PDA

View Full Version : Magazines



craner
20-06-2010, 10:33 AM
Does anybody (still) work in the magazine world? Not, like, online magazines, but actual, tactile, living-in-your-hands MAGS? The racks are still full and Conde Nast still stands tall and spans oceans but, still, it seems deflated, all the air let out. Or am I wrong? What are the best magazines around? Italian Vogue? National Geographic? Standpoint? Vanity Fair? What is your favorite defunct magazine? Are magazines better than books? Or merely equal?

Dr Awesome
20-06-2010, 10:43 AM
All about Nat Geo (that hardly counts though).
TIME and The Economist are pretty good reads too.

Edit: Oh yeah - I find Vice is occasionally worthwhile, although it seems to fluctuate between on point cultural analysis and hipsterdouchebaggery all too much.

luka
20-06-2010, 11:10 AM
i always thought there was something very unwholesome about magazines. i remember my joy at hearing the face had folded for example.

scottdisco
20-06-2010, 12:33 PM
i've been in a huge magazine malaise for a long time now but they have meant a lot to me down the years.

Jockey Slut is probably my fave defunct mag.

i may not read old faves like the Economist, the Wire, Vibe or the New Yorker much (or at all) these days, but as a stand-by they're still reasonably go-to. i even like Time Out titles (although Chicago, London and NY are the only ones i've ever read w any regularity), i know all the criticism us Dissensians have w them, but for addresses of food and drink gaffs alone it's worth a read at WHSmiths. (you don't need to pay for it, granted.)

the magazine i look out for on home turf is Opening Times, the Manchester and Salford real ale magazine, it's a modest but very good free-sheet distributed monthly in the area, normally about 24-36 pages. i would pay for it.

if i'm in the States (the country where i have spent the most time after UK, as Oliver knows), then i like the tradition (certainly in larger cities) of weighty, often free alterna-rag type tomes (i think Seattle's Stranger is the oldest). the Chicago Reader captured my heart a long time ago.

i used to read Songlines a lot, i think that's still going, and Gramophone, which is definitely still going.

Monocle and Wallpaper are sort of porn.

you can recycle your magazines. and you can cut out pictures and text and plaster your lavatory with the pictures and text.

books remain generally better but VANITY FAIR, by jove, that's a fine read.

paolo
20-06-2010, 06:14 PM
I subscribe to Viz :cool:


What is your favorite defunct magazine?

Undercover

grizzleb
20-06-2010, 06:20 PM
I read Prospect Magazine every month pretty much, it's pretty reliable and a good antidote to the shite journalism and opinion you are subjected to any time you pick up a paper. It makes me wonder why broadsheets are supposed to be 'quality' in any way at all.
I've also got a subscription to Cabinet quarterly which is a kind of wanky cultural mag but it's pretty good too. I also sometimes buy Wire for a larf and a bit of music info (not that it's really necessary).

polystyle desu
20-06-2010, 07:49 PM
Aaah magazines- used to be essential didn't they ?
How much money did I spend on mags ?
Most of what was good in them is by now long ago clipped, gone through a second or third time into a much smaller stack in back of the closet.
Just threw a pile out today, though some old '80's Jill and Photo mags remain in ... another stack.

Mr. Tea
20-06-2010, 09:59 PM
Bought the current issue of The Chap recently. :) First magazine I've bought for months, though. Only title I've ever had a subscription to is LM (make of that what you will!). I have a look at the Economist and Statesman when I find a copy somewhere, occasionally New Scientist too. But that's about it.

Edit: oh yeah, Private Eye is quality, goes without saying.

Ness Rowlah
20-06-2010, 11:27 PM
Magazines are holding up quite well me thinks. I was going to compare it to vinyl culture in music, but I think mags are doing a lot better? Reading and looking at photos/artworks just works better on paper.

http://magculture.com/blog/ is a good one to follow.

scottdisco
20-06-2010, 11:39 PM
I subscribe to Viz :cool:

top mag.

used to sub to Private Eye, now just pick up maybe once or twice a year, but generally remain always impressed on the whole.

used to sub to the NYRB, which i still have quite a bit of time for. alongside the larger essays and reviews, little fragments of verse sometimes crop up, that sort of thing. no real reason, but have always preferred it to the LRB or Paris Review.

When Saturday Comes is the best football magazine on UK stands by a country mile, although you get a lot of interesting world football titles at any half-decent * news-agency these days. and that's not including the 'zines.

* spectacularly bad in-joke...

craner
20-06-2010, 11:40 PM
Only title I've ever had a subscription to is LM (make of that what you will!).

Living Marxism?

scottdisco
20-06-2010, 11:50 PM
Living Marxism?

i always knew you were an apologist for Serb aggression, Tea. it's how you mix your crisp packets in the pub w such ease and panache, it was a dead give-away ;)

woops
21-06-2010, 12:01 AM
Living Marxism?

Lithuanian Mistresses?

scottdisco
21-06-2010, 12:06 AM
he will have to settle this in the morning.

Lithuanian would perhaps be less socially acceptable than Latvian, mind you.

craner
21-06-2010, 12:08 AM
There aren't any music mags still being produced that are worth a shit.

