it is not granted the right to be fact free. Joel can't have been "the worst for that long" given that he hits more than competence across the range of skills of being a recording artist, and there are many more that don't.

As for Dutton and A&L, that you read them without being paid to does not speak well of your intellect.

Stirling, no need to get personal

Comparing Stirling's work to Rosenbaum's work is like comparing lemonade to piss water.

Stirling had to point this out because he was being slandered.

all you have left is an "irl."

And that's kinda boring. You know--Coke. Flat. Like that.

who put the "ring" in the name
    to make us precious Stirling?
who put the "ling" in the name
    to make our friend start flying?
who was that man?
    I'd like to shake his hand
he made a name
    that's won-der-ful in-deed!

by personally vouching for Dutton and his crew. That's like vouching for Rush Limbaugh personally.

don't insult fellow members even if they are vouching for likes of Rush lol

snark=snide remark. It's just not polite or civilized. But it defines our times. It's one of the downfalls of the internet, the anonymity allows for behaviors that one would never do in meatspace. (unless you're a sociopath like myself)
Like I don't think Rosenbaum would tell Billy Joel that he sucked to his face. True art criticism exists to sing the praises of art, not to degrade the attempts at it.

Like the reviews of my restaurant, everyone's a critic online, but not a single one of those persons that have written something negative have ever had the balls to send the food back and complain. Maybe one or two. But they'll say anything when they think you're not listening and they have the web's anonymity to hide behind. It's the difference between a professional critic and an amateur. A professional has the depth of knowledge to stand behind his convictions and not resort to snide remarks. Used to be people just didn't come back and tell their friends, now they can tell the world.

It's tough being an artist, isn't it Stirling? You try to express what you know in your soul, but some asswipe just has to take the uninformed cheap shot. Problem is, we're all guilty now.

ah, where's artappraiser when you need her?

It's the difference between a professional critic and an amateur. A professional has the depth of knowledge to stand behind his convictions and not resort to snide remarks.

I recommend Slonimsky's "A Lexicon Of Musical Invective". A professional critic is not defined by their insight in the field upon which they are commenting. They are defined by the act of receiving pay for expressing that opinion (although there have been reported cases where expertise and insight is part of the reason for that employment).

The most frequent path to becoming a critic in most fields involves first turning one's hand to a particular art and discovering you have no particular ability at it, and then casting around for employment that lets you feel like you're still part of the industry.

but the good ones, they do have an appreciation of the effort because they did try. that defines professionalism in my book. It's also why Jan and Michael Stern's review means so much to me. They understand the art that I'm attempting, while others don't. I read and was influenced by their articles for 25 years, because they see what I see. I can taste love in food, like I can hear love in music, or see it in folk art. my job as a professional is to make sure that the skills that I've acquired are used to convey the love. It's never an easy task, no matter your chosen art.

In the wise words of "They"...

"Those who can't perform, teach," to which I dare add "...and those that can't teach become critics."

Incidentally, re They are defined by the act of receiving pay for expressing that opinion (although there have been reported cases where expertise and insight is part of the reason for that employment). my significant other did a turn as theatre critic/summer job eons ago for the local paper. He soon discovered that neither readers or editors were interested in bland "well done everybody" critiques. They wanted blood on the pages screaming invective - a full on qwerty assault. You see, the first reaction was not considered valuable (anybody can generally enjoy a show) while the second response was widely received as a professional critical opinion. The hubby quickly learned to hate everything he was paid to see.

the commentators who are worth it know that they can say what's on their minds and folks will keep coming back.

don't you puff this little light out
i'm going to let it shine
let it shine
all the time
let it shine

people need to tell the difference between smiting and being forced to be defensive.

snark as if it is a bad thing ;)

cuts directly to the heart of the matter -

... In terms of tone, the comedic stylings of Stewart and Swift are much more closely related to the “snark” Denby derides than he would like to admit. The difference is that good satirists don’t just attack people for the fun of it, but as a reaction to actual injustice. Good satire is an elegant counterattack to the corrupt and the ignorant. It is a productive, light-hearted way of expressing horror and disgust on behalf of the downtrodden...

Thanks for the links. Resnikoff's review is pretty good but stops short of differentiating between satire and snark--and I agree with him that "snark" is an ugly morpheme.

"Lord! What Fools these Mortals be!"

I'm showing my age when Piano Man is not on your list ;)
but srsly thanks for the toobs. Piano Man probably is the most down to earth of Joels' music, timeless lyrics that ring true for anyone that ever visits the same bar or pub for any length of time. And yes I agree that the lyrics approach folk music in their intensity of emotion that is tweaked by the actual use of instruments to maximise the musical impact.

I'm ignorant of musical aptitude, #1 son has the music gift, but I know that the key changes and bass lines sure have an impact on the listener. (Rosenbaum and Guilderstern will both be dead and not remembered)

_{shit it sux being fifty}

it's already been in heavy rotation on the oldies stations for years. Its truth and beauty are well known. Just wait for the onslaught of the rest of Joel's music to hit the airwaves yet again. I'm a little shocked, however at the prescience of the song regarding his own life, he's still the Piano Man, making us feel alright, only it's his own songs now that he has to play over and over.
Joel's a masterful thief as Jean Luc Goddard would say, "It's not where you take things from, ---it's where you take them to"

oh, and sorry I editted my comment on Rosenbaum after a second reading.

escaping the 10th iteration of the same news item or totally bored with some political analysis I do listen to some of the oldies stations. I often hear Leningrad or We didn't start the fire. Perhaps Piano Man has been played to death already down under...

Hey it's good to see posts edited :) I freak when I can't find something thats been deleted!

edited to add: yes I own a 2CD best of Joel, along with Supertramp retrospective, but full collections of Beatles and Dylan. I'm a 60's/70's boy.

but Matter of Trust always gets me when I hear it, I think it's a great song. You can dance to it, it has good lyrics. I give it a 96 Dick. (American Bandstand reference for you un-American furriners)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xx53c_6h-W4

When I was working in a low level office job in NYC in 1977, it got to where I developed a raging hatred for "Just the Way You Are," since it came on the radio about every other minute (although it actually wasn't a bad song), but I forgot how many great, memorable songs Billy Joel churned out - not only catchy tunes and great arrangements but also lyrics that stood out from disco infected pop of the time.

YouTube: Elton John and Billy Joel Sing "Piano Man"

they're just doing it for the money. presumably unlike when Joel wrote the song. Read the lyrics, he loves those people in the song, that's why it rings true. He doesn't love doing it for the money though, and that's the difference.

Goodnight Angel

you can hear the love, he's using every ounce of his abilities to arrange something beautiful and satisfying to the soul. and that is the definition of art. From the Wki:

The first and broadest sense of art is the one that has remained closest to the older Latin meaning, which roughly translates to "skill" or "craft," and also from an Indo-European root meaning "arrangement" or "to arrange". In this sense, art is whatever is described as having undergone a deliberate process of arrangement by an agent.