goedwingo:

Dear Matt Friedberger of the Fiery Furnaces,

A few weeks ago you went off on Radiohead and their song Harry Patch.  You were quoted in the article saying:

“F—- you! You brand yourself by brazenly and arbitrarily associating yourself with things that you know people consider cool. That is bogus. That’s a put-on. That’s a branding technique and Radiohead have their brand that they’re popular and intelligent. So they have a song about Harry Patch.  How’s the song? Is it 48 notes to the octave? What does it have to do with Harry Patch? Oh, my wife says I am being very rude. She doesn’t like me insulting Radiohead. She’s afraid they will send their lackeys through the computer to sabotage us. But they needn’t worry — we are a band that sabotages ourselves.” (Spinner)

It then occurred to everyone that you erroneously mistook the song title. It appears that you misheard Harry Patch, the last surviving British WWI veteran, for that of Harry Partch, an experimental music composer.  Oh what an easy mistake to make!  Your publicist cited the mistake and we thought all was well in the world.

Instead of graciously admitting your fault, you denied it.  And not only did you deny it, you did so like a pretentious douche bag.  Sigh.

Here is what you had to say:

“Back in the fall of 1996 or whenever that interview was conducted, the interviewer asked what Matt thought of the Radiohead song celebrating a WWI veteran. Matt naturally thought it would be interesting to pretend that they wrote a song about the celebrated American composer of a similar sounding name, hence his joking in the interview about Radiohead composing a song with something like 48 notes to an octave. It was easy and amusing to imagine Radiohead’s attempt to colonize that relatively arcane bit of our musical lifeworld. This is what they used to call, in some bohemian and advertising circles, ‘riffing’ or fooling around.”

“Matt has not heard the Radiohead song about Harry Patch, but if he did, he is sure he wouldn’t like it. No doubt Radiohead and their fans can ignore his opinion of this matter and continue with their triumphant artistic interventions. Matt would have much preferred to insult Beck but he is too afraid of Scientologists.” (Pitchfork)

Oh the humanity!  When I read through this article, I only felt pity for you.  You see instead of admitting your wrongs like a gentlemen, you decided that it was only appropriate for you to continue your path of disaster.  You claimed that you knew of the difference between the two Harry’s and that your joke went on death ears.  Now, I am not saying you’re lying.  This could very well be the truth.  Perhaps we have lost the art of humor and that only those in the company of Mensa could guffaw.  However, in either case, you sir, are still a dick.

Not only do you refer to yourself in third person, a technique that Dwayne Johnson has decided was passé.  You show no signs of grace or humility.  Had you simply explained that it was a joke, all would have been well.  Had you humbly accept your mistake, all would have been well.  But instead, you result to childish ways and continued to make a fool of yourself.  And you made fun of Beck.

Sir, no one fucks with Beck.  Because when you insult such a man, he will not simply let it go like Radiohead.  Nor will he stoop to a low level and begin a flame war.  Beck will take the opportunity and rise to the occassion.

Beck decided to kill two birds with one stone.  Not only did he bitch slapped you across your face, he created an interesting piece that actually reflects the works of Harry Partch and his studies on microtonal scales.

At this point, it would only seem reasonable for you to say, “Ah, I have been bested.  I shall accept my defeat, retreat, and save my dignity.”

Instead you post this:

“But doesn’t this imaginary feud demand imaginary responses? And therefore, imaginary response songs? Shouldn’t we step—isn’t now the time to ascend—from the merely virtual to the boldly imaginary?”

“I am proud to have been raised to seek out, revere, and practice the power of the pun without apology—or explanation. And I am pleased to be in a position where I perceive it useful to write such a thing in such a style, both as a joke and in earnest.”(Pitchfork)

What exactly are you trying to do here?  Are you trying to say that because Beck released his song “virtually” that it holds no merit and exists in the same plane as the “imaginary”?  I think you are beginning to lose focus of this battle that you are desperately trying to win.  And please stop with the condescending attitude.  I encourage you to proceed with the argument if you must, but when you do so with such spite, it damages your reputation.

Sir Matthew of the Fiery Furnaces, I just want to thank you.  For you see, I have learned from your experience, even if you sir, have not.  I have learned to take responsibility over my own mistakes and admit when I am wrong.  I have learned that if I do not do this, Beck will own my ass.  And when I teach my children this lesson one day, I will say, “Accept your mistakes with humility and grace or else you will look like Matthew Friedberger of the Firery Furnaces and that guy was a prick.”