The Aesthetics Of Rock

by Richard Meltzer

This infamous book has enjoyed a lively underground reputation since its first publication in 1970. Richard Meltzer (a.k.a. R. Meltzer) took his training as a young philosopher and applied it with unalloyed enthusiasm to the lyrics, sound, and culture of rock and roll. Never before had anyone noticed the relationship between the philosophy of Heidegger and a tune by Little Anthony and the Imperials, heard the cries of agony in the Shangri Las' “Remember (Walkin' in the Sand)”, or transcribed every "papa-ooma-mow-mow" in the Trashmen's “Surfin' Bird.”From Dionne Warwick to Plato, Jim Morrison to Bert Brecht, Conway Twitty to Miguel de Unamuno, Meltzer subverts high and low culture in his search for meaning, emotion, and codes in popular music. At once an earnest investigation and a crypto put-on, the book can be read for its nuggets of information and insights or for its humor. Here with Greil Marcus's new introduction, yet another generation of readers can be outraged and inspired.

Genres: Music, Nonfiction, Rock N Roll

384 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1970

About the author

Rock critic, performer and writer. He is considered by some rock historians to be the first to write real analysis of rock and roll and is credited with inventing "rock criticism".

Reviews

[Vaughan · Rating 5 out of 5]

His first book, begun when he was a wisenheimer college student, writing about rock stuff for college classes. Ah, the 60s. This one's a funny ass-pain to read. Poke around with GULCHER and WHORE and then work your way up to this one.

[Willy Boy · Rating 4 out of 5]

'Written in a religious fervour" - R. Meltzer. Everything they say is true - impenetrable, pretentious, precocious, verbose, opinionated (gasp), contentious ... One of the only essential rock books (or Rock Books). Throw away your Rolling Stone Encyclopedia (smooth, rational surface merely a disguise for the most pernicious lies and manipulation). Disagree with the Aes. Of Rock, argue, throw it at the wall in frustration. You're supposed to. Do as you are bid and be free. More like a Medieval Text - as if Meltzer was channeling Julian of Norwich into his late teen early twenties shell. And you'll be similarly possessed, once you slog through the maelstrom and catch sight of the final divine revelation. It will all suddenly make sense and you'll abandon the Lie that constituted your Life (and be left with 'F'). You'll want to seek out and smell old vinyl (of the most inexpensive kind), you'll hear the animalistic, primordial clarion in Frankie Valli's vocalising, as a call that speaks to your eternal self. You'll grok that belief is but a temporary stop gap solution to mend the cosmic void. Rubber Bisquit and Surfin Bird as anti-hypnotism agents. Declassified Louie Louie report reveals FBI has real beef with DNA. Destroy the Rock N Roll Museum (figuratively of course - there's no need to waste energy demolishing an empty vessel)

[Alex V. · Rating 4 out of 5]

Wow. I'm not sure I got all of it, or what there is there to get besides the process of getting (and perhaps that's really what aesthetics as a discipline is), but this is a maddening, delirious, wonderful book that should be quoted in moments of high-minded, drunken bouts of rock-dude-ery for generations to come.

A favorite quote, one that I should post above my desk, is:

Boredom is actually the greatest automatic soul-endurance move, coupling mere endurance with the endurance of the mere.

[stew · Rating 3 out of 5]

If Little Richard and Hegel ever could have shared a bed.

[Timothy Kirchhof · Rating 3 out of 5]

The foreword in the edition I have describes the book from a very similar viewpoint as the one I have of it. It is verbose and over the top in its analysis of the social import of certain songs. The language used and the structure it is used in are often hard to follow. I guess this could be called a cult classic. I "enjoyed" it, but it was painful at the same time. Not the best review but apropos to the book.

[Derek · Rating 4 out of 5]

I seem to have read several bks with no cover.

[Harley Lond · Rating 4 out of 5]

Tough going on this one -- there are so many diversions in the writing, u-turns and deadends -- that sometimes it's difficult to follow. But, like listening to rock, one has to let it flow into and through and over you.

As the title suggests, it's an attempt to take a philosophic look at the aesthetics of rock -- through Plato and Aristotle to Kant to Heidegger to Nietzsche to Buber - with connections to the self-reflexive world or art from Dada to Calder to Johns to Warhol --

His postulate: Rock -- even the trivial, most repetitive - is serious art.

"Rock 'n' roll realizes that its songs function within life itself more than any other art historically ever has and that the secondary level also functions in the primary context, while all levels are involved in the art-life problem; to rock this all resolves into a perfectly acceptable reductio ad absurdum."

Rock seeks to illuminate "the collapse of art into everyday life, and vice versa."

Within its purview rock uses symbolism, tragedy, repetition, cliche, ethics, politics, good-bad-evil, love, hate, death, linguistics and nonsense syllables (invoking the legacy of Dada)

"rock is the brute actualization where all earlier art is potential"

[Litmus · Rating 1 out of 5]

jesus f***ing christ. what a colossal waste of paper and my time. 338 pages of nonsensical, pretentious drivel. i only finished it because i’m not a quitter. but after 20 pages, i knew the chances of this being anything other than a wankfest slog were slim to none—and slim had just left town. the one star is only because goodreads won’t let you assign zero stars.

i read this over a period of five years, in the bathroom, as an occasional accompaniment to defecation. i honestly couldn’t tell the difference between meltzer’s and my output. i think this book has only been deemed a “classic” of the rock criticism genre by those who have made it through to the end and want at least one other person to suffer as much as they did. i’m here to break the cycle of paying it backward.

avoid this book at all costs. i’m going to try to wipe my brain of this twaddle with a packet of wet wipes and a roll of toilet paper. wish me luck.

[Phoenix Alexander · Rating 1 out of 5]

Quite possibly the worst book I have ever read. I literally made a Goodreads account just to write this review. I did agree with the few points he was able to articulate, but Meltzer's writing style is purposefully unreadable. He is a pretentious writer and I regret buying this book. Jeez I am seriously so upset at this a-hole. I ripped up a page of his book that was almost complete nonsense because nothing will be missed by the removal of such trash.

[Edward Champion · Rating 4 out of 5]

An enjoyable classic, complete with wildly annoying footnotes and (not so enjoyable) casual racism. Meltzer deftly slides between mock philosophy and some rather interesting observations about the Beatles. I can imagine Meltzer in the 1960s shuffling among hundreds of records. That he got so much wonkish mileage before the Internet is truly astonishing.

[Glenn Evans · Rating 4 out of 5]

Now I'm not even going to try and pretend I understood much of what RM was trying to say here, nevertheless I thoroughly enjoyed this book.

He gets 4 stars for the sheer audacity of the thing and his astounding musical knowledge.

[Butch Lazorchak · Rating 2 out of 5]

Incomprehensible.

[Patrick K.]

A Sixties rock reviewer's stoned Sokal hoax (which, like the Sokal paper, is an interesting document for reasons unrelated to authorial intention). A pataphysics of the pompatus of rock, in all its pismotality.

[Rebecca Noran]

started, but took a break. This book was much discussed at the EMP pop music conference in Seattle, where I purchased said copy.