I mentioned Mick Farren’s passing I a post yesterday, along with JJ Cales, and planned to write some more at some point. The Deviants lead singer and major rock critic for all the players in the UK and plenty of em in the States (I first read him in the NME) collapsed on stage last week and died soon after.
I knew Mick slightly and though I was friendly with his ex-wife Betsy Farren in the 1980’s.
But this isn’t about his death as such, it is about Pitchfork and Rolling Stone failing to report it. Spin Magazine, what happened to the big dogs? Pitchfork are so self-involved I would guess they don’t consider it news when one of the original punks dies. I mean, he was 69 years old, right? Isn’t that old enough to croak?
I really don’t like Pitchfork very much, I have no time for them and I have no time for their opinion. They walk up and down their little piece of turf like it’s the Maginot Line; keep out if you don’t belong, if you are too old or if you are unhip, or if we simply don’t care it. We will write about Paul Williams but only if he is writing with Daft Punk , otherwise why bother?
Pitchfork are so elitist their opinion gets devalued, it’s like they have such a narrow scope and though in 2013 in might capture a lot of bands, it loses more than it captures.
Rolling Stone? I would guess he had some form of fight with Jann for them to simply ignore him. The thing about Stone is that it holds grudges forever and once you’ve had a fight with em you would be better off moving on with your life but still Farren is a legendary character and a great rocker and frankly I am surprised they would ignore his death.
Surprised but not shocked, both magazines swill in a cesspool of self-regard. I don’t trust either publication in the slightest –there is too much going on behind the scenes. Certainly enough so that ignoring Mick Farren’s death feels like just a very strange, rude and very typical act of malfeasance.