Largely because there's no longer any money to send journalists on jet planes to LA to take drugs with degenerate rock groups or rap stars, publish three pages of purple prose and slurred quotes and pay them for it -- but also, I am sure, for other reasons too. Trawling through hideous Camden pubs with thick 19 year olds for shit money doesn't quite have the pull for thrusting young music journos who must therefore -- like lovely, lizard-eyed Alexa Chung, Queen of Climbers -- look to TV for a future full of travel and free drugs and glamorous sex.

There's the possibility of a few 200 word reviews for Uncut this month (review copies on the way) and all this deadness wasn't so different by 1998 (say). And who in their right mind would want to write about pop music beyond the age of 30 anyway? (31 year old man employed by Observer Music Monthly sits down in front of three Sugababes to discuss current career patterns -- but what exactly happened to his life? Why is he not being flown to New York to uncover Jay Z's dark soul at a surprising tete-a-tete outside New Jersey?)

I love magazines though and I largely miss something in them -- part of the unwholesome nature is essential and endemic like Anna Wintour or Tina Brown or some other nutcase deadline-visionary who wouldn't even spit on Jockey Slut or The Fader (this is possibly a matter of taste). Guy Bourdin in Vogue or Christopher Hitchens in The Nation or Harold Evans on a whim thinking up Conde Nast Traveller or -- ideally -- something like the PR crowd and their enemies and allies and satellites and interventions.

scottdisco
21-06-2010, 12:24 AM
this was in Prospect once, which Grizzleb did laud ^

i love this.


I beat a retreat until lunch, in a Greek restaurant in the Dupont Circle area of Washington.

The proprietor is a friend and familiar who plays up to Hitchens’s Rabelaisian presence, automatically presenting him with a full tumbler of Johnnie Walker as they banter about the finer distinctions between halloumi and kasseri

Brad Pitt said not so long ago that he felt the best reportage/journalism (long format, anyway) was to be found in the sheafs of reports Human Rights Watch put out. (not magazines, true.)

a lot of young magazine writers these days (Dissensians among them) seem to have to flit from harbour to harbour (as w Oliver nailing the changing market ^), a bit of money for a 200 word capsule review here, something else from there for a longer think-piece, and so on.

a Jockey Slut staffer made a weak and pretty insulting attempt at humour over the phone to me once, i must say!

grizzleb
21-06-2010, 12:39 AM
Good Journalism should be about looking at a tiny particular event or scene and using it to bounce off into a kind of universalism... I'd like to write but I don't really have a clue what about. Well I do but I get easily dissuaded by myself. How is it possible to have a career in journalism? I feel I could batter out a good piece about something if I had some sort of brief...but about what?

craner
21-06-2010, 12:43 AM
a lot of young magazine writers these days (Dissensians among them) seem to have to flit from harbour to harbour

Which is harder than having to write something good -- I often think these boys should give up and go into advertising or marketing...it's a heartless creativity but it's full of £££s and life is short and the world is large. And the only kind of reviews they get to write these days run the emotional and aesthetic spectrum of effusive praise <> disappointment. The Big Critical Assassination can no longer happen: there's no need and there's no space. No one is paying attention and there are too many opinions to ignore. This is why K-punk still labours in the shadows and you hear nothing from Penman: their world has disappeared.

swears
21-06-2010, 01:48 AM
Photos look waaay better in magazines than on a screen.

Mr. Tea
21-06-2010, 11:48 AM
Living Marxism?

I think it used to be called that, but it was plain 'LM' when I had a read of it. I think by that time they'd shifted from a straightforward leftist position to a more generally contrarian, libertarian or anti-establishment one, and some of the things they published could probably be considered pretty conservative ("neo-con" if you're George Monbiot!). I think I read about six issues before they went bankrupt after their disastrous libel case against ITN. There was some interesting stuff in it, all the same.

gumdrops
21-06-2010, 01:06 PM
i used to love mags. meant a lot to me growing up. still got more piles of them than anyone really should do. the one i used to like the most as a 10/11 year old was sky. dont think many people talk about that now though lol. used to go smiths or borders and read as many mags as i could but havent done that in so long. doesnt feel that essential/necessary anymore. i might try and get back into that though.

bought sight and sound the other day (this doesnt feel as vital as it once did either, despite good content, seems like it needs more content, like a lot of music mags, and a lot of the reviews seemed a bit diffident), as well as adbusters for the first time - not sure what this is about exactly, bits of current affairs, some philosophy, but good design, if more pictures/artwork than words.

the believer looks good but is quite pricey. wax poetics i always want to read but it just looks too 'baggy'. i get little white lies which i like, but its always a special 'theme issue' (another common theme of many modern mags - prob in the absence of enough to fill it with?) centered around one particular film, which almost makes it an advertorial cos theres so much about that one particular film. but i like the love that goes into it, even if the writing is quite fanziney.

dont think ive bought a music mag in ages. i used to like fact more when it was a little mag than a website. not that theres anything wrong with the site, i just liked the compact paper version.


who in their right mind would want to write about pop music beyond the age of 30 anyway? (31 year old man employed by Observer Music Monthly sits down in front of three Sugababes to discuss current career patterns -- but what exactly happened to his life? Why is he not being flown to New York to uncover Jay Z's dark soul at a surprising tete-a-tete outside New Jersey?)

harsh.

crackerjack
21-06-2010, 01:24 PM
Seconded for Little White Lies and Prospect*, which I've been impressed with both times I bought it - thinking of taking a sub out to replace the Vanity fair one, which can't end a day too soon (no sooner did I buy it than they replaced all the long political articles I liked with bankers, fucking bankers every bastard month).

