Monday, April 14, 2008
I'm back
After nine hours, four airports, and mild motion sickness, I'm back in 80-degree weather (and a possible cold front!). It was great to see friends and colleagues in Seattle, as usual, and, while EMP Pop Conference itself was good not great, I particularly enjoyed these three papers, as well as presentations by Todd and Tal. The decision to include more papers by academics injected an unwholesome amount of pedagogical oratory and jargon into several promising ideas (I never want to hear about "praxis," "teleological," and "heteronormative valences" in my presence again). In my experience, academics care little about audience reactions because the lecture format isn't particularly kind to the reception of ideas; it's just irrelevant. Also, academics have been taught to expunge their presentations of opinions, so their relation to the material they're presenting is often mystifying, often reflected in neutered prose. Pop music promises a utopian notion of community, and some of the presentations betrayed purely ascetic experiences that often clashed with the inchoate nature of the songs under discussion.
ascetic experiences that often clashed with the inchoate nature of the songs under discussion
ReplyDeleteEvocative phrase...I'll have to swipe it from you some time!
Yeah, I'm trying to decide if I'm going to keep sending in increasingly batshit abstracts to EMP or just give it up and try just to attend one of these days. Probably the latter.
Found my way here thanks to Carl Wilson's post. I'm surprised this didn't happen earlier, mainly because conferences tend to formalize a discipline, and as you imply, music criticism isn't exactly a discipline in that sense.
ReplyDeleteI personally think it's silly and a bit sad for music criticism to be held up to that standard since it seems to be a ploy to be taken seriously, when more people read and take seriously music criticism all the time.