Dear Ms. Jepsen:
This letter is in response to your article in the July 12 issue of the Rock, Etc. column "Pasture-ized." I am just wondering why you think it's cool to try to emulate the already overly bitter ranks of the Reader's rock critics. Please, tell us something we don't know! As someone who attended the first four Lollapaloozas, I can tell you that to most people like myself, it has been a widely accepted fact that Lollapalooza "sold-out" basically as soon as the second year, and definitely by the third year when "alternative" became a marketing buzzword and Q101 trashed the Chicago music scene. (This is not to say that all the bands sucked, but rather that the general vibe did.) The point, however, is none of this is news to the Chicago musicians and music lovers who probably, like myself, read the Reader to find out what's good, and in small unobvious doses find out what's not.
Please, do your readers a service and instead of wasting your column space on bitter articles that are not anywhere near newsworthy or mentionable, consider choosing to review and write about either bands or shows you recommend or can say something positive about, or if you choose to critique, please oh please pick subject matter that hasn't already been overkilled in the media, and additionally isn't something that Chicago rock fans haven't already figured out for themselves years ago.
This would be much more enjoyable and informative to read than what is becoming a standard in the Reader: inane, obvious, bitter, caustic, narcissistic reviews that seem to have the sole purpose of displaying the writer's feelings of superiority and just ignorant and irrelevant comments. (Although I doubt any of you can even write one song that is nearly as good as those of the bands you always like to feel superior to--although I guess as a musician, that is my job. Your job, then, is to tell me something I don't know. Please consider . . .
A Tried and True
Chicago Music Fan