Robert Christgau Review of Van Halen Debut LP

Is getting defensive about Christgau really any more reasonable than getting defensive about VH? I'd say no.

He's just a guy that writes stuff. Not everybody is going revere him as "the Dean".

 

I'd like to retract my criticism of the great Christgau earlier in this thread. Can someone point me in the direction of what records I can get that the old master would approve of? Also, does anyone have any old Clash t-shirts I can buy? I want to make sure everyone knows I am with it and listening to the right bands, the ones that matter, you know. I suddenly find myself feeling like a nerd-ish, self-hating teenager in the 1970s that is struggling to forge a sense of personal identity - does anyone have any cool magazine or newspapers that can help me resolve this? Preferably nothing written by actual musicians or creative artists of any kind. That stuff just kind of intimidates me! I don't see how thinking about music in a personal and constructive way will allow me to become the condescending, self-satisfied and self-assured geezer I long to be in fifty years! (ooh, can someone quote this and point out the irony of me saying "condescending"? It would be such a rewarding and valuable use of your time, I assure you!)

 

I don’t think he was that far off. If he had 20/20 hindsight... maybe a B-?

 

The "Dean":

vs

The RYM:

Discuss!

 

It's funny how, in this wonderfully condescending reply, you seem to be urging me to take a more expansive historical-type view of this stuff, evidently unaware of the fact that a mediocre initial review of something truly historical would be a crucial part of that thing's reception history. For example, the fact that The Rite of Spring got hostile reviews in 1913 is part of the reason it is studied today.

If critics thought Van Halen sucked back then and you don't think Van Halen sucks, then you should be interested in why critics thought they sucked. If you're not, then you're not a historian, you're just a crybaby.

I can't imagine getting upset about an historic negative review of something I love unless I had a nagging suspicion the review had a point.

When Christgau wrote his review in 1978, it wasn't with posterity in mind. It was part of a weekly column called the Consumer's Guide that was designed to advise readers who shared Christgau's frame of reference whether to bother with the week's new releases. He thought Van Halen wasn't worth bothering with. That's all.

You want to go back in time and rewrite every review so that it matches your opinion?

 

If it will make you feel better, OK I will

 

Yes, enthusiastically to that. Having his 70s guide to lean on in my first few years of heavy accumulating was a godsend. He did, alas, infect me with some prejudices it took me awhile to get over. He did not get or appreciate hard rock/metal, prog, or in most cases the overly weird or experimental or overly soft.

As Fallbreaks says, tho, almost universally his ENTHUSIASMS could be trusted. If it got an A- to A+ from him I am almost certainly going to agree it's a very good record. Not that I think all his A+s are A+s---he liked, for a couple of examples, STRONG PERSUADER and 12 SONGS way more than I did. But if you, say, were to take the list per year at the end of his 70s books of all the A- or above records, you will not find a dud in that list.

And he did have power as a thinker and writer of prose. Some of his sentences I can recite from memory decades down the line. He got overburdened and out of it by the 90s, and I never learned to care about afropop as much as him, but the 70s and 80s books are both essential. He's VERY often wrong about what he doesn't like, but not about what he loves.

 

Nope
Nope
Nope

But on a serious note, I find his reviews funny to read at times, even hysterical. He and other reviewers can say some outlandish things and I can do is laugh.

 

He has stated many times that his favorite album is the New York Dolls' first album. He has also mentioned that the Clash's debut album (UK Version) is the greatest rock album ever made so that should give you some idea of his tastes.

I have tremendous respect for Christgau. In the late 60s he really established Rock Music criticism at the Village Voice as something to be respected and read by smart people. In the 60s "Rock Music" was considered music for Children and serious musical aficionados listed to Jazz or Classical or Opera. He was one of the first writers to take it seriously and the rock critics that immediately followed him (Lester Bangs, Greil Marcus, Dave Marsh) recognized him as the Dean of Rock Criticism. His records guides are up there with the Trouser Press guides to me in helping me find music I never would have become familiar with otherwise.

That being said he has larges holes in his ability to appreciate certain music styles (hard rock, metal, prog, post-punk) so depending upon your tastes your mileage may vary. If you are a massive progressive rock fan you will not love his takes. That doesn't take away his contribution to the culture of rock journalism. He has earned his place in the writers pantheon.

 

Some actually don't like VH ...... it is possible.

 

Same here.....I used to look forward to his Consumer Guide reviews every week in the Voice. I believe he used to write reviews in CREEM as well.

 

Look here.

 

I enjoy Christgau’s reviews even when he doesn't think too highly of something I like. He has an insightful instinct and a wit. I really don’t understand why anyone would take it too much to heart though. Like what you like. It’s no big deal.

 

I would guess that he might mean that he wants to understand the angle of the criticism. At least that what would make me listen to an album Christgau criticised, and that I was unfamiliar with. Curiosity and to see whether I thought he’d got it right .

 

As a profession I'm pretty sure 'critic' is well on the way out. Everyone has, and can share, an opinion now (for better or worse).

Good riddance I say, I've been tempted to write a segment being a critic critic, for a while now. Reviewing various critics criticisms in a condescending way. Edit: (Before someone beats me to point this out, no way in hell am I the first person to come up with that idea, surely).

 

no one knows nor cares who this guy was/is
he is obsolete
done

 

I'm a Christgau fan....even if he hated a lot of music I love. Like prog rock. We can't all be alike in our tastes. I always liked the brevity of his reviews, even if they were often inscrutable.

 

Van Halen were a very popular hard rock band that peaked fro the late 1970’s through the early 1990’s.

 

Never thought of Roth era Van Halen as music for critics....
It rocks with a sense of humor and crosses over to musicians...
Critics of this stuff even lose more credibility when they change their tune after bands in question have a few platinum album without changing the formula.

 

I read a number of his reviews, my impression was he didn't like anyone who wasn't named the B-52s or the New York Dolls.

 

Yep... the extensive citation of Christgau by wikipedia is indicative of nothing more than laziness... it's not some nefarious plot to foist his opinions on everyone. His website is easy one-stop shopping for anyone who wants to cite a contemporaneous critical viewpoint on an album without expending any effort on actual research. Which is why I suggested the guy who was complaining about it ought to put in some effort himself and find some other sources to cite on there, if he doesn't like it.

 

Creem republished the Consumer Guide columns.

 

I did very much. Nearly bought everything he recommended in The Voice. Now not so much

 

Why should any of us care about taking this review, from almost 43 years ago, with a grain of salt or not?
Also Van Halen wasn't heavy metal (sans perhaps the song I'm On Fire).

 

You are a very charitable fellow