“Writing about music is like dancing about architecture.”

- Elvis Costello

Sometimes I wish that I could stop you from talking when I hear the silly things that you say...

Oh Elvis. You’re so wise. It’s true, using one medium to describe another is always a challenge, and writing about music is no exception. This of course hasn’t stopped people from trying; there is a massive and constantly-expanding network of fanatical bloggers and music critics out there, passionate listeners who deconstruct every obscure indie release in excruciating detail, who obsess over artists 99.8 percent of us have never even heard of. And you know what? Despite its occasional pretensions, I love this community; their relentless sifting of new music has lead me to some great bands, and they are ultimately the ones who identify and dictate what music will be popular in the future.

What I don’t love is the style of writing that many of the people in this community employ: the use of fragmented images and phrases to try and illustrate what a particular piece of music sounds like. You’ve probably read some of this before; a reviewer will attempt to describe a song by writing something nonsensical like: “The verse shimmers along, buoyed over a gentle sea of bass by airy wisps of keyboard, until it explodes into the chorus, a glorious cacophony of overdriven guitar and distorted drums.” This style of writing is ridiculous and a waste of time. No one could ever read one of these crazy streams of consciousness and gain any real kind of understanding of what the song actually sounds like; music is too subjective, and the terms used in these descriptions are too abstract to be useful. (They are also often repeated – for example, the verb explode is one of the most prevalent and pernicious words in all of music writing, appearing in about 60 percent of music reviews. It seems like every song is combustible.)

Why, then, has this style been so universally adopted? I’m not sure. Maybe it’s because it allows the music nerds of the world to flex their collective vocabularies and syntactical dexterity by writing the most provocative fragments of gibberish that they can. This way, their voices rise above the din and their writing has a greater chance of standing out. What really boggles my mind though is that large music publications are just as guilty as the little ones. For example, here are some selections from popular reviews of this year’s indie success story, the album Bitte Orca by the Dirty Projectors:

“The best unexpected moment of all comes in pseudo-title-track “Useful Chamber,” where the sweet, sinuous, minimalist keytone-pop slides into meadows of folkie fingerpicking, before the whole explodes into a chorus of metal-esque proportions; a mammoth, in-the-red, overdriven riff sounding like it’s trying to fill a stadium.”

“The warped electro pulse of “Useful Chamber” dissolves into finger-picked introspection before exploding in noise-rock abandon; restless guitar skitters, and esoteric Nico references add anxiety to the heart-stilling balladry of “No Intention” and “Two Doves,” respectively.”

“Opening with a celestial synth groove housing Longstreth’s most pared back piece of vocalization on the record, the song warps into a fingerpicked guitar line, buckles into an unadorned break beat, then explodes into a flash of searing rock. It’s a beauty and maelstrom all at once.”

“Roughly halfway through, the beat breaks, Longstreth half-raps a little pre-chorus pep talk, and the song explodes in sound and vision.”

“Like the breakneck, hooting vocal breakdown in “Remade Horizon,” Bitte Orca exudes a peculiar duality comprising quasi-opposites; it is simultaneously mysterious and inviting, sophisticated and relaxed, high-concept and yet oddly unassuming.”

Well okay, so that last quote wasn’t exactly congruous with the other selections, but it was just so ridiculous that I had to include it. Anyway, this style of writing distresses me, particularly because you can tell that the people responsible for it are obviously capable writers. They are using their powers for evil though, making something that should be simple and accessible and obscure and remote. The worst thing that the already dangerously pretentious music community could do is alienate people further.

Of course there is hope. When I was searching for these quotes I found a bunch of exceptionally written reviews, many of them from places I had never heard of before. The ones I enjoyed the most were effective because instead of using crazy imagery to try and describe what the music sounded like, they focused on the history of the band, the steps they have taken with their newest release, the influences that are present in the record, etc. All things can be written about definitively and effectively in nice, concise language.

Disagree? Got some more examples? Let me know below.