Hating On Matthew Morrison = Hating On Fun: Comment Of The Day

• Hating On Kiernan = Winning?

• The only people breathing life into this blog lately are the people who actually review shows worth going to: Krissy, Christian, Roy, Diana, etc.  As best as I can tell, Kiernan's strengths are regurgitating press releases and adding snark.  In fact, out of the dozen or so contributors to this blog nowadays, he's probably the least vital.

• Fuck all of you talking shit about Kiernan.  I gotta say that this guy is doing a great fucking job.  He's a great writer with a lot of versatility, penning equally great and descriptive reviews of U2 as well as Wacka Flocka Flame. Don't get me wrong, I think Annie was great as well. She could sum up a Decemberists show and wax poetic about the greatness of Ke$ha.  But I'll be honest, I'm enjoying Kiernan's hip-hop sensibilities, and he's got an edge I think AZ was sorely lacking.   Maybe just cuz I'm a dude and he's a dude. No homo. Kiernan, ignore these haters and know that you are well appreciated.  You've breathed a lot of life into this blog recently and it shows.  We're lucky to have someone like you here in St Louis, so keep doing it big, player.

• Thanks!

• LEAVE THE GUY FROM GLEE ALONE!

• Hand to God, I have commented on this article more than any article ever.  It is probably my love of this blog and the St. Louis music scene that makes me keep coming back to it.  After I read the article again and got past the "too cool for school" stench that permeated it I can see that she is trying to make some sort of cultural statement.  What it is I'm still not clear ...but yes you are correct the point of blogging is to express an opinion and not to please the masses.  However, this blog used to be articulate about expressing an opinion without resorting to the common snark that is found on somebody's Tumlr account.

• Yup, nothing but lists. Nothing but snark. Every other blog in the Village Voice media empire -- please check them out -- aren't anywhere near as execrable as this one. New editor? Okay, but the honeymoon is over. This is how it's going to be, folks, for the foreseeable future.  And, for fuck's sake, there is this: "where we being bullies?"

• I wasn't the biggest fan of Annie, but compared to this new guy she's Ernest fucking Hemingway.

• I'm confused. I thought the whole point of blogging was to allow one person to express their opinion. If the rest of the world- or even the rest of Scottrade's audience- don't agree with it, who cares? I never realized the RFT's primary objective was to agree with everybody, or even identify with a majority; especially considering there was an entire show review that seemed to me to be fairly complementary of both the openers and main acts.  Meanwhile Ann's dig at St. Louis Community College psych students could be seen as just as offensive and ignorant as she apparently found the original post. An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind, amiright? Also using 'garsh and golly' doesn't make it less abrasive than just saying, fuck off kelsey. So one person didn't like it- I didn't realize everyone was required to.

• No you can't get a psychology minor at St. Louis Community College.  I should know, I work there. :-)  With that comment, Ann was wrapping and insult within an insult because your headline sounded psuedo-intellectual and the article had this feeling of too many self help books.  It also had this sheen of "aren't I cooler than you".  The comment "the audience was unafraid, but perhaps it should have been" in particular stands out as if the author is saying "look dummies, you many not realize it because you are dumb dummies, but you shouldn't like this, you dummies".  And so what if the guy likes Patrick Swayze? From what I've seen on Twitter the audience loved the whole dance bit.  They loved "Gold Digger" too.  Plus I highly doubt a guy who wears a bow-tie thinks he is "with it".  He strikes me as an entertainer who really is just doing what he likes at the moment and will probably change it up later.  The audience seemed to enjoy it.  And isn't that what matters from a concert, anyway?  Like Dawhizz I've been reading this blog a long time and have noticed the slow slide from informative, enjoyable reads to snark and rudeness.  Please fix it.  I used to love reading it. 

• We do all of those things constantly. 

• Actually this is yet another example of how this blog has been on a downward trajectory ever since Annie left. Maybe just focus on reporting on such things as reviewing live shows, upcoming shows to be excited about, and general STL music scene news? The daily snark posts don't really make me want to be a return visitor to this blog.

• We actually only glanced by Matthew Morrison in the review for this exact reason, but I'll avoid getting bogged down in the particulars: The larger goal of the sort of posts you're referring to is to act as supplemental commentary -- the heart of this blog will always be St. Louis music and I assure you we respect it categorically. And it's not a matter of picking on artists certain authors find uncool -- it's a matter of providing our take on specific events in mass popular culture. We welcome discussion and disagreement -- that is a key function of music criticism.  

• Were you being bullies? Well, sure.  Especially since the author of the article already had the opportunity to criticize the performance and had taken full advantage of that opportunity in a review of the whole concert (seems to me the subsequent article is the very definition of "piling on").  More troubling for me is the trend of A to Z articles which exist solely to identify and mock what various staff members see as staggeringly uncool (recent posts on Blink 182 and Coldplay spring to mind).  It's a striking departure from the overwhelmingly respectful tone this blog used to have (I'll refraing from using the "A-word") and is the laziest form of pseudo-journalism.  I've come to expect more from this blog and hope these will soon give way to more thoughtful and legitimate critique.

• Well, I can tell you the goal was not to make fun of his audience but to have some fun with what I certainly think is a very, very strange career trajectory/choice of presentation.

• It seemed to be a$$hattery for a$$hattery sake.  Plus, it was deeply condescending to an audience that had a good time.

TotalComments: 16