*esp in comparison to New Statesman, which I've bought once about 2 years ago and couldn't believe how boring it was (arts coverage excepted)

scottdisco
21-06-2010, 01:35 PM
Seconded for Little White Lies and Prospect*, which I've been impressed with both times I bought it - thinking of taking a sub out to replace the Vanity fair one, which can't end a day too soon (no sooner did I buy it than they replaced all the long political articles I liked with bankers, fucking bankers every bastard month).

LOL.

i never knew LWL was a paper mag, i've read (and greatly enjoyed) the online version.

i also used to love picking up FACT in little record shops, was very exciting! still love the site, the best there is, IMO.

used to read Adbusters a lot back in the day via a uni library. can imagine it sparked a thousand epiphanies for exurban kids. although i haven't seen it, the cover identifying the Jewish heritage of Bush II/neo-con top-brass does sound foul, mind you.

LM losing its libel case was a great day for journalism.

crackerjack
21-06-2010, 01:47 PM
LM losing its libel case was a great day for journalism.

Amen.

crackerjack
21-06-2010, 01:51 PM
Also amused by Craner's love for Standpoint. Isn't that just training ground for the children of famous writers and the place for which Nick Cohen reserves his very worst journalism?

scottdisco
21-06-2010, 02:12 PM
i've only ever read one article from Standpoint (a magnificent piece on Berlusconi) but, yes, the whiff of Cohen * off-form is not the best bouquet for any magazine.

* i adore Cruel Britannia, FWIW.

polystyle desu
21-06-2010, 02:20 PM
Which is harder than having to write something good -- I often think these boys should give up and go into advertising or marketing...it's a heartless creativity but it's full of £££s and life is short and the world is large. And the only kind of reviews they get to write these days run the emotional and aesthetic spectrum of effusive praise <> disappointment. The Big Critical Assassination can no longer happen: there's no need and there's no space. No one is paying attention and there are too many opinions to ignore. This is why K-punk still labours in the shadows and you hear nothing from Penman: their world has disappeared.

Right on some money there Craner

Mr. Tea
21-06-2010, 02:26 PM
Amen.

Roffle, shoulda known there wouldn't be much love for LM around these parts. Their anti-environmental/pro-growth-at-any-price stance was quite worrying, I recall.

woops
21-06-2010, 02:37 PM
I feel I could batter out a good piece about something if I had some sort of brief...but about what?

This is half the battle though, isn't it? if I knew the answer to that I'd batter out the good piece myself.

crackerjack
21-06-2010, 02:37 PM
Roffle, shoulda known there wouldn't be much love for LM around these parts. Their anti-environmental/pro-growth-at-any-price stance was quite worrying, I recall.

Well, it's also borne of a dislike of the RCP (the mag's political parent), which was for people who were too cool for the SWP, but too bourgeois sneery for anything constructive (like the Labour Party, obviously :p). But if you're feeling nostalgic, you can still (?) find those people at Spiked and they make regular TV babble appearances in their Institute of Ideas guise.

scottdisco
21-06-2010, 03:23 PM
Mick Hume had the chutzpah to write a piece fairly recently for Spiked as an anniversary came around about the ITN thing, predictably trying to play his violin about Britain's (undeniably unfit for purpose and shockingly unfair in general) libel laws and trying to minimise federal Yugoslav/Serb leadership culpability for the vast majority of deliberate Balkans agonies, peddling the old sleight the SWP used to do so loudly, the civil war tag and all that, a rank piece of equivalency that must be loudly opposed for the foul horse-shit it is at all times.

thence a back-of-cigarette-packet laundry list of excoriating overbearing western crusaders obsessed w intervention and all that jazz, easy topics on which to drum up support, i grant you, though wrt Bosnia LM got things totally wrong.

and i don't suppose they will ever admit that.

which is deeply disappointing, to say the least.

scottdisco
21-06-2010, 03:45 PM
ahem.

for my next post, i shall tell you all what i really think.

craner
21-06-2010, 05:01 PM
Also amused by Craner's love for Standpoint.

I don't particularly love it, but I think there are some things it does, mag-wise, that are correct, even outstanding, certainly superior to Prospect (I am not talking about ideology or even specific content in this case). New Statesman and The Spectator are both the pits; Standpoint and Prospect have a lot of potential they never fulfill, though Standpoint usually gets closer (at least it's not dull) (the i-D to Prospect's Face).

scottdisco
21-06-2010, 05:12 PM
(the i-D to Prospect's Face).

i do like that analogy.

grizzleb
21-06-2010, 05:32 PM
I'll need to check out Standpoint, I've never read it before. :cool:

crackerjack
21-06-2010, 05:37 PM
I'll need to check out Standpoint, I've never read it before. :cool:

It's great. Number one mag for EDL apologia ;)

grizzleb
21-06-2010, 05:51 PM
Ah right, I think I've seen it and avoided it based on it's billing as a right-wing Prospect. I will need to swatch it out, but I hate Christopher Hitchens and it sounds like something that he would laud.

crackerjack
21-06-2010, 05:53 PM
Ah right, I think I've seen it and avoided it based on it's billing as a right-wing Prospect. I will need to swatch it out, but I hate Christopher Hitchens and it sounds like something that he would laud.

