Jim DeRogatis, pop music critic of The Chicago Sun Times eviscerates Ian Christie’s Everybody Wants Some: The Van Halen Saga.
I read the book the day it was first released and didn’t find it to be that bad. It wasn’t as good as I was hoping, but I didn’t think it was awful. My main criticism of it was that I didn’t really learn much new in it. There wasn’t a great deal of depth (particularly if you already know quite a bit of VH history) or new material in it.
DeRogatis’s review raises an interesting question, however. How does a reviewer of a book put aside his opinions of the book’s subject? There’s no doubt that Christie goes a bit far in his praise of Van Halen. So DeRogatis definitely has a point with some of his criticisms. But with lines in the review such as “the overdressed, over-amplified, prone-to-overplaying heavy-metal cartoons who gave us Jump, Dance the Night Away and Poundcake” it makes me wonder how DeRogatis feels about the band. Christie could have done a better job, sure. But if DeRogatis goes into it with a dislike of Van Halen, then how does the book stand a chance?
It’s a difficult stance to maintain. I’ve reviewed books about music genres that I didn’t like. And although I like to think I put aside my distate for X genre or Y musician and focused solely on the book’s merits, it is definitely a struggle.
Ouch is right! I’ve been flayed with the overcooked pasta of America’s widely mocked worst working rock critic — the living embodiment of the Simpsons’ Comic Book Guy. That review is a great example of why you shouldn’t send a music critic to do a book reviewer’s job. He hates Van Halen like an old-fashioned rock critic should — that’s fine. But I didn’t like the potshots directed at me — especially since I used to work with the guy, and I generally defend him against ridicule. But at very least, I would have appreciated it if the lazy slob had bothered to copy the name of my book Sound of the Beast correctly — it’s printed on the VH book cover, FFS!
In any case, this was one of those harshly negative reviews that perversely helps sell the book. Even the headline was intended as a slur against the band — but Van Halen rarely, if ever, teased their hair. And attacking Fievel the Mouse — for shame! Honestly, I doubt Rogatis read more than a few pages.
But thanks for sniffing out the bias, and your very mild defense of the book regardless,
Beast wishes,
IAN
Hang in there, Ian.
The more I think about it, the more I think that DeRogatis was over the line.
In particular, I’ve been pondering DeRogatis’s criticism that Christie’s praise was too exaggerated. Sure, we can debate whether the Van Halen clan’s immigrant story is comparable to that of Henry Ford.
But at the same time, if you’re writing a book about Subject X, and that book is going to be read almost exclusively by fans of Subject X, then shouldn’t the writer be excited about Subject X? Unless your goal in writing on Subject X is to somehow “expose” it, then wouldn’t you make it sound like the greatest thing since sliced bread?
What’s the point of reading a biography of F. Scott Fitzgerald that says, “He was an acceptable writer in the twenties” or a celebrity memoir that says, “I’ve led a mildly interesting life” or something like that?
I guess like all things it comes down to matters of degree and balance. A writer shouldn’t be embarrassingly fawning over the material. But neither should he be afraid to get excited about his subject.
I’m writing two nonfiction books at the moment. And if I didn’t think that these subjects were the absolute shit, then why would I dedicate years of my life to them?
Anyway, food for writing thought.
Oh, and Ian, I loved Sound of the Beast.