• 102
  • 7
  • 8072

About the Author

Image for Does Chris Brown deserve ‘no stars ever’?

Does Chris Brown deserve ‘nostars ever’?

Chris Brown may be a shit human being, but that doesn’t mean his music is beyond fair critical appraisal, writes CAITLIN WELSH following Chloe Papas’ infamous “no stars ever” review.


Last week, Chloe Papas’ scorched-earth review of Chris Brown’s new album Fortune spread across the interwebs, trailing righteous applause and gratified commenters in its wake. “BEST REVIEW YOU’LL EVER READ,” crowed several American blogs. In essence, she said the album has no artistic value whatsoever. It is also often, like far too much commercial R&B and hip-hop, incredibly anti-women in its themes. Moreover, Chris Brown is a piece of shit who has shown no genuine remorse for his felony assault conviction against then-girlfriend Rihanna in 2009, only a petulant resentment that people continue to mention it at all. I agree with essentially everything she said.

But I find it hard to believe that Papas went to her editor and asked to review Brown’s latest album because she was interested in hearing what innovative new direction Brown’s music was taking. Most music critics have at one point or another taken a review assignment licking their lips at the prospect of a good old-fashioned Christians-vs-lions evisceration, or because they already have an opinion formed or half-formed and would very much like to have an audience for it. A good music critic tells you what they really think about an album. A good music critic is able to set aside preconceptions, to admit when they are wrong or simply surprised by a record. Papas was never in any danger of enjoying or being surprised by Fortune, but even if she had been, that was not the purpose of the piece. Her inability or refusal to engage with the actual music at all is not only amateurish, but doesn’t add to the conversation at all.

People have acknowledged that slamming your girlfriend’s head in a car door is wrong. This is excellent, and worth celebrating. The outcry against Brown following his felony assault conviction has raised awareness of what is obfuscatingly and euphemistically called domestic violence. Every time I see a smart public figure publicly denouncing Brown and/or his defenders – particularly a man – I rejoice a little. But if you’ve ever tweeted anything negative about Brown, you might’ve come across Team Breezy.

While many of them are simply pop fans who can’t or won’t let his awfulness interfere with their enjoyment of his music, there are others who clearly spend all their time looking for critics of Brown to abuse. Once they pop up, it can be fun to bait them. They tend to be just on the wrong side of literate; use a lot of all-caps; and when backed into a corner, will often drop something like, “WHO MADE YOU GOD TO JUDGE ANOTHER HUMAN BEING?” Even more horrifyingly, many of them tweeted after his Grammys performance that they’d, like, totally let him beat them any time.

They are called Team Breezy by themselves and by Brown. He thanks them a lot. While it’s become de rigeur for every pop star’s glittery minion army to have their own demonym, there’s something on the nose, even a little etymologically sinister about the adversarial vibe here. If they are Team Breezy, who are we? Are we The Opposition? Team Rihanna? Team Drake? Team Not Beating Women?

The arguments that both Brown and his followers spout in his defence tend to run along one of two lines. One is to point out all the other entertainers who have beaten, stabbed, robbed, raped, bludgeoned, snorted, crashed, abused or otherwise fucked up real bad, and been welcomed back into the fold after some or no time at all. From Errol Flynn to Charlie Sheen and all the woman-bashing Browns (James, Bobby, etc), celebrity history is full of awful humans. The difference is Chris Brown happens to have committed his crime in an era of TMZ, the 24-hour news cycle and Twitter. We all saw a horrifying picture of what he actually did to his girlfriend, so yes, few of us have rushed to forgive him.

But the other criticism levelled at writers is that we are attacking the man, not the music. Papas certainly prioritised lambasting Brown’s horrible-person status over tearing into the music. She’s far from the only one taking this tack, just the most visible right now. I’ve done it myself, albeit on Twitter and not in a published review. Chad Taylor, a critic for an Iowa paper, published a six-word review of the album: “Chris Brown hits women. Enough said.” By all means, refuse to engage with Chris Brown’s music, give it no “stars ever”, but then you also have to give “no stars ever” to the industry that supports him, the performers who defend him, the producers who work with him and all the celebrities throughout the years who have ever hit a woman, child or a puppy. Otherwise, you are a hypocrite, like it or not.

“If we choose to review Chris Brown’s record, we have a responsibility to approach it with the respect and open mind we give to anything else.”

Loudly proclaiming that you’re never going to pay attention to him in a published review could be seen – if you’re cynical – as piggybacking off Brown’s notoriety for your own ends. That’s exactly the same as all the artists who have made music with Brown and stuck by him. Indeed, the commercial imperative of working with a man who generates such tremendous publicity outweighs any moral compulsion that might say it’s best to ignore him. As music critics, if we choose to review Chris Brown’s record, we have a responsibility to approach it with the respect and open mind we give to anything else. Prepare to be surprised; engage with the music itself; and, sure, let your preconceptions of the artist’s personal life and failings inform your opinion.

But the responsibility of the music critic, such as it is, is to talk about the music. Writers from all over have “reviewed” Lana Del Rey’s flaccid palimpsest of a record by talking about the hype and her lips. They’re “reviewing” The Newsroom by talking about The West Wing and Sorkin’s shitty behaviour towards a female interviewer. If you’re reviewing Chris Brown – if you’re going to take exposure and column space away from a great record in order to take potshots at a performer everyone knows is a completely shit human – tear this obtuse, misogynistic and derivative album a new one and let that speak for itself. Be a sharp, sly voice for critical and human integrity, in a sea of people bleating the obvious and feeding the trolls.

