A critic, a band, a day. The Diesel Phoenix StoryBy Mike Atkins & George Buckleton

The interview that we conducted with Diesel Phoenix was on the topic of the state of rock ‘n’ roll. I believe that that piece of indulgence justifies this piece of self-indulgence. -As I write a piece about my

experience as a critic watching a band do what they do.

As a person who’s never felt the need to be on culture’s vanguard, I’ve been writing from the perspective of an outsider. Pretty soon, that schtick is going to get old, and/or dishonest; but before that happens, I need to write one more piece from that perspective. -A piece on a situation in which I was undoubtedly an outsider.

Watching a band record a song is not something I recommend if you like music. The old metaphor about seeing “how the hamburger gets made” is close, but not quite right, unless you believe, for some reason, that hamburger beef is an exquisitely complicated thing.

Granted the song that they were recording was a cover, recorded at our behest, so they were not burdened with the trials of creation on that day. And granted, all I can come up with, when asked, what I was expecting is inarticulate sentences-fragments, like “y’know, more...” and “just... bigger”. It was all done in a few run-throughs.

Part of me expected this. It’s always

been my belief that pop-culture critics should stay away from the artists that they criticize (why it’s different for other kinds of cultural critics is a discussion for a different time). But that was just an abstract thought until that day; -like how a person who’s never met their hero can still say with authority “you should never meet your heroes”. Besides, I was smart enough to not take my own advice.

I’m getting ahead of myself though. The reason that pop-culture critics should stay away from artists: they think about the same things from two very different perspectives, and when they discuss those perspectives, they come to loggerheads that can never be resolved. The artists do what feels right, with only good old-fashioned Darwinism for quality control, where it’s a critics’ job to analyze, and make judgments. Neither position is superior, and while that may sound like a back-handed insult to artists, please remember that not only is Darwinism a far more reliable quality control than our internal one; but artists also put their money where their mouths are, where critics criticize things they would have no hope of doing themselves.

Off course, it’s very easy, and quite exciting to discuss something that you disagree about, all the while agreeing to disagree, but that can only been taken so far. In the history of music journalists talking with musicians, these differences have been nutted out to the point where there’s nothing new to be said. And any insistence on going back to the discussion just looks like obstinence of the “I-know-we-disagree-but-i’m-still-going-to-keep-trying-to-change-your-mind” variety.

Thus, topics such as creativity integrity, and honesty are often taboo in these interviews (although an interesting interview in which these topics are not discussed is near impossible, the best interviewers coyly probe the topics, and pull back when the subject says something they do not agree with. It’s about their opinions, not yours).

I had a question for Diesel Phoenix that involved the term “rockism”. “Rockism” is the belief that rock ‘n’ roll is the purest, and most honest form of music, and that other forms of music are at best, commercial ear candy. It was the last question on my list of questions, as it only occurred to me just before I turned the computer off to just come out and ask what they thought of the concept. So, by the time I up to the question, we’d already been discussing the topic for quite a while, without mentioning the actual word. They’d spoken quite eloquently, and quite justifiably on being old-fashioned rockists. I remembered the history of the term, how it was coined during the heyday of disco record burnings to imply a link between rock, and homophobia, and misogyny. Disco representing a perfect storm by being both gay music, and chick music. And it struck me the utter dickishness of calling people sexist homophobes for making the kind of music that they liked.

Doing that would’ve at best elicited an awkward silence, which may have made good video. But considering that after spending a day with the guys, it's not something that I believe is the case, it would've achieved nothing. If you believe in the evils of rockism, then you can infer what you like from the interview, and you don't need me beating you around the head with it. If you've never heard the term, the thought of the concept of rockism never occurred to you, then you are lucky. You can go on listening to the music that you like without the burden of politics, and you'll probably never watch a band record a song either.

-Mike Atkins