Doesn't his right-wing son write for it? Amis' wrote the EDL piece, feel sure Alexander Hitchens (who from the little I've seen has most of his dad's drawbacks with none of the talent) calls it home too.

grizzleb
21-06-2010, 06:03 PM
I don't particularly love it, but I think there are some things it does, mag-wise, that are correct, even outstanding, certainly superior to Prospect (I am not talking about ideology or even specific content in this case). New Statesman and The Spectator are both the pits; Standpoint and Prospect have a lot of potential they never fulfill, though Standpoint usually gets closer (at least it's not dull) (the i-D to Prospect's Face).
Prospect can be extremely MOR and tasteful alot of the time, but every issue there is usually one or two excellent articles and sometimes the whole thing is great (twice a year maybe). This month's was hilarious, and I recall an article last year some time about chess in Armenia that was absolutely great - just what I look for in journalism.

Corpsey
25-06-2010, 08:40 PM
'Zoo' has really gone downhill in the last few months.

Mind you, it's still got great tits.

don_quixote
26-06-2010, 02:16 PM
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/65/Parus_major_2_Luc_Viatour.jpg/800px-Parus_major_2_Luc_Viatour.jpg

mistersloane
26-06-2010, 11:26 PM
I buy Sound on Sound when I have spare cash. And Vanity Fair if I go on holiday. And Future Music sometimes for the sample CDs.

And I found a copy of Heat on the tube the other week and was fucking overjoyed. They should give that out for free instead of the Standard.

gumdrops
07-07-2010, 10:50 PM
new little white lies looks really good. thankfully not yet another issue devoted entirely to one big new film thats out (and thankfully not one thats crap like tetro). lots of stuff about cinema past and present. and some fantastic shots of dilapidated cinemas which brought a minor tear to my eye. though im still wary of it as its from the same company as some ad agency.

stevied
13-07-2010, 03:27 AM
Who Are They? is a great piece by Jenny Turner on LM and the Institute of Ideas from the London Review of Books -

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v32/n13/jenny-turner/who-are-they

Thanks!

scottdisco
13-07-2010, 01:37 PM
a fair-minded and admirably in-depth overview.

cheers stevied!

the IoI type crowd are so willing to peddle their wares in any circumstances (cut-price Zizeks, i suppose, which i have to marvel at and laud) they are a diverse bunch (w a few sort of vaguely libertarian and/or speak-truth-to-power kernels seamed through as a central core, perhaps), running a gamut. and Kenan Malik is really rather good, for instance.

re Bosnia (something i am allowed to waffle about if i do say so myself :D ), from O'Neill's usual load of occasional minimising nonsense (this Guardian column for eg) (http://roarofthemasses.blogspot.com/2007/07/more-revisionist-tosh-about-bosnia-from.html) to Hume banging his drum every so often (i mention a fairly recent spiked piece ^), there's a slight whiff w some of this loose network still (if i can use that term to describe a few or so vocal members who are often on bylines and seem fairly close professionally), and it seems some key figures can't quite let go, though i appreciate a general overview of them all will focus on all their thoughts and activities, not just the Bosnia controversy that Deichmann started. my main beef is it's obviously fine to sketch out general anti-intervention thoughts (and sensibly so in light of Iraq and complexities in Darfur that increase the closer you look at Sudan, etc), but every case also always has unique specificities and whatever your views on the Nato bombardment of Serbia wrt Kosovo/a, you do not and should not talk garbage about the actual facts of the Bosnian war years earlier, even if you say this is all of a piece w softening up global opinion for a run at the Serbs in the late 90s (which as a short proposition that i'll run w here, for the sake of simplicity, obv ignores many things re Milosevic).

and yet they continue to do so.

why?

no need.

Ed Vulliamy writing about LM-associated people applauding the camps is indeed a gross overstep (about the only stumble he makes in his famously excellent Poison in the well of history article, tbf), except for sure in the case of Laza Kekic, who is notoriously on record as looking forward to the destruction of Muslims, Albanians and Croatians.

the sad thing about Furedi's WHITE NIGGERS cover re the Serbs back in '92 is that, really, it turned out the actual niggers were the Bosnian Muslims. (notwithstanding the charge may have had some credence wrt some global media outlets, though not re any serious ones, i imagine *, and certainly not that the "international community" was whipped up into some Cruise missile-addled fervour w the 'something must be done' crowd leading the way for a Bosnia-H intervention that, er, never happened.)

* would be happy to be corrected on this, natch; i was 12 in '92 and mainly paying attention to the Danish football team at the time.

crackerjack
13-07-2010, 01:47 PM
* would be happy to be corrected on this, natch; i was 12 in '92 and mainly paying attention to the Danish football team at the time.

Who were only there because the People's Republic of Slobodan were thrown out by the "international community" as part of the softening-up black op ;)

Stuntrock
05-08-2010, 07:14 PM
There aren't any music mags still being produced that are worth a shit.

Kof kof *Wire* Kof kof...

Although I don't buy it anymore, I still find it to be one of the few mags where music has ever been subjected to proper journalism.

I read french mags, but also FTimes (the WE edition), Alan Moore's Dodgem Logic

bruno
14-08-2010, 02:03 AM
my vote is for japanese animé magazines, or whatever they are called, my sister had stacks of these things. i can only remember newtype but all were so dense graphically, so intricate, the array of pop stars, video games, figurines, media in general was absolutely staggering, very intoxicating. i could see why she was so into this culture.

you
30-08-2011, 12:38 PM
http://www.infobarrel.com/media/image/47807.gif

righto, other than The Wire can anyone point me in the direction of some good music magazines mainly concerning themselves with dark stuff, im into MGLA, locrian, Om, Wolves in the Throne Room, that sort of crap right now as well as witch house... just anything dark - i'd also like vaguely occultist and literary/horror stuff too.. aesthetic is important.. needs to match my darted rick owenz jawns

dd528
08-09-2011, 10:16 PM
Can vouch for Wax Poetics (http://www.waxpoetics.com/) on the back of the one issue I've ever read (the reggae issue, from some time last year). Really interesting, in-depth interviews, although I think some of them were reprints from now-defunct magazines, foreign magazines, or out-of-print books. The use of archive photography and the quality of the layouts and design (not particularly complex or original, but giving the different visual elements exactly the right amount of space to breathe) is another big plus. I'd say over half the reggae I've listened to in the past year or so is the result of that issue serving as a springboard.

I'll pick up Dazed and Confused (http://www.dazeddigital.com/) two or three times a year usually. The quality of the writing is variable, but the reviews are often good, and their fashion spreads are quality, if you're into that kind of thing.

On the subject of fashion, various international editions of Vogue can be brilliant. Especially the French (http://www.vogue.fr/) and Italian (http://www.vogue.it/en) ones. If fashion isn't your thing (and there is certainly much that's reprehensible about it) then I guess they'll be of no interest, but I personally love fashion photography. There's a Dave LaChapelle shoot based around an air crash from a Vogue Italia from four or five years ago that took my breath away when I saw it. Obviously when you buy Vogue most of your money is going on adverts, but I never really get tired of looking at (heavily-doctored) pictures of pretty girls shot inventively in original clothes.

Other decent magazines off the top of my head are Hotshoe (http://hotshoeblog.wordpress.com/), The New Yorker (http://www.newyorker.com/), Frieze (http://www.frieze.com/magazine/) and Wonderland (http://www.wonderlandmagazine.com/). I find that a lot of monthly magazines tend to produce maybe one or two really great issues a year and are a waste of money the rest of the time.

you
19-09-2011, 01:38 PM
I used to buy Wonderland, V, A Magazine, Dazed and Confused, ID, Inventory, Wound, Muse, Fantastic Man etc.... but now I only buy Purple Fashion - for me it's head and shoulders the best fashion focused publication out there. Some/things also looks good and i'm looking forward to getting there stuff soon. 032c (http://032c.com/) is also pretty cool, if you dig red covers...uhhh. I 'copped' it for a slick owenz article a while back. I actually quite like monocle too, I don't know why, it just feels rounded... Like Inventory Magazine and The Economist rolled into one with nice photos of cheese boards and trinkets too.

dd528 - uggghhhh LaChappelle!?!?! Horrendous! I can increase the colour saturation all by myself dave....

On the metal music tip - I bought Zero Tolerance (http://v2.ztmag.com/current.html) a while ago solely for the free CD it came with containing a new Wolves in the Throne room track. It's ok but really very 'metal' - when what im looking for is the more droney artsy side of metal and none of the speed or thrash type stuff. Maybe i'll just stick with the Wire in the faith that they will highlight any decent releases?

slowtrain
20-09-2011, 06:58 AM
I used to buy Wonderland, V, A Magazine, Dazed and Confused, ID, Inventory, Wound, Muse, Fantastic Man etc.... but now I only buy Purple Fashion - for me it's head and shoulders the best fashion focused publication out there. Some/things also looks good and i'm looking forward to getting there stuff soon. 032c (http://032c.com/) is also pretty cool, if you dig red covers...uhhh. I 'copped' it for a slick owenz article a while back. I actually quite like monocle too, I don't know why, it just feels rounded... Like Inventory Magazine and The Economist rolled into one with nice photos of cheese boards and trinkets too.

dd528 - uggghhhh LaChappelle!?!?! Horrendous! I can increase the colour saturation all by myself dave....

On the metal music tip - I bought Zero Tolerance (http://v2.ztmag.com/current.html) a while ago solely for the free CD it came with containing a new Wolves in the Throne room track. It's ok but really very 'metal' - when what im looking for is the more droney artsy side of metal and none of the speed or thrash type stuff. Maybe i'll just stick with the Wire in the faith that they will highlight any decent releases?

If you want to get really into good metal via physical means, you'd probably be better off checking out the 'zines and the like.

I'm too poor, so can't help out much. Expect lots of terrible 'philosophising' and dodgy politics though.

Gallery of the Grotesque is good, but very irregular.

Aside from that just check blogs like hammer smashed sound and hte like:

http://www.hammersmashedsound.com/

he's reall good at keeping p to date with the scene even if he misses some of the better 'kvlt' things and overestimates some of the hipster posey stuff

Sectionfive
20-09-2011, 06:10 PM
Has anyone picked up the Eye book?
Is it any good

Ness Rowlah
20-09-2011, 10:53 PM
Photos look waaay better in magazines than on a screen.

