"... offering to sell housewives lessons in music and art appreciation. Hickey plays no interviews—it’s just his research, painstakingly arranged to make a point. At first, these essays were of manageable length—half an hour for Episode 4, discussing 'Choo Choo Ch’Boogie,' by Louis Jordan. ('In the nineteen-forties and early fifties, the train still meant freedom, still meant escape, and even once that had vanished from people’s minds it was still enshrined in the chug of the backbeat, in the choo choo ch’boogie.') But the transcript of even that episode is four thousand words long, which, multiplied by five hundred, would give you two million words of content, and would best Gibbon by half a million. (Winston Churchill’s six-volume history of the Second World War clocks in at around 1.25 million words; the Bible barely hits three quarters of a million.) And, in any event,
Hickey’s ability to control his material has begun to gloriously unravel as he has proceeded. A recent episode—No. 165—is devoted to 'Dark Star,' by the Grateful Dead, and it clocks in at well over four hours and 38,458 words. At this pace, Hickey will eclipse every literary project in history; the current plan is to reach the five hundredth song sometime late in this decade, but that presupposes he can keep writing what amounts to a book every fortnight or so. We shall see."
Writes Bill McKibben, in "A Music Podcast Unlike Any Other/Andrew Hickey has embarked on a heroic and wild effort to tell the history of rock music in five hundred songs" (The New Yorker). Much more at the link.
I'm thrilled to see a New Yorker article on "The History of Rock Music in 500 Songs," which I've been recommending to you since September 2021, with this post. There are 8 more posts of mine, just click on the "Andrew Hickey" tag.
९ टिप्पण्या:
Your blogging, Althouse, of this episodic series has been glorious. You always inspire me to listen to the segments that you have commented on, and I am constantly kicking myself for not taking the time to keep up with them as you have.
But, uh, Bill McKibben?!? The global warming nut? I'm a New Yorker subscriber and I never recalled him writing about anything other than environmental stuff. Probably my bad; any other New Yorker readers here can feel free to tell me what I have missed.
A history of six chords in cliche orders.
Bill McKibben is a net zero nut. He's been a prime force in pushing unreliable and expensive solar and wind. He is also a leading force against oil and natgas pipelines.
As long as we are indicting people for speech, I think McKibben should be indicted in federal court.
The writerly equivalent of those ever longer guitar solos, late 60s on? Hope he has a lot of "weed, whites and wine.'
I’ve spread the word about 500 Songs to as many as I can. And I’ll keep doing it. I think it’s that valuable. So I’m glad it’s getting publicity. It’s an impressive job he’s doing. Some of the episodes have not been along my interests. I thought the one on the Grateful Dead was horrible, but I respect his view that he needed to do it. And I’ll keep listening.
The Academy/Academics - Sucking the Joy Out of Fun since the Get-Go.
I notice he's taking more time between episodes. The installments on the Velvets and the Dead were masterly, taking what at first appeared to be tangents and tying them in to the rest of the story. The installment on Cream seemed less interesting, perhaps because they had a short career, but Clapton, Bruce, and Baker individually deserved closer looks. He ended the Cream story with a lengthy look at how the legend of Robert Johnson grew and how it ended up varying from what was later discovered about him. That should have been a standalone episode done earlier in the series, and he could have done a better job of contrasting Johnson's relative obscurity and lack of notice while he was alive with Clapton's increasing mediocrity and vast wealth.
Neither McKibben nor Hickey are (hauck, spit) Academics as far as I can tell. Surely Mikey NTH at 5:15 isn't referring to our beloved Prof?
Mr Hickey puts out a fine podcast despite his sententious trigger warnings and the care he takes to avoid appearing anything but nobly accommodating. In one episode he describes Brian Jones as a sadist, "but not in a good way," then goes on to mollify his audience by claiming to have many friends who enjoy sadistic role-playing, and he wants to assure everyone that they are fine people, etc. etc. Far be it for him to judge.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा