okay i'm just getting back to this thread now and i've read it closely (i think) and taken the comments to heart, have thought about what's been said and my own words and i'll try to address a few general points without getting going through individual comments
i'm not trying to be a dickhead, i'm trying to provoke people to talk - fisher's words are plenty provocative towards other musicians and writers, and if he or someone else is offended by discussing specific issues, then that wasn't my intention ... arguments, sure, yes, great! insults or people leaving the forum as a result - no, that wasn't what i had in mind
his blog has no comments section, nor does the wire blog, this seemed like a logical place to throw out issues for discussion. if you disagree with what i've said, of course i look forward to the debate - that's what this place is about, right? i'm a grown up, i'm perfectly fine with being criticized gently or brutally etc (it's the internet for heaven's sakes), and i'll try to respond thoughtfully
of course i am not advocating a strictly formalist music criticism and OF COURSE i want to be provoked by music writers, i just don't happen to think that hyper-cynical criticism where we're told that portishead (or anyone else) is in actuality some sort of hipster-designed product when in fact their musical pedigree stands for itself, is a very very poor form of 'criticism' and deserves to be called out as such, i used the word 'smug' to describe his tone for a reason and i stand by it