I concur. Buy Port mag when it comes around every few months
and I just bought Wallpaper's last issue (Kraftwerk edited) and sometimes
pick up something like Blueprint just for the pics.

All full of nice stuff I cannot possible afford/get, but I like looking at it all.
It's a bit like Playboy, not for articles, but for the pics.

craner
29-10-2011, 10:33 PM
Someone suggested to me recently that Tina Brown is getting all of her (good) ideas from her husband, Harold Evans. This reminded me of the days when some people used to claim that Damon Albarn wrote all of Elastica's songs, or Kurt Cobain gave Hole their riffs. (Probably wrong, but who gives a shit?)

Prospect has got better under Bronwen Maddox -- it really has -- but in terms of editorial ingenuity and creativity and scope, Standpoint retains the edge.

Don't get me wrong, I quite like Wire, but with no competition it could be less dour and ghetto-ised; it could be bolder, more colourful. It could run many more Reynolds and Penman pieces, for a start.

I will disclose here that my aunt is a friend of Geoffrey Robinson, and on this basis I was sent for a meeting with Christina Odone in 2004 to jam me onto the New Statesman -- the whole thing was comical, as I discussed with her the misjudgement of Paul Wolfowitz and the importance of Yemen (having just been to a garden party with some exiled Yemini royals).

During this conversation she quite rightly looked at me like I was insane. Geoffrey, in despair, sent me to meet Mark Leonard, who just wanted to talk about the EU, which I knew little about. I just wanted to talk about Paul Wolfowitz and Yemen, two things he knew little about. It was like an episode of Made In Chelsea directed by Larry David, and ended about as well as an average episode of Curb Your Enthusiasm.

My brief moment of contact with the NS included a "hello" with Peter Wilby, then its editor, who Christina was desperatly trying to prevent from running a front page expose of the Jews running Whitehall (I am not making this up!) -- an idea he was full of enthusiasm for after returning from an exceptionally long, booze-fuelled lunch. I thought that was very Old School. Odone is a bit of a Catholic airhead, but I retain some affection for her after this brief episode.

I have a lot of these kind of stories, by the way. I'm still waiting to hear news of my, um, "associate" Moussa Ibrahim.

baboon2004
30-10-2011, 01:06 AM
I was at NS for work experience in 2002 - they love their jewish conspiracy stories, had a major one then... Odone was definitely bonkers.

luka
30-10-2011, 02:46 AM
I quite like Wire, but with no competition it could be less dour and ghetto-ised

this is very true. they also made a mistake by filling it with bloggers some of whom had readable blogs but none of whom were remotely interested in music. or were interested in music but dull writers. also and ive said this before th standard of photography at the wire is utterly unacceptable. its clearly nepotism because they are so bad gawky and apologetic. that magazine is wasting its potential.

blacktulip
30-10-2011, 05:17 AM
Someone suggested to me recently that Tina Brown is getting all of her (good) ideas from her husband, Harold Evans. This reminded me of the days when some people used to claim that Damon Albarn wrote all of Elastica's songs, or Kurt Cobain gave Hole their riffs. (Probably wrong, but who gives a shit?)

Prospect has got better under Bronwen Maddox -- it really has -- but in terms of editorial ingenuity and creativity and scope, Standpoint retains the edge.

Don't get me wrong, I quite like Wire, but with no competition it could be less dour and ghetto-ised; it could be bolder, more colourful. It could run many more Reynolds and Penman pieces, for a start.

I will disclose here that my aunt is a friend of Geoffrey Robinson, and on this basis I was sent for a meeting with Christina Odone in 2004 to jam me onto the New Statesman -- the whole thing was comical, as I discussed with her the misjudgement of Paul Wolfowitz and the importance of Yemen (having just been to a garden party with some exiled Yemini royals).

During this conversation she quite rightly looked at me like I was insane. Geoffrey, in despair, sent me to meet Mark Leonard, who just wanted to talk about the EU, which I knew little about. I just wanted to talk about Paul Wolfowitz and Yemen, two things he knew little about. It was like an episode of Made In Chelsea directed by Larry David, and ended about as well as an average episode of Curb Your Enthusiasm.

My brief moment of contact with the NS included a "hello" with Peter Wilby, then its editor, who Christina was desperatly trying to prevent from running a front page expose of the Jews running Whitehall (I am not making this up!) -- an idea he was full of enthusiasm for after returning from an exceptionally long, booze-fuelled lunch. I thought that was very Old School. Odone is a bit of a Catholic airhead, but I retain some affection for her after this brief episode.

I have a lot of these kind of stories, by the way. I'm still waiting to hear news of my, um, "associate" Moussa Ibrahim.

I think this is my favourite Dissensus post ever. If I click on the links to your blogs, will I find more of this ilk?

craner
24-06-2014, 10:43 PM
Two of my favorite stories are:

Danny Baker being give the choice, at the NME sometime in the '70s, between interviewing The Damned in some shit London pub, or going on tour with Earth, Wind and Fire in America. "Of course, I went on tour with Earth, Wind and Fire in America. What could be better!" he replied. "The music was certainly better."

Julie Burchill, writing about and liking Patti Smith at the NME sometime in the '70s, but really desperate to go home to listen to Tony Blackburn playing the Isley Brothers and Odyssey and dancing around her room to the music she really loved, then feeding this back surreptitiously into her articles.

