Pages
16
everybody else thought they might be. There was a ton of competition and I worked with a ton of really cool bands, but the True Believers had something that everybody kind of recognized. Alejandro's concern about music as art remains really high. Whether it's good music or bad music matters a lot to Alejandro. [italics] And Bloodshot's probably the most stable label relationship he's had. He was the other day telling me he knew how many records he'd sell on Bloodshot, he'd like to figure out ways to sell more and he thought with Bloodshot he could, and he got his checks regularly from Bloodshot. [italics] That's the same exact thing Jon Langford said. They sent his checks on time. That's no small accomplishment. I worked at an independent label in Los Angeles for a couple of years, Spindletop, which originally was a Texas-based label. We did roots stuff and we did what's called "New Adult Contemporary," which - the less said the better. [Italics] You couldn't say that with a straight face, could you? No, I could not. But boy, those things sold a lot of records. It woud blow your mind how many records that you could sell in that format. The point of that only being, I know because of that how hard it is for an indie label to manage their money well enough just to make sure that they're responsible and their obligations to their artists are made. It's really hard to make it go as an indie label, even an indie label with integrity has a really hard time paying their artists what they're due. So the fact that Bloodshot manages this and convinces artists like Jon Langford and Alejandro, who are smart people, that speaks really well of them. [Italics] Beside Bloodshot, who throws your favorite party? I don't get to go to any parties. I go to the barbecue. [Italics] Whose is the biggest hassle, then? Oh, this year it's Revolver. [Italics] So why is it a hassle? Is it just the fact that they're bringing in a big band that's [Italics}not playing the conference? Do you feel you're getting shown up? No, it's not being shown up. In my mind - now mind you, I'm 100% biased about this - but if you want the benefits of SXSW, if you have a reason to be at SXSW, then work with us and allow all of our registrants to be able to see the acts that you're bringing. [Italics] The Cult didn't apply and get rejected? No, they didn't. [Italics] Last year it was a to-do because of Guided By Voices. Yeah, it was. And we believed they were going to work with us this year and they chose not to. [Italics] And yet you also encourage bands in Austin that don't get in to play non= conference shows. But that's completely different. Bands that don't get in, if we're not able to take the band, and we can't take nearly all the bands that deserve to play, and if a
16 Geek Weekly #9
17
band can't get in and they can create something, that's great. That's the kind of do-it-yourselfism that we encourage. And there always are some places in town that are going to book those bands during SXSW. That's fine. We want those bands to play, and if they can make something of it, great. But that's an entirely different thing than the big guys coming in. I have to say, the thought of people clamoring for invies to see the Cult is pretty sad. I can only see going in there to have a good laugh. I'm not saying I'm not trying to go, though. . . So, we got rejected for our rock critic interview for this issue, which makes me wanna ask you why Raoul Hernandez doesn't play poker with you guys. The thing is about our poker group, is that our poker group genuinely is friends. It's just friends. It's just friends that happen to control the media in Austin. Yeah, we control it. There's gonna be a buyout of Geek Weekly anyday. We're for sale cheap. Our poker group is- this poker game has existed in some form or fashion for 17 years, and it's friends, and anyone who's ever joined the game has been a friend of a friend. ANd that's just it. Raoul's not your friend? I'm not saying that, I'm saying that right now we have too many people, we couldn't add people. Should one of your members drop out, you'd be glad to take his money, though. Adding member to poker, part of it's serendipity. When Jeff Salamon first came to town, he was introduced to us by Pat Blashill. It just happened that somebody had left town around the same time, and Jeff had been invited over, a friend of a friend, and was gonna move to Austin. Do you usually come out on top? I think I've probably broken even. I think that's the case for most of us. No big winners? No, and everyone knows each other's bullshit. Well, anyway, we were turned down by Raoul and we were very hurt by this. Why did he turn you down? We'll get into that in the rest of the issue. Basically he said, "I don't consider myself a geek, I'll have to decline." We're very hurt by this. First of all, by definition, he's a rock critic- He's clearly a geek, but some people are proudly geeks, and some people are not. I think we should. I'll go on the record as saying that I consider this really unfortunately poor form on Raoul's part. I'm sure he's not losing any sleep over it. I'd like to think we're good enough for any rock critic in Austin. That's the first time we've ever been turned down for
17 Spring 2001
18
