
I've just read the mess in The Province this morning, "The Truth About Goth". The research looks like it went about as far as reading over the FAQ on Gothic BC, recycling parts of the Toronto Star article the other day, and talking to a 20-year old who claims to have "been in the scene for a really long time".
I have Siouxsie records older than her! Not to mention the sidling-up of my name up beside a poorly drawn metaphor in order to equate me with a pill-bug. It's not a
terrible article, but it is clearly based on only a few hours research and no fact checking - precisely the sort of thing I was afraid of but expecting nonetheless. In all it is a typical Surrey Province article: badly written, poorly researched, and targeted at mental 12-year olds.
[EDIT: on a second look, now that I'm not quite so pissed off about being compared to a bug, it's not such a bad effort. No worse than the attempts at redemption made by the Globe and Mail and the Vancouver Sun. The same sort of mistakes are made, but one can only expect so much, particularly from a tabloid.]
no subject
Date: 2004-10-17 12:59 pm (UTC)yeah, i'm sure she's been in the scene a long time.
i wonder what "a long time" means...
I've been in the scene for a long time too, but nearly not as long as some people. But a 20 year old? Cmooooooon.
snarl snarl
Date: 2004-10-17 01:13 pm (UTC)And as we (E and I) were saying, most of the scene is predominately "club related"...if you'd be in the scene for "years" and you're only 20 ffs, how does that equate? LAF shut down almost 2 years ago, The Palladium has been gone for longer, Celebs was closed for 2(+?) years, etc., and The Onion was stringent aboutID.
Most of us who did start clubbing at an early age did because we could get in, almost no-one was ID'd back then, whereas for the past couple of years it's been manditory to ID. If you're only 20, how could you get in? Where have you been "for years?" Which clubs were you at? I don't consider all ages events as such....that's just dumb.
Man, I'm annoyed.
no subject
Date: 2004-10-17 01:35 pm (UTC)They clearly at least attempted to do some homework and *try* to get things right ... which is about the most you can hope for, I suppose. Also looks like they definitely got most of their source material from the links you put up, so kudos for that!
But yeah, a lot of their current info they got from new sources like the lass they interviewed totally looked silly next to their lifted-right-off-the-page stuff they obviously took from a Goth FAQ somewhere.
Infected Mushroom essential goth listening? OKaaaaayyyy .... how did *that* one happen?
no subject
Date: 2004-10-17 01:50 pm (UTC)Don't get me wrong, I am not ragging on this woman. But what does bother me is the source this guy used, a 20 year old, despite the fact that they even admit that Goth has been around since the 80's. What kind of source is he using here? I hate to say thins, but I wanted to report about the war in Iraq, I wouldn't talk to a soldier who has just spent three days there. I would talk to a soldier who had spent at least a year there. However the fact that this woman works in a Goth-oriented store does seem like a good source. I would rather they have talked to the owner, however.
I think the paper made an honourable attempt, however I think it's only going to piss more people off. Sadly, Mike Roberts was once responsible for writing an Indy music column, and I would have thought he'd have known a bit more on where and how to get the best information. *sigh*
no subject
Date: 2004-10-17 01:51 pm (UTC);)
Re: snarl snarl
Date: 2004-10-17 04:58 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-10-17 06:42 pm (UTC)The 20 year old? Nice, but dear, you've not been in this a long time. That made me snicker.
I wish they'd gotten into a little depth on why all of us get into this in the first place and don't leave, they all seem to imply still it's a passing phase.
Depth, however, is not synonymous with "The Province".
no subject
Date: 2004-10-17 09:31 pm (UTC)*end sarcasm*
It's time for all this to be put to rest, in my opinion.
no subject
Date: 2004-10-17 09:54 pm (UTC)I was born this way! it wasn't a choice?
no subject
Date: 2004-10-17 10:00 pm (UTC)Re: snarl snarl
Date: 2004-10-19 09:15 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-10-19 09:17 am (UTC)Re: snarl snarl
Date: 2004-10-19 09:17 am (UTC)Re: snarl snarl
Date: 2004-10-19 09:43 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-10-21 01:29 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-10-21 08:20 am (UTC)