everyone think critically about her/his cultural consumption? Absolutely yes. But by drawing on this idea of an “avant-garde” as the platonic ideal (the “truly adventurous,” in his words), Weingarten simply reuses a bullshit high culture vs. low culture dichotomy—a bizarrely backwards-looking argument in an otherwise very much of-the-moment and on-point presentation.
P.S. He also contradicts himself by talking nostalgically about magazines with a breadth of coverage pre-internet and then complaining about magazines (online and in print) that are not narrowly-focused enough to exclude Phish. But that’s a minor point.
The Rockist term gets thrown around a bunch. For me, definition relates to how the practice is used. For me Rockism is an attack on other genres usually associated with some sort of marginalized group (gays, blacks, women) like Disco, Pop, R&B, and or even easy listening music, in such a way that always favors the values and tastes of the liberal arts (predominantly white) dudes that became music critics. Why would that extend to bands like Fleet Foxes, whose raison d’etre seems to be making the most comfortable people in the history of the world even more comfortable? You can’t really compare their blandness to the purported blandness of Celine Dion. From a pure usage standpoint, who listens to Fleet Foxes? hmmm?
