Wednesday, October 01, 2008

So that's what I'm doing wrong.

Robert Christgau, giving it up for Girl Talk's conceptual majesty:

"Only when I printed out Wikipedia's list of samples -- good enough for downloaders, though an official version comes with the official release -- did I get it." [italics mine]

On paper (like Christgau), I'm all for chipmunking totems, mining classics and fabricating duets. On iPod, I prefer songs rather than an hour-long, flow-free medley. But my insistence that Girl Talk take all these elements and create new pop (like hip-hoppers and earlier mash-up celebrities always have), rather than a beat-diffusing bricolage of gone-before-you-know-it signifiers, may just be a sign that I don't get it. Sadly, I don't own a printer.


Alfred Soto said...

Why waste paper? We're in a recession.

Sam said...

I'd argue that he is creating "new pop" it's just that it's defined by such an ADD paradigm and such a sense of sprawl (as opposed to the more Aristotilean-leaning structure of traditional pop songs) that it can feel more like being thrown through a spreadsheet of reference points. However, I feel like he dispenses his epiphanic gestures and uses different textures and instances of melodic similiarity smartly enough that (for me anyways) it all works from a dramatic standpoint, independent of which references I can spot. (Whether or not my ignorance of most of the mainstream music he pulls from helps or hurts my enjoyment of the whole deal is a different argument.)

Anthony said...

I'd vote "helps."