ducksstab

JF: It seems a neutral enough label on the surface, but the problem with labels is that by definition they place a frame, or add some kind of topspin, on to musicians that defines them before the actual work does. This brings up a whole bottomless topic regarding the use of biography of artists to lead the conversation regarding authenticity that makes me itchy. In the case of "outsider music", having an artists mental health being a defining characteristic of the genre feels kind of bad and voyeuristic, even if it's not inaccurate.

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outsider_music

>>Outsider music (from "outsider art") is music created by self-taught or naïve musicians. The term is usually applied to musicians who have little or no traditional musical experience, who exhibit childlike qualities in their music, or who have intellectual disabilities, mental illnesses or a nerve disorder. The term was popularized in the 1990s by journalist and WFMU DJ Irwin Chusid.[1]

As I am always using this fan-run wiki as a resource for set lists, I notice our Woodstock entry included this slight misquote:

>>Most Shocking Stray Catcher: The band Geese. Remarking on the phenomenon of industry plant musical acts, Flansburgh said, “It turns out, you don’t even like Geese!” He said later that Geese were very talented.<<

I could be wrong but I'm think I said "It turns out you don't like Geese" (which might sound worse (!?!) but it was kinda my backward snarky way of poking at how we are all being TOLD that liking Geese was a psy-op by a marketing company and we were all just hypnotized into enjoying them which I elaborated on at the time)

Now I was being sassy expressing it this way, and it may be a distinction that means little to anyone, but to be clear--I love that band and Cameron Winter and I seriously take issue with all of this pearl-clutching about some promotion co. hire on their behalf going wrong. I wish them the best of luck and want to see them become even more successful.

transcript: