NY Times Article on Jeffrey Lewis
Tue, 11/22/2011 - 9:33pm
The Times has a nice, long article on Jeffrey Lewis.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/23/arts/music/jeffrey-lewis-singer-and-il...
Wed, 11/23/2011 - 10:52am
#2
Reply
I know so little about Jeff (who helped me move once for free).
When I read some article like this I learn something I never knew.
The writing (NY Times) was a bit mundane to me, but I have seen worse.
PS Jeff, in my experience, is sort of like diane cluck, Adam Green, Kimya Dawson, Lippe, and a few others I have met at Sidewalk.
They tend to give unconditionally and then if something comes to them in return it does.
Wed, 11/23/2011 - 11:11am
#3
Olive Juice Music is the
Olive Juice Music is the exclusive online distributor for Jeff's comics and his last collaboration album with Peter Stampfel. That's saying something about his dedication to this community. He understands the importance in maintaining that connection. It's a real thing with him. Not just a press quote. The guy's got buckets of talent and I'm happy to have called him a friend for many years. But don't fool yourself. He's also a very smart business person and very, very, very dedicated when it comes to working on his craft and getting it "out there." He deserves every bit of credit he gets and more. It ain't just karma.
Wed, 11/23/2011 - 12:33pm
#4
Man
I wish I was never inspired to say or type anything.
Wed, 11/23/2011 - 1:24pm
#5
Woman.
Luckily, that feeling will pass. (I'm glad you do.) I'm sorry if what I wrote hurt your feelings Barry. The word "unconditional" always triggers something in me for some reason.
Sat, 11/26/2011 - 6:38pm
#6
The Mercury Lounge show last
The Mercury Lounge show last night featuring Toby Goodshank, Diane Cluck with Anders Griffen, and Jeffrey Lewis and the Junkyard (Jack, Dave and Nan), was stunning.
Everyone was great, and I think that's the best I have EVER heard Jeff with band. Jack's bass playing was a mindblower, and everyone was so tuned in. There was such a positive vibe, and the many new songs were fantastic.
Diane also played a lot of new stuff, including series of short songs strung together, very exciting. There was a nice blended vocal duet with Abbey Todras--impossible to tell who was singing what. Toby is operating at an additional depth of feeling and melodic invention.
Perhaps this should be its own separate thread, and I feel a little silly stringing together so many superlatives, but WOW, what a show.
Sun, 11/27/2011 - 7:44am
#7
Totally.
Nan Turner upped everyone's game. (IMHO)
Mon, 11/28/2011 - 12:08am
#8
Super nice article. For some
Super nice article. For some reason I wasn't clicking links for a few days. Just read it.
I even learned things I didn't know!
Mon, 11/28/2011 - 1:34am
#9
Hey all, thanks for the kind
Hey all, thanks for the kind words!
(Steve, I wonder what you could have learned from that article that you didn't know already!)
My own impression of the NY Times article:
I'm certainly glad to have had that article appear in print. I wonder how many people at the Mercury Lounge show might have only been there because they read that article, having never heard of me before?
As usual with any press on me that I've seen, big or small, I disagree with the impression that the article gives of me and my work. But if that's the impression that the journalist had, then I guess that's the impression that I give, so I suppose that's who I am (as opposed to who I may think I am).
I really don't think of myself as a Woody Allen character, I'm not even much of a Woody Allen fan (at least just thru lack of exposure to most of his stuff, I'm sure I'd like more of his movies if I saw them). I don't think that anxiety about my personal failings at love and fame is the primary focus of my songs. Yes, maybe it IS the primary focus of a whole bunch of my songs, but there's a whole bunch of other ones that have nothing to do with that at all. At least in my own mind.
And I really don't like the photo they chose - that guy took about 100 pix of me, and they seem to have purposefully picked a photo that was NOT meant to be a decent photo of me but rather a photo that saves them from having to say in the article "isn't it interesting that an ugly guy is surviving in the music biz?" I know the photo basically IS what I look like, but it seems to have been chosen specifically to be unflattering. I feel like if I was looking at their batch of 100 pix of me, and I was trying to choose just a nice normal photo of me, the one they picked would not have made it into my top 70 choices. All I'm saying is that I don't think they WANTED to present a decent photo of me, I think they sort of cunningly wanted to pick a photo that said "awkward-looking" in order to save them the trouble of saying it in print.
Basically I thought the article didn't focus on the music and art in and of itself, which I suppose was not the point, but which I THOUGHT was going to be more of the point.
If I was a random person reading that article I might think "hmm, it's interesting that this fellow exists," but I probably wouldn't read it and think "wow, sounds great, I'd like to go to a store and buy his record right now!" My webpage experienced a total of 65 hits from the NY Times article. So there you go.
But it was certainly complimentary enough, waaay better than a bad review, and hopefully darn good exposure, possibly the best I've ever gotten in America.
And I had a great time at the Mercury Lounge show!!!!! Absolutely awesome to have such a great crowd, great openers, great sound quality (at least from where I stood on stage), a great set and great feeling all around. A much-needed rescue for my band from the US tour doldrums.
Thanks again to everybody!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Tue, 11/29/2011 - 12:04pm
#10
Considering how horribly
Considering how horribly wrong these things can be I think the article is not bad. The Woody Allen connection is not hard to see for me (self deprecating humor, New York, artistic analysis, liberal politics etc...). I'm a fan of both of you. I kind of like the photo. Glad you got rid of the beard. I see how the angle of how an artist flourishing, especially in these difficult economic times, could be interesting. I think it's inspiring. But I do see this annoying tendency to pigeonhole an entire artist's career in a clever sentence. If feels a bit condescending and oversimplified. But at least it's in the ball park, which I think is the best you can hope for with these kind of things. Nice Job!
Wed, 11/30/2011 - 12:27pm
#11
Without rechecking it ....
Without rechecking it .... new news? Some of the cool stuff about your parents and background, and yes, how you keep the economics of your career going.
Mon, 11/28/2011 - 6:36am
#12
Speaking for myself
the new thing I learned was that you put $23,000 down and own an apt. in the city.
I suppose it was relevant considering what the focus of the article was.
I never overestimate The New York Times when it comes to good writing.
They tend to have agendas and be scared of offending the masses, in my quite limited experience.
Tue, 11/29/2011 - 2:27pm
#13
"I don't think that anxiety
"I don't think that anxiety about my personal failings at love and fame is the primary focus of my songs. "
. . . agreed
"I don't think they WANTED to present a decent photo of me, I think they sort of cunningly wanted to pick a photo that said "awkward-looking" in order to save them the trouble of saying it in print. "
. . . agreed
"Basically I thought the article didn't focus on the music and art in and of itself"
. . . agreed
Those things are what journo-tainment is all about. I totally agree with Matt's comment "this annoying tendency to pigeonhole an entire artist's career in a clever sentence." . . this is the very essence of journo-tainment.
But I do think that the article was generally respectful, and in spite of the simplification/cleverness tendencies, I've seen much worse (not too much of a consolation, I know) and I actually came away from the article with a sense that the writer was impressed with Jeff's work and considered his work thoroughly worth writing about.
As for the Woody Allen connection, to me it's is comically wrong ~ any time they can shoehorn in a celebrity name, they'll do it.
nice to see an intelligent, well-written, fluff-free article
~ beau