Listen to Chris Brown’s Fortune:

Social

  • DinkiDIDude
  • Perfect Skies
  • i_have_ADD
  • berlinchair101
  • bigerkev
  • katiecunningham
  • sarahanne

Comments

www.fasterlouder.com.au arrow left
45669
DinkiDIDude

DinkiDIDude said on the 10th Aug, 2012

Where do we draw the line?

Mark Wahlberg committed some outrageous acts of racially motivated assault when he was a teenager and is now an acclaimed Hollywood star. Should we revile him and his work now because of these horrible things he did?

But on the other hand he served prison time for these crimes and has apparently spent a lot of time trying to find the people he harmed in order to repent for his crimes, not to mention the large amount of charity work he works in.

Our justice system and the justice system of many western nations is based on not only punishment for crime, but the idea of rehabilitation and redemption for transgressors... but should we accept people who commit these kind of acts be accepted back into society? It's a hard answer.

The fact is though, the pathetic fuckbucket in question served no jail time at all and instead ended up picking up rubbish on the side of the road for a few weeks, and with the exception of a few high profile identities within the hip hop scene (Nas, Jay- Z and Drake obviously) has been seemingly welcomed back with open arms by the majority of the music industry including 'that' performance at the Grammys which saw him recieve a standing ovation. Since that performance instead of showing any form of meaningful remorse, he responds with crap like 'u a h8er', 'only god can judge me', 'i grow from my mistakes' etc, when questioned about the assualt and then releases crap like this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdaaA6mLaWU <- not working, heres the link (freestyle having a go at Rhianna) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdaaA6mLaWU

after doing this - http://i.ytimg.com/vi/XWerpwE6FHU/0.jpg

Bottom line, I dont think I can ever listen to any artist who supports this guy, dude should still be on parole. :mad:

tyler07

tyler07 said on the 10th Aug, 2012

i think this is completely biased. why say there is no upside to any of his album unless you just completely dislike the man? his song 'don't judge me' is about his feelings but only someone who is narrow-minded can't see that. also, the critic is saying he has absolutely no talent, yet he has gotten praise from many people much more important than this critic.

and if you listened to any of his other songs that aren't on this album such as 'i needed you', 'how i feel', or 'she ain't you', you would see that he does have talent.

and what's wrong with songs about partying? in a world where not everything is as perfect as it seems. where i'm from (usa) there is a reccession and a loss of jobs. songs about partying makes us forget about all that. it's called fun, you should try it. and last time i checked, chris brown was an american singer/rapper/dancer/actor. <--- quadruple threat! :o

so maybe you should put away all harsh feelings on his past and actually listen and analyze the music. find out the meaning and see why he would have reason to write a song like that and maybe, just maybe, you'll become a better critic. kay?

I award this post NO LIKES EVER.

But srsly, I think another extremely important point to consider is not only did Chris Brown not do the time for his crimes, he has also showed little evidence of remorse, and continues to be a fuckhead to this day e.g. homophobic comments about Frank Ocean.

If he were to ever be forgiven for this incident, he might need to actually grow a pair of balls and try and use his fame to provide some sort of positive influence in the world, rather than just being a fuckwit.

DinkiDIDude

DinkiDIDude said on the 15th Aug, 2012

Seriously guy... have you heard of a strawman argument?
Unless they are a repeat offender they are more than likely not going to serve a custodial sentence for domestic assault. Maybe you should picket a few courthouses and protest the leniency...
These are the type of falsities I am referring to.
Chris Brown was not convicted, Chris Brown has never shown remorse, Chris Brown isn't on probation, He started the NY brawl, he called Frank Ocean a homo.
I would have no problem with all of the net justice if there was consistency.
Did Tupac have albums reviewed that even mentioned his previous crimes? Why is Tupac immune?

eh?, please ellaborate as to how I missrepresented you in any way, was just pointing out that totally ignoring the severity of the punishment (by arguing that the defendant was 'technically' punished) when discussing the consequences in relation to something as serious as felony assault is a fallacy by association all on its own

and by that logic you should start a fb in support of celebrity internet slander victims

These are the type of falsities I am referring to.
Chris Brown was not convicted, Chris Brown has never shown remorse, Chris Brown isn't on probation, He started the NY brawl, he called Frank Ocean a homo.
your right on every single point, my argument is that putting out a you tube video apologising to your victim and claiming remorse for your actions, seems pretty weak when you follow up by doing things like trashing a dressing room and abusing people when questioned about the incident coupled with the facing of robbery charges for recently snatching a girls I Phone, calling her a bitch and then driving off (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/23/chris-brown-robbery-snatches-fans-phone_n_1297368.html)......you really think picking up rubbish was a deterent for this guy?

I would have no problem with all of the net justice if there was consistency.
Did Tupac have albums reviewed that even mentioned his previous crimes? Why is Tupac immune? .....the guys been dead for over a decade, I really dont think a campaign of internet outrage is going to have too much affect

There are 1 more comments. View them all