Maybe America has taste after all? Paris Hilton album tanks

Post by **Jake** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 11:02 am

booker wrote:This is wild. All Music Guide gave it a steller review (4 1/2 stars).

http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=am ... vyxdgb6olg

Stephen Thomas Erlewine is a tool.

miss carol · Post by **miss carol** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 11:04 am

Jake wrote: Stephen Thomas Erlewine is a tool.

Maybe he was being "ironic," which merely underscores your judgement, Jake. I'll keep his name in mind when I look at their reviews.

DJMurphy · Post by **DJMurphy** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 11:16 am

Jake wrote:Stephen Thomas Erlewine is a tool.

Can GloNo's J-Lo verify this? I know that at one point, Mr. Loftus was working for them; did he and Mr. Erlewine ever get into a rumble over the finer points of a record review?

I used to think S.T.Erlewine had respectable taste. But how can anyone who even hopes to retain a shred of credibility or integrity in his field give Paris' steaming turd a high review? Boggles the mind... and calls into question his ability to be an arbiter of taste. Payola lives on, my friends; the fifty-dollar handshake continues to wield its poisonous tongue on the weak-willed and callow.

Post by **Jake** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 11:27 am

DJMurphy wrote:I used to think S.T.Erlewine had respectable taste.

I've noticed he's always the one assigned to review huge mainstream pop albums:

Lindsay Lohan - A Little More Personal (Raw)

Clay Aiken - Measure of a Man

etc.

One thing about AMG's reviews is that they're critiqued "within the context of their own genres." And the star-system is based on the artist's overall body of work; how to rate a debut album, I don't know...

Johnny Loftus · Post by **Johnny Loftus** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 2:19 pm

DJMurphy wrote: Can GloNo's J-Lo verify this? I know that at one point, Mr. Loftus was working for them; did he and Mr. Erlewine ever get into a rumble over the finer points of a record review?

I used to think S.T.Erlewine had respectable taste. But how can anyone who even hopes to retain a shred of credibility or integrity in his field give Paris' steaming turd a high review? Boggles the mind... and calls into question his ability to be an arbiter of taste. Payola lives on, my friends; the fifty-dollar handshake continues to wield its poisonous tongue on the weak-willed and callow.

Dude, don't attach payola to this. That's a pretty gigantic leap to make after reading one record review you don't agree with.

As for Tom's review, you can sum up his angle in one line: "...it just so happens that her sexy, spoiled, shallow act is perfectly suited for bubblegum pop." Shit like Paris' album is totally worthless - you know that just as much as Erlewine does. So the only way for him to really write about the album effectively is to contextualize it within its genre - market-based, moneymakin' music for people who don't like music - and that's exactly what he does throughout his writeup.

Tom's also a pop freak from way back, so his barometer for what constitutes good bubblegum is usually spot on. He would likely write a similar review if this was 1969 and Bobby Sherman's first album had just come out.

JTL

booker · Post by **booker** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 2:29 pm

Hey, I for one haven't heard the Paris Hilton album. Has anybody else on these boards?

I was pleasantly shocked when I heard a few Shakira albums (no joke, no irony intended).

miss carol · Post by **miss carol** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 2:36 pm

Johnny Loftus wrote:
Dude, don't attach payola to this. That's a pretty gigantic leap to make after reading one record review you don't agree with.

As for Tom's review, you can sum up his angle in one line: "...it just so happens that her sexy, spoiled, shallow act is perfectly suited for bubblegum pop." Shit like Paris' album is totally worthless - you know that just as much as Erlewine does. So the only way for him to really write about the album effectively is to contextualize it within its genre - market-based, moneymakin' music for people who don't like music - and that's exactly what he does throughout his writeup.

Tom's also a pop freak from way back, so his barometer for what constitutes good bubblegum is usually spot on. He would likely write a similar review if this was 1969 and Bobby Sherman's first album had just come out.

JTL

Good points. I shouldn't be so quick to judge. Perhaps the likes of P-fork has made my bullshit meter a little cynical. Context changes things. And I do appreciate good bubblegum. That said, I'll give Paris a pass.

DJMurphy · Post by **DJMurphy** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 2:42 pm

Johnny Loftus wrote:Dude, don't attach payola to this. That's a pretty gigantic leap to make after reading one record review you don't agree with.

Alright, you are correct; I mainly meant it as sarcasm, but I can see how that can be perceived as slanderous. For the record, I have no evidence one way or the other whether or not Mr. Erlewine has ever accepted payola, but seeing as how there has NEVER been even the slightest whiff of suspicion directed allmusic.com's way, I can very safely assume that Stephen Thomas Erlewine has never and probably will never accept a bribe.

That said, it takes a better music journo than myself to give a Paris Hilton CD a high mark with a straight face. I wouldn't be able to do it. I sincerely apologize to Mr. Erlewine for the ill-aimed joke.

Post by **Jake** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 2:49 pm

Still a tool.

steve-o · Post by **steve-o** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 8:43 pm

booker wrote:Hey, I for one haven't heard the Paris Hilton album. Has anybody else on these boards?

Yes, as a matter of fact. All it takes is a little trip over to itunes. It's fucking
garbage.

And any good reviewer will write with the listener of that particular genre in mind. But in the context of bubblegum pop for people who don't care about music, Justin Timberlake is good. Destiny's Child is good. Hell, even the new Christina Aguilera is good. But that still doesn't not make Paris Hilton's album fucking garbage. And granted, maybe in the context of the genre of fucking garbage, it's halfway decent. But I don't really want to delve into that genre too deeply, for obvious reasons.

What's so frustrating about STE's review, is that he outlines all these reasons why it's total crap, but still concludes by saying it's a good record. He says that her voice is obviously doused in pitch-correction. He admits that its shallow and a "pure piece of product". He admits that any redeeming qualities in the songs only lie in the star production team, not Paris herself. He even manages to say that her voice is better than Britney Spears' "awkward sqwuak," though I'm not really sure how that's a compliment. And of course he forgot to mention the ridiculously insipid lyrics, even for this kind of pap. Yet, it's still "enjoyable?" I mean come on, you've got to do better than that! That's like describing the burning, tingling, oozing sensations from a nasty case of gonnorrhea and yet still calling it "great fun." I mean, using those arguments he could just paste this review onto any new Kidz Bop record that came out. So I'm calling bullshit. Guilty pleasure maybe, but even in the realm of mindless pop, the record doesn't hold up.