From Alex Reynolds Sent Sat, Aug 1st 1998, 09:30
RECLUSIVE REVIEWER GIVES RARE INTERVIEW AFTER IDM ARTICLE CAUSES MASSIVE GASTROINTESTINAL DISTRESS By Philip Smiles BRECON, WALES, August 1 (REUTERZ) In a very rare and unexpected demonstration of cojones, the reclusive music reviewer Alex Reynolds agreed to respond in an exclusive Reuterz interview to numerous complaints about an unusally controversial and disturbing review posted two days ago to the IDM mailing list.=20 Some readers of the offending article were stricken with debilitating cramps and nausea, while others who deleted the message immediately were not affected. Still others reading the article remained puzzled and simply turned the computer off to watch "Teletubbies" and drool on themselves. As I fought back rolls of gagging reading the thing myself, I reflected upon the writer's turbulent past: being awarded advanced degrees in Bullshitting from the highest institutions in the land at the age of 14; the first, sweet taste of rock and roll at 16; the first acclaimed album review at 20; the eventual shying and self-exile from the mocking of the critic-critics by 22. I was received at the Brecon train station in mysterious, yet polite fashion by Reynolds' houseboy -- a cross-eyed hunchback, named Mongo -- who bowed neatly and proceeded to blindfold me for security reasons. "Mongo sez: Plees step een to thee caar, meester Smylesss", he hissed, leading me to his 1972 Citroen Type II. We drove to the writer's estate in silence, myself not knowing at all where we were. After fifteen minutes, Mongo stopped the car and, with my blindfold removed, let me out.=20 Clad in James Bond-like smoking jacket and pipe, Reynolds held open the door to his ivory-tower-shaped residence and welcomed us in. We exchanged brief pleasantries and proceeded to the study; with Mongo in tow, carrying our freshly-made martinis in a tray: PS: Your article seems to have ruffled a few feathers. Some think you're full of it or that you're poking fun at the typical pseudo-intellectual review; others yet see the piece as overanalysis of an artwork which didn't ask for an explanation to begin with; the rest are uneasy or just don't care. What happened? AR: Most could care less. But it appears that some have a nihilistic view of the world and feel that the artistic process fits in this view quite nicely. For most works, I tend to disagree with this view quite strongly. It is the exceedingly rare instance when the artist puts paints to canvas, letters to paper, or notes to stave without some motivation or impulse behind the act. PS: So you think Autechre have higher motivations than aesthetics for its own sake? AR: I do for this particular release. I could be wrong -- it wouldn't be the first time. They could be motivated purely by aesthetics, or by money, for example: generating a set of beats that they know to hook listeners, sell records and make profits. Somehow, I doubt it. Even so, that's a judgement call on the part of the listener. I strongly welcome other readers to volunteer their own unique viewpoints, beyond the tired "Alex, you're full of shit" viewpoint. M: Mongo sez: Pleese tayke theese fukin drinks, sirrs, my arrm ees veery tyerrd. AR: Ah, so sorry, Mongo. (Takes martini) Cheers. PS: Cheers. What if Ae says: "We're only in it for the money", or, "We we're thinking about those spiffy new, two-inch high elevator shoes with the velco laces we saw in _Cosmo_ when we wrote this particular track." Would that change your opinion of the music? AR: Probably. I might not enjoy my hard-earned interpretation of their tracks, as much. I would probably still enjoy the track for "Spice Girl"-ish reasons, though. PS: What exactly do you mean by that? AR: Well, as you know, Phil (I can call you Phil, right?), the Spice Girls are the invention of a record company exec making scads of cash by connecting well-marketed, sexy bods with lyrics and music that are known to be catchy and thus will move product.=20 The catchy "hook" of an Ae track would still appeal to me, in that mechanical, "Spice Girl" way. Listen to Ae's "Clipper" a few times and you'll know exactly what I mean by the "hook" device. But that basically takes all the fun out of listening to a work so I keep my mind on how I interprete it, instead of how it is probably in all reality intended. Music is entertainment, after all; it is, ultimately, an escape from reality. PS: You seem to read quite a bit into an artist's piece of work, issuing what some critics have called "fluff", not limited to the usual pseudo-profundities and an overabundance of modified adjectives. How do you plead? AR: Guilty as charged!=20 Off the record, the only reason I made the article as long-winded and academic-sounding as it was, was to secure bags and bags of tax-free grant money from the major music rags for my new research lab. We'll call it the Brecon Advanced Autechre Reviewing Foundation (BAARF). Here's our research plan: We'll have a testing lab where we'll bring in fresh mea.. erm, test subjects and have them eat lots of acid before placing them in a controlled stimulus/response environment: playing new Autechre and other IDM tracks while hosing them with water in unpredictable ways. Afterwards, if the subjects haven't clawed each others' eyeballs out yet trying to escape, we'll get their educated responses on paper and sent the results along to _Spin_, _NME_, and _Rolling Stone_ journals for publication.=20 God, I can see the checks rolling in right now... Seriously though, I'm only guilty of compressing the review by the words I chose. The track descriptions could easily have stretched on another twenty, thirty pages. God forbid. Brevity improved readability, in my opinion. Buy a fucking dictionary if you can't follow along. PS: So you willingly open yourself to mockery? AR: Yeah, well, so what -- who cares, you know? In the end it's only music and it was only my informed opinion about it. So sorry if any of you lost any sleep. Even if I'm dead wrong I wouldn't have changed a thing about the article. It was fun to write and, after all, no one else has bothered to offer their take on the subject -- beyond a cursory footmark or two. End of story. M: Mongo sez: whip theese ignooranto bastardos with thee no-eet-all, smahrt-ayss commentarees, eeh? AR: Easy, Mongo, easy. Don't make me bring out the leeches. =A9 1998 Reuterz Inc. All rights to satirical usage reserved, blah blah blah= .