Chuck Eddy

The particular charm of this work is that the author is basically my contemporary, so I can track my parallel experiences in life and music against his. Having not been a huge "Village Voice" reader back in the day, Eddy's collected writings remind me (I was a determined "alt-rock" obscurantist and Anglophile in my tastes) about that magazine's mission to be contrarian in terms of selling the virtues of all popular music to radical hipsters whether they liked it or not.

The other main virtue of this memoir is that it is something of a tribute to a golden age of rock criticism that was pretty much built on the album as the focus of analysis, and the semi-collapse of which is part of the reason why it takes a lot of work to identify what is interesting to listen to in a time when there is no shortage of interesting music. This is not to mention that Eddy's lived a long enough life to be able to talk intelligently about the trends that have led to the current state of affairs.… (més)

I had not heard of Chuck Eddy before reading Rock and Roll Always Forgets: A Quarter Century of Music Criticism. I can say now that I wish I could write about books the way he writes about music. I don’t always agree with Eddy, especially about Kix, Def Leppard, and Nirvana, but even when I don’t agree with him, I recognize the intelligence, honesty, and passion in his writing. Eddy has made a name for himself in music criticism being provocative and fearless. It is certainly evident in this collection.

Rock and Roll Always Forgets: A Quarter Century of Music Criticism, published by Duke University Press in October 2011, is over 300 pages long. The back cover states: “Essential reading for music scholars, critics, and fans, it may well be the definitive time-capsule comment on pop music at the turn of the twenty-first century.” It’s not something you sit down and breeze through. I admit I struggled with the sections on hip hop and country simply because I don’t care about the subject matter, but Eddy’s writing is excellent throughout.

Most of the sections in the book deal with specific genres, except for the first section, “Predicting the Future” and the last section, “Singles Again and Again.” Those two sections happen to be my favorites. “Predicting the Future” is simply eerie. Maybe Eddy just made some lucky guesses. He heralds rap becoming an art form in 1981. He talks about a Pacific Northwest music scene that is “the making of a muck-megalopolis on the level of Michigan in ’69” in 1987. He talked about the power of the internet in music marketing in 1997.

The only article in the “Predicting the Future” section that I take exception with is a review of Radiohead’s The Bends, but that review is a perfect example of Eddy’s writing because there are so many cross references and so much thought. And even if you don’t agree with him, it’s hard to argue that he doesn’t know what he’s talking about. He makes comparisons and references to Michael Jackson, David Bowie, and Jesus and Mary Chain in one paragraph. In his closing paragraph he references the Beatles and Nirvana, and then writes:

"There’s more nice guitar gush (e.g. the sub-Tom-Scholz anthemic stairclimb of “Black Star”), but the rest of the album mostly reminds me of Suede trying to rock like Sparks but coming out like U2, or (more often) that hissy little puissant in Smashing Pumpkins passive-aggressively inspiring me to clobber him with my copy of The Grand Illusion by Styx."

What? He just ripped an album I like, but I’m going to have to educate myself in three bands (I’m familiar with U2 and Smashing Pumpkins) just to understand what he’s saying before I can try to refute it. I wonder if he liked OK Computer better.

I liked “Singles Again and Again” because it’s such a great education in music history. In “Radio ’86: Dead Air,” Eddy writes “Rock’n’roll radio has never been as boring as it’s been this year. Not in the middle ‘70s, not in the early ‘60s, not ever.” He goes on to explain. By the end of the article I wanted to get one of those best of the ‘80s mixes and compare the hits year to year. I also like this section because the shorter reviews of singles are simply funny and smart.

I don’t want to dismiss the genre sections of the book. There are great articles about the indie scene and rock in general. Eddy wrote a lot about metal and hard rock when few critics took it seriously. There is a nice section about the mixing of hip hop/rock/dance etc., which is fitting since it is rumored that Eddy’s review of Aerosmith’s Done with Mirrors inspired Rick Rubin to have Run-DMC cover “Walk This Way.” There are sections on hip hop, country, and pop as well. I’m simply not interested in all of the genres and artists, and I’m not a serious student of music criticism. That being said, it’s a great collection, and Chuck Eddy is a great music critic.… (més)

This is a difficult one for me to rate. Here's what I liked: Eddy's essays and reviews cover a 25 year period in music. If he spoke about a particular band more than once, as he often did, the pieces were grouped together so readers can see how his opinion, as well as the music, has evolved over time. The pieces are grouped loosely by genre, with rock, then hip hop/rap, country and pop. This makes it easy to skim over genres you have no interest in. Eddy holds nothing back. He doesn't get hung up on the technical side of music. Instead, he tackles the feel of it.

What I didn't like: Many of the rock bands he spoke about are obscure to the point that the average music listener won't know who they are. When he doesn't like something, which happens frequently, he will rant about it for pages. He leaves no room for differing opinions and the negativity gets old after awhile. He spent a lot of time on hip hop and rap, music genres I don't personally classify with rock.

Overall, it's an interesting read for any music lover.

** I received this as an advanced review ebook copy from Duke University Press, through NetGalley. **… (més)