an interview. Salamon might be a target in the future. You should, because Jeff's an interesting guy. And one of these days we'll do the all-Jewish issue. I've noticed your affection for Jews. Well, Jennifer is Jewish and she wanted to do a section in this one but we couldn't get it together in time. We'd have to have the Jewish sports section, Jewish rock bands. Well, this is the point in our interviews where we like to have everyone run down our lsit of writers and comment on them, but I didn't prepare my list this time because I didn't know if - not being a practicing rock critic - you'd have the same view. Oh, I know the rock critics. Well, we've go Raoul. What's your opinion of him as a writer? Raoul is a man of genuine integrity. I respect that. He's very serious-minded, he's professional. At times I wish he would loosen up a little bit. If you're going to be a rock critic, you should have fun with it, too, and I don't have the sense that he's having as much fun with it as he should. On the other hand, it's a little bit like asking a horse to be a giraffe. He's good at being a horse. Chris Gray. Chris has a lot more fun, obviously. I'd like to see Chris have a wider audience. I think that he - early on, he was geeky that I had of course a great degree of affection for his geekiness and at the same time because I recognized so much of myself in him, and also said, "He'll grow out of it." He's grown out of it and he's become a much better writer and I'd like to think that Chris could have a bigger audience. He's got good insights and he works hard. And like I said, I identified with Chris the first time I saw Chris because he was paying a lot of attention, and standing in a corner kind of quietly, but paying a lot of attention. Greg Beets, who's spoadic at the Chronicle And Greg is terrific writer and he's a really grat humor writer. He's really great at being funny. But writing for him is just one of those things that he does. It's just a creative outlet, i think that if 's what he decided he wanted to do all of the things that he does. Ken Lieck. Ken's kind of really impossible for me to comment on in any objective way because Ken's been my friend for so long. Ken at his best is really really funny and he does this job that is a hard thing to do and it's sure hard to do week after week after week. Yet he manages to do it most of the time with at least several good pieces of news and a couple of good jokes and at times, it's better than that. But Ken's the same way as my old friends who are in bands, Ken's comfortable. He might not like that thought, but the fact that Ken's voice is there all the time, I like. What's with the hair? Oh, God. Ken's satorial sense is - has he never had anybody in his life teach 18 Geek Weekly #9
19
him how to dress? He doesn't care.
Margaret Moser - she's more than a rock writer, though.
Margaret's always kind of been big sister to me. When I really was even dumber than I am now, Margaret clued me in to a lot of things that I didn't know about and has always treated me just terrifically. Margaret does memoirs, personal experience, very, very well and has become increasingly good at it. In terms of her opinion and being able to use that opinion to gauge whether you'll like something or not, I don't know how reliable I've ever found Margaret in terms of that. Instead it's if Margaret loves something - and in fact, that's the thing I've always looked for in rock writers. First and foremost, you're a writer. If you can't write, who cares? If you can write, who cares what your opinion is? I mean, hell, I' ve agreed with about three of Corcoran's opinions musically in my life, but when Michael writes really well, he's a terrifically entertaining writer. I don't care what his opinion is, and the fact is that he's oh so frequently just wrong, wrong, wrong in his opinions.
What was it like working with Rob Patterson?
Rob and I personally have always had a good working relationship. We got a lot done together, we always worked well together. But Rob can be difficult. Other people don't necessarily find Rob easy to work with. He's opinionated. He'll have a vision of how things should be, and with people that he respects, that kind of interaction can be one that will produce positive results. But if Rob dosen't respect somebody or if he thinks that they're wrong or something, he can be - he can make people angry. And he'll make people angry in ways that a lot of writers make people angry.
He was your successor at the Chronicle, right?
He was. And prior to that, Rob was a writer for me. He did a bunch of really good good work and did it really well and didn't cause me any grief at all.
Let's see, over at the Statesman, you already talked about Corcoran.
Now, Michael, I just want to mentain that Michael and I have been friends for a very, very long time. Michael and I lived together twice.
Couldn't work it out?
He was a bad lay. No, when it comes to Michael doing his job, if people would ever get the sense that - like the kind of thing you talk about, the poker game that controls the media, or all of my friends who are journalists or musicians, Michael sort of is proof that this does not preclude conflict. With that column, sometimes he'll do things that make me crazy. He'll also do things that are helpful. But he has his own agenda and I have mine, and of course I feel like mine is right, and how could he possibly fail to see that my side is the correct one?
I have to ask you one final question that was requested by an outside party. I was told that for women of a certain age, Brent Grulke was a rite of passage.
I can only answer that by saying no one can talk about his or her love life without bragging or confessing, and who wants to hear either one?