The music press wasn't all freedom in those days, because you had the tyranny of taste and the Rock Editors, but you also had the freedom and the money to do other things, and the word count and the words to do things slightly differently.

On the one hand you can do anything you want these days, online, and it means nothing culturally and there's no risk involved; on the other hand, you can get published and paid, and do virtually nothing aesthetcially or contensiously, because you either have no space to do it or editorial considerations are like massive heavy chains of mediocrity.

The most controversial thing that happens these days is that you ask a star the wrong question, they get in a mood, you apologise and cringe, and then write it up as if you had some amazing confrontation, which you didn't. You just pissed off some famous wanker who was probably in a bad mood anyway, and then shat yourself in case your editor got annoyed because you ruined any prospect of future exclusives or access. Then wrote it up to make yourself look as reasonable and safe as possible, to save any skin left (or worth) saving.

I always go back to my favorite example of Paul Morley and Jackie Collins. Asked to interview this famous purveyor of glamorous steamy novels, he insisted on interviewing her in the hotel shower, and she told him to "fuck off" and stormed out. And he managed to pump out the whole word count on this fantastic exchange.

My second favorite is when he insulted Jim Kerr, and wrote up the whole interview from the perspective and in the voice of Jim Kerr. These kind of antics are why I still love Morley and illustrate the gulf between what you could do in 1982 (and get paid and published for) and what you can do now (fuck all).

All in this amazing book (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Ask-Chatter-Pop-Paul-Morley/dp/0571138136/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1403645922&sr=1-1&keywords=ask+morley), by the way.

craner
24-06-2014, 10:57 PM
So you may ask: "uh, what, how's that different?"

Because:

Baker was offered the orthodox "cool" thing and chose the unorthodox "uncool" thing, and revelled in his choice, which was natural to him anyway.

Burchill was hired to do the orthodox "cool" thing and did it, but turned it around by choosing the unorthodox "uncool" thing and feeding it back into her zinging, unorthodox prose and was absolutely fantastic and marvelous and sexy at doing it (in those days, not now).

Morely was given free reign to do whatever he liked and fucking well did it, as did Penman, but Morely took it further, culminating in the ZTT shenanigans and those sleeve notes for Frankie, Art of Noise, Propaganda etc. which is some of the best music journalism of all time, mostly because of where it was placed and its massive high-brow, ridiculous, abstract pretension, which suited the time and music. Morely was the great cultural assassin and avant-garde Ad Man, the two extreme and authentic poles of pop criticism.

Edit:

Lester Bangs writing about Kraftwerk for NME. Amazing. Or his John Coltrane reviews, Lou Reed interviews, or Sweet review that opened with a quote from Huysmans' Against Nature, or ripping apart Bob Dylans' 'Hurricane' and 'Joey' for the pathetic gangster pretensions. Is it just context that gives this stuff such impact even now, or just the quality of writing?

crackerjack
25-06-2014, 12:21 PM
Julie Burchill, writing about and liking Patti Smith at the NME sometime in the '70s, but really desperate to go home to listen to Tony Blackburn playing the Isley Brothers and Odyssey and dancing around her room to the music she really loved, then feeding this back surreptitiously into her articles.



Isn't that just a bit of creative revisionism from Burchill - I'm sure she was a massive Patti Smith fan, her response to the Hip Young Gunslingers ad was an appreciation of her. I don't think liking both was that incompatible, even then.


The most controversial thing that happens these days is that you ask a star the wrong question, they get in a mood, you apologise and cringe, and then write it up as if you had some amazing confrontation, which you didn't. You just pissed off some famous wanker who was probably in a bad mood anyway, and then shat yourself in case your editor got annoyed because you ruined any prospect of future exclusives or access. Then wrote it up to make yourself look as reasonable and safe as possible, to save any skin left (or worth) saving.


Or things like this (http://www.theguardian.com/music/musicblog/2014/jun/20/lana-del-rey-problem-interview-but-why) happen.

craner
25-06-2014, 12:50 PM
Isn't that just a bit of creative revisionism from Burchill - I'm sure she was a massive Patti Smith fan, her response to the Hip Young Gunslingers ad was an appreciation of her. I don't think liking both was that incompatible, even then.


Er, probably, yes. I was ranting and raving last night. I actually sound a bit nuts. Alarming behaviour.

crackerjack
25-06-2014, 01:33 PM
Er, probably, yes. I was ranting and raving last night. I actually sound a bit nuts. Alarming behaviour.

I think it may have been the bog-standard UK punk bands she didn't like writing about. I'd quite like to see some of her stuff from 77. The first I read of hers (apart from Boy Looked At Johnny) was about 1980, when her rep was already established.

craner
25-06-2014, 02:45 PM
I used to have the Love It Or Shove It (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Love-Shove-Best-Julie-Burchill/dp/0712607463/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1403703782&sr=1-2&keywords=love+it+shove+it) collection, which is very entertaining. I remember one particularly good Face article that started with the line, "Poor old Nancy Reagan, she's got egg all over her facelift..."

crackerjack
25-06-2014, 10:43 PM
I used to have the Love It Or Shove It (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Love-Shove-Best-Julie-Burchill/dp/0712607463/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1403703782&sr=1-2&keywords=love+it+shove+it) collection, which is very entertaining. I remember one particularly good Face article that started with the line, "Poor old Nancy Reagan, she's got egg all over her facelift..."

