Music journalism is pretty stupid. Record reviews are mostly conceited garbage that don't tell you whether an album is good or not. If it weren't for the numbering system that Pitchfork uses, for example, I would never be able to tell from the written review whether or not the reviewer actually liked the album!

By the time you get to the junior varsity leagues, for example in most larger cities' weekly "alternative" newspapers, the entire music section is unreadable. Completely.

It's a waste of everyone's time, and I'm glad that Isaac Brock is willing to point that out to make music "journalists" feel as stupid as they should. Those who can, blah blah blah.

1. So what were your thoughts about "Debaser"? Specifically the parts where Black francis sings about being "un chien andalusia"?

2. How do you feel about the music press reporting the exoneration of musicians for major sex crimes?

Before I found out Debaser was about Un Chien Andalou, I had no idea. I thought Francis was singing "I am, uhhh...Shock! I'm a loser!" Slicing up eyeballs just sounded cool.

Still appreciate the song, but I think I liked it more when I had my own lyrics, my own meaning, and it was much more immediate to me.

Then what's with the self-mutilation on stage at your recent shows?

http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/page/news/41806-isaac-brock-self-mutilates-at-south-dakota-gig

So, you don't really know, but James Dean was a 'wastoid'?

What does that mean, exactly?

Jean Genet, you're not.

Rest assured I'll never read 'music journalism' about Modest Mouse ever again.

Way to make Portlanders sound like morons, asshole.

isaac brock is out there making music and touring constantly.

it's easy for you to make fun of what he said in one interview or how he acted at one show.

give the guy a break, you dont have to be on drugs to cut yourself.

you dont have to be eloquent to make great music.

it's hard for someone who is slightly anti-social, like brock, to be in the spotlight constantly.

the guy writes some incredible lyrics.

a few of which express his manic and depressive personality.

stop picking on the guy just because he's an easy target.

How nice for you to have the back of a fellow musician. Guess I'm just suggesting a little more self-awareness might be in order. It's not as if Modest Mouse requires more press to push new product. I would label Brock's attitude towards press and publicity as more than a little hostile.

If he truly considers rockcrit a bunch of crap, perhaps he should limit interviews, or consider his answers. Talking from his ass about James Dean and claiming he doesn't need to understand lyrical content to enjoy a song: that's his privilege. If the spotlight glares too brightly, he can keep his thoughts to himself. I can't imagine everyone's so bloody interested in his issues to keep asking.

"I suppose if Isaac Brock got involved in an armed robbery, you'd do it too ... "

Sorry, cheapshot, but old jokes are the best jokes.

Well, for one thing, the label is probably responsible for most, if not all of the interviews that the members of Modest Mouse do. Doing the press rounds comes with the territory.

Secondly: Rock critism is pretty much ridiculous. I do like to read the occasional (WELL WRITTEN) article about bands I like, but I get really fed up when every one I pick up starts with, "Isaac Brock walked out on me..." or "Isaac Brock was no where to be found..." only to later read in the article that it's because he had to take a piss or because he was stuck in traffic. And, honestly, I haven't read an article where they didn't bring up the fact that he A) hates doing interviews, B) has been to jail, C) has been accused of rape, D) had a broken home/has been homeless/lived in a shack/had crazy religious parents, E) has struggled with substance abuse and/or E) had a billion odd jobs before finally being able to support himself by being in a rock band. And sure, Isaac's trying to push his product, but it's not like the magazines are innocently writing exactly what happens without any intention of spicing things up. They, too, sensationalize to push their product and can easily prey on the perception of Isaac as a raging douche bag; they play the tempermental "rockstar" angle.

Of course, I'm not saying that Isaac's totally free of blame - I wouldn't doubt that he is totally capable of being a raging douche bag! I'm just saying it must get boring when in every interview you do they ask you what your songs mean, how you and Johnny Marr met, how long you'll be collaborating et al. Ad infinitum.

Also, I disagree that if someone's "famous" they should have to "keep their thoughts to [themselves]." Just because Isaac's got some sort of "celebrity" doesn't make him any less deserving of an opinion or a means of expressing it. By the same token, it doesn't make his points any more or less valid, than say, yours or mine, but he should have the right to express them.

Just my 2 cents...

...Well, alright, maybe that was more like a nickle...