Paste Magazine was a victim of its time, facing a bad economy and competing pressures between physical and digital media. But what changes were its founders willing to make to keep it alive as a website? And in the process, did they betray their loyal audience?
Are Radiohead the most accomplished “art rock” band of the early twenty-first century, as the Encyclopedia Britannica claims? Or are they savvy businessmen who’ve brilliantly marketed themselves for 20 years? Can they be both? In the title fight for Charlie’s musical identity, Thom Yorke comes out swinging with every ounce of nihilistic ennui at his command.
Seth and Lizzy invited me to join them for an episode of SETH AND LIZZY TALK ABOUT MUSIC (which was a blast) and one part of Lizzy’s prep advice was “Think about Radiohead because I want to get you and Seth to argue about it.” I came up with an analogy that I thought would be funny and useful for conversation.
You can hear what I had to say on the podcast but I wanted to write a little more on it and clean it up:
How Quentin Tarantino and Radiohead are alike
1) They each started with two high-quality, personal works that were twists on a specific popular genre: Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction, Pablo Honey, The Bends.
2) They followed those initial successes with a critically lauded postmodern-pastiche (that I think is a bloated, useless formalist exercise): Jackie Brown, OK Computer.
3) Those triumphs gave them the freedom to start making sprawling, derivative, incoherent spectacles that are progressively more about the artistic process and other people’s work (and yet are adored by fans): e.g. Death Proof, Django Unchained, Kid A, King of Limbs.
And in both cases I wouldn’t care nearly as much as I do if it weren’t for the incredibly high praise they each receive for the formalist exercise (in particular) and the oeuvre (in general), and they each are huge influences on artists I really, really enjoy. Now I’m going to go listen to some TV on the Radio, then watch True Romance.