People who review music are interesting creatures. Do we listen to them because they offer us unique and informed insight into artists we both love and have never heard of? Or, do we enjoy their outrageous opinions and biases? Obviously the answer is a little of both. Some reviewers are so immersed in a love of music that they cannot give a bad review. Should any true musical effort get a bad review? Here i’m obviously differentiating between thoughtless or overly-produced music that one often finds on the radio and the totally opposite effortless or carefully assembled music that most people would consider as art. As much as i hate the new Radiohead, and though i might give it less than two stars if i were to review it for the paper, the review itself would doubtlessly offer many positives about the album so that people who liked those facets of it would know to buy it.
That, of course, is why album ratings are arbitrary; are they personal opinion or objective rankings? I found myself battling over such thoughts earlier while i was commenting on Nelly Furtado. While there are only a few tracks on her disc that i enjoy, a quick read through Amazon.com‘s reviews pointed out to me the many aspects of her disc that my ears weren’t open to. After several revisions, my review sounds like it should be nearly four stars, but i plan to submit it as a two star review on monday. Obviously i intend for people to glance at the rating and then read the article, because the rating is probably only applicable if they share an overwhelming overlap in musical taste with me. And, god help them if they do…