I still have that. Remember looking all over Brighton for it – the only shop that had it had stocked it in the humour section. A right mixed bag. There's an essay on Graham Greene which develops into an anti-Irish Catholic stream of filth ("what could be more Catholic than the dirty protest?"*) that Paisley would've rejected as being a bit toooo much.

*I probably shouldn't use quote marks there since I'm going entirely by (very bad) memory.

craner
26-06-2014, 08:46 PM
You can always tell when I am writing plastered because you get posts from me like those earlier ones, loads of little paragraphs filled with nonsense, and I must retract one thing about Morley's sleeve notes being high points of music journalism. They aren't. Why?

1) If you read the sleeve notes to Billy Mackenzie's Beyond the Sun (superb album, by the way) they are embarrassingly bad, particularly for a 40-something critic as Morley then was.

2) Marcello Carlin is spot-on in his dissection of Morley's Frankie sleeve notes in this little piece:

http://nobilliards.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/frankie-goes-to-hollywood-welcome-to.html

craner
26-06-2014, 09:03 PM
I won't retract the fact that Ask is a fantastic book, though.

rubberdingyrapids
01-07-2014, 11:07 AM
i hate the internet for killing off magazines.

craner
01-07-2014, 11:19 AM
I watched Martin Scorsese's documentary (http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0486nzj/arena-the-50-year-argument-the-new-york-review-of-books) about the New York Review of Books to save you lot the hassle.

It wasn't very good. An extended love letter to the NYRB editorial board; a spot for various contributors to say, "the NTRB is really good because it lets me write what I want" in various different ways; an indulgent film-maker's meander without any atmosphere or tension or insight. Except as a witless, sychophantic tribute, I saw absolutely no purpose in this at all.

One crucial subtext that was completely excised, but played some important part across the pages of the Review, was the split and fight between Cold War liberalism and the counter-cultural left. It is possible that the documentary was unable to address this because it totally failed to establish the Review's origins in the milieu of the New York Intellectuals and the little magazines (Partisan Review, Dissent, Commentary, etc. etc.); the battle took place within and between all these magazines and in many cases they shared contributors. This fascinating hinterland was absent from the film. NYRB didn't just materialise from nowhere to take on the torpid New York Times Book Review, but was a platform upon which the New York Intellectuals and their extended allies (and enemies) could attack it directly and surpass it (see Norman Podhoretz, 'Book Reviewing and Everyone I Know').

So having made no attempt to convey any of this, which is really the whole thing to begin with, we are left with a flacid, dilatory collection of clips and talking heads. Well, yes, it's fun to watch Norman Mailer and Gore Vidal insulting each other on TV, or Susan Sontag humiliate Norman Mailer at a public meeting of feminists, or Norman Mailer...actually, enough Norman Mailer now, thanks very much Marty. None of this told me anything about the Review's narrative or its real place or culural influence beyond an occasionally influential magazine article. How did NYRB liberalism develop in relation to McGovern, Reagan, neoconservatism, Clinton? Not a clue, but Timothy Garton Ash did write an important essay on the Velvet Revolution (cue, TGA, "There I was, in Prague...").

What a load of rubbish.

craner
01-07-2014, 11:54 AM
I'll be fair, it did attempt to do the job properly in regard to James Baldwin and the Civil Rights movement.

Leo
01-07-2014, 01:50 PM
i'm the only person i know who still has dozens of print mag subscriptions. since i'm a bit (!) older, it's a lingering tradition that i don't want to abandon, even though i also spend a stupid amount of time reading things online. i guess it's similar to how some people still love vinyl versus digital music: i just really enjoy the ritual of getting a new print issue of a magazine, having it, relaxing at home reading, keeping it in some cases, etc.

the one i'd miss the most would be the new yorker, by far. it's the rare magazine (also to a much lesser degree with vanity fair) where the contents are divided between articles on topics of interest and those which you thought you had no interest in, yet the general level of writing and depth of reporting enlightens you to a new subject. you don't find other magazines willing to devote 10-12 pages to one article, which took a year to research and write, and sometimes i wish they went on longer. and they don't take the knee-jerk northeast liberal position on everything, take for example the recent feature on ted cruz.

i also really like frieze, ostensibly an art magazine but goes beyond that into other cultural issues (as well as the occasional reynolds music piece). i read artforum but the heavy art theory stuff largely goes over my head.

the economist is pretty much the main way i have any clue about international affairs, also very well written. i wish we had a US equivalent of private eye, my wife's UK family gave me a gift subscription for xmas and it's clever but doesn't mean much to me, since it focuses on UK politicians and businesspeople who i don't know.

and, of course, the wire. :)

Ness Rowlah
09-08-2014, 03:25 AM
Vak Magazine - Norwegian fly-fisher mag killing all fishing mags I see at WH Smith in terms of paper quality, design and photos (the writing is a bit so-so, it's full of flyfishing snobbery). Probably a losing proposition long term, but bless the publishers for doing something like this. I get friends to bring it over to the UK whenever I get someone visiting from the old country. Here's a taste
http://vakmag.com/magasin/vak-3-2013

Took out a stack mag subscription a year or so ago, different mag each month and good value at a fiver a month for getting random decent quality magazines about plants, happiness, design and music (yeah it's Wire).
http://www.stackmagazines.com/the-magazines/