>Quantcast

« Home | Sunny in San Francisco? » | Death Rock Booty Call » | Coachella 2005 Lineup » | My Ugly Mug... » | Carlos Delgado Taking a Stand By Refusing to Stand... » | Mesh Mix Playlist - January 27, 2005 » | Mesh on West Add Radio Tonight at 7PM » | Guantanamo Soldier Details Sexual Tactics » | Irv Gotti Going to Jail » | I am guessing that it is a fart? » 

Wednesday, February 02, 2005 

Jimmy Draper Hearts Ashlee Simpson

How else can you explain this, quite possibly the most ridiculous thing Jimmy Draper of the San Francisco Bay Guardian has ever written?

This is exactly why the backlash has been so brutal. By straying from the so-called fake and feminized realm of pop music to make a rock album, Simpson and her prefab persona threaten to sully the supposedly authentic rock pantheon – a canon that, despite the inclusion of a few women, largely remains the domain of men like Robert Plant, Bob Dylan, and Jack White. As a result, Simpson's detractors have maligned her as a talentless interloper in rock. Rather than come right out and say that, though, they mostly complain that she's unworthy of attention because she can't sing well – as if the wounded-boy warbles of "rock saviors" White and Conor Oberst are somehow more palatable and artful than Simpson's vocals. Such accusations merely distract from the fact that many people hate her for daring to crash rock's boy-clique culture.

So Ashlee Simpson is right up there with Robert Plant and Bob Dylan, who knew? Rock's boy-clique culture may exist, but Ashlee Simpson, purveyor of bland pop music (yes, just because it's got guitars doesn't make it rock music) as a rebel woman rocker? PJ Harvey makes rock music, Von Iva makes rock music, Chrissie Hynde, Sleater Kinney, Patti Smith, Joan Jett, Kim Deal, Exene Cervenka, The Go-Gos and a hundred other women make rock music. Draper seems to think that we should accept Ashlee Simpson as a rocker, even though she is manufactured, just because she is a woman. He seems to think that we should accept bland, bland singing and songs from someone who is only famous because her sister can sing, just because she is a woman. He seems to think that we should be okay with backing tracks just because a lot of singers do it. That too me is what's offensive.

dude is basically echoing the same thing that Kelefeh Sanneh did in his lame editorial in the NY Times a few months back when he coined that stupid term "rockist".

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/31/arts/music/31sann.html?ex=1107493200&en=b707eaceaed3761a&ei=5070&oref=login

i can't stand it when academia types start breaking down pop culture in that professor tone.

Duh, Duh, and Double Duh, just because people can craft an argument doesn't mean they should use it. Ashlee Simpson doesn't suck because she's a woman she sucks because she has no talent. At least Jessica can sing and doesn't front.

Ashlee Simpson is better than Elvis Costello? You have to be kidding me. And I suppose Staind is better than Leonard Cohen because they're newer.
Come on. Ashlee Simpson is just dull, dull, dull and has has the same effect on me that Valium does. There's nothing exciting, fun, or edgy about her. Basically, she's another pop princess who thinks she's Debbie Harry or Siouxsie Sioux.

Thank you someone for actually writing against what the Bay Guardian deems cool. I'm so sick of self-proclaimed music journalists tagging jargon all over talentless trash they happen to favor in order make their bad choices cool. Sorry, not even Pitchfork could convince me Ashlee Simpson is worth more than that fake nose and botox in her lips.

Post a Comment

About me

  • I'm Mesh
  • From
My profile