On The Record

  • Why sensitive singer-songwriters and reviewers will never be friends

    September 10, 2009 @ 9:32 am | by Jim Carroll

    They never forget, you know. Never.

    By any standards, Chris De Burgh has had a remarkable career. For the last 40 years or so, ever since he started out busking for customers in the Captain America’s burger joint at the top of Dublin’s Grafton Street, the dude has been making music, selling out shows and having huge chart hits. Sure, he’s not as popular now as he was in his “Lady In Red” hey-day, but he’s still trucking. The bank-balance is healthy, the wardrobe is bursting at the seams with leather jackets, the wine-cellar is full.

    Yet all this time, Chris has been hoarding other things aside from these expensive trinkets. Every slight and barb which has come his way from the reviewing peasants who have been in the audience has been filed away in his memory. Even when he was selling out the largest arenas in town and enjoying Top 10 hits around the world, the dude did not forget those horrible reviews from the loathsome critics he had to probably let into his shows for free. He probably had a photo of legendary Irish Times rock critic Joe “The Assassin” Breen on his dartboard. But he kept it all in usually. He was dignified for the most part. He played his piano and wrote more songs. They weren’t, sadly, as popular as “The Lady In Red”. But Chris kept his game-face on.

    However, if you keep poking the bear, the bear will eventually bite. And Peter Crawley was that one poke too far. A few weeks ago, Peter toddled along to the show in Dublin’s Gaiety Theatre and filed his review for this newspaper. A few days later, standing in his beautiful kitchen in his palatial gaff, Chris read the review. And Chris went fecking ballistic. Then, he emailed Peter. It’s the email of the year. Forget Zip Up Your Mickey, this is Chrisgate!

    At this stage, reaction to the contents of the email will go one of three ways depending on who you are.

    Reviewers and critics will chuckle loudly that, yep, Peter got him good and proper. A response like that to a review is always priceless. There’s Chris going on about how newspapers are dying out and that reviews don’t matter yet, he’s still piqued enough to spend a few hours investigating the reviewer, putting a dossier of facts on the chap together and firing off an email with plenty of CAPITAL LETTERS. Peter should get a pay-rise or, at the very least, a work experience kid to help him transcribe interview tapes. Bravo, Peter, bravo!

    Singer-songwriters and musicians, meanwhile, will raise their glasses to Chris and say “hurrah”. Now, that’s how to deal with snarky, cynical critics and reviewers who go along to shows with the reviews already typed up in advance. “Creepy Crawley” - why didn’t we think of that first? No wonder Chris wrote “Don’t Pay The Ferryman” with wit like that! What a lark! Bravo, Chris, Bravo!

    And punters who are or are not fans of the great man will chortle at the whole storm in a teacup and how worked up poor Chris sounds over a review that very few people probably read anyway. They will also probably note with a sense of wonder that there are people out there after all who refer to others as “Impressarios”.

    Of course, Chris’ reaction does raise a few points about how a reviewer can go along to a show and have a totally different reaction to what he or she hears than the rest of the audience. Talking to Hot Press about the whole brouhaha and asked if this was “just another case of the age old debate about how objective/subjective reviewers can/should be”, Peter notes that “there’s no such thing as complete objectivity. You can’t really have a structuralist reading of a concert! So everything is subjective but must be argued. You have to back up a position…The alternative is criticism which is nothing but unmitigated praise and I don’t think that’s especially helpful either”.

    From Chris’ point of view, he played a show to a fanatical audience (or as fanatical as a Chris audience can be - damn, there we go again) and had them eating of his hand. Then, he reads the review by someone who was also in that audience but didn’t see things in the same light. Naturally, he was going to be annoyed and peeved.

    But surely, Chris should also note that everyone is entitled to an opinion. At this stage of his career as a 60 year old veteran, with all those hits and sellout shows under his belt, Chris should have learned that is the case - and should also know that a negative review is not going to matter a damn to his audience. Yet Chris still lets fly and in a manner which is every jot as viterupative and abusive as he perceives the review to be. In football terms, Chris played the man AND the ball. Steaming and angry, all those negative reviews of old come to the fore and poor Peter gets the kind of email which stops you in your tracks.

    Interestingly, there’s an invitation from Chris at the end of the mail to meet Peter for a chat. Peter says he’s up for it. We await Chris’ response with interest. Hell, you could probably even sell tickets to the event if it comes to pass. Any impressario interested in promoting it?

  • 135 Comments »

    1.
    September 10, 2009
    9:42 am

    what’s he got against Sligo is what i want to know?

    Comment by daniel harrison
    2.
    September 10, 2009
    9:55 am

    brillant…what a cracking way to start the day reading those gems!

    it’s like school yard fighting…old man stylee! as it comes, some friends and I were just talking about Chris the other day (don’t ask why) and they mentioned they’d worked with him at a show a few years back and he was one of the nicest guys in the industry they’ve met (and they’ve worked and met them all) They said he was a pure gent, very gracious and nice to the venue staff and put on a brilliant show…please note my friends and I are in our late 20’s and not 40 year old women.

    I hope these two meet, kiss and makeup or at the very least have a Mexican wrestling match to resolve all this tension

    It was a gem of a read this morning, thanks Jim

    Comment by caroline
    3.
    September 10, 2009
    10:04 am

    good on you chris ,i love it . i hate your music but i now like you.

    Comment by petee
    4.
    September 10, 2009
    10:05 am

    That email is a classic. I cant believe he has bitten the bait! Didnt Calvin Harris have some kind of blow out a couple of weeks back when he released his new (2nd Album) on his twitter or something against some journalist dude in The Guardian. He really lost the plot and his getting so much slagging since .

    Comment by Patrick
    5.
    September 10, 2009
    10:13 am

    I think chris has a point….

    That review is pretty full of cliché’s. I realise it is hard to come up with descriptions for a show that bland …. but it does read like someone went along and didn’t even try to engage.

    I think sometimes reviewers just have to say y’know what this is so far removed from my appreciation of music that there is nothing i can do here … I’m not some fawning old biddy who derives fun from this utter crap, there is no point in me going along.

    Comment by Tycho
    6.
    September 10, 2009
    10:15 am

    i wouldn’t mess with the burgh, he has powers.

    Comment by ruan // nick thinks...
    7.
    September 10, 2009
    10:20 am

    hold on i just had a thought, isn’t chris well up with the iranian’s. i feel a ‘fatwa’ coming on

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7146354.stm

    Comment by petee
    8.
    September 10, 2009
    10:25 am

    Any impressario interested in promoting it?

    If they can’t find one maybe a mogul, a Svengali or at worst a mover and shaker will step up to the plate.

    Ah it’s all a bit silly really, I can understand how someone would be annoyed if a journo came to a gig with the review already written, and I know it occasionally happens because some people have told me that they do it but jesus it’s a silly bit of argie bargie really isn’t it? Maybe Chris is narked off over Maradona’s mishandling of Messi + 10 others.

    Personally I don’t get why anyone reads their own press, if you think you’ve played a good gig a good review is only going to massage your ego (oh, wait, now I get it) and if you think you’ve played a bad one no positive response is going to make up for that. And if you get bad press then you’re just going to think … well see above.

    Comment by Ian
    9.
    September 10, 2009
    10:44 am

    Jim why did you change all the references that you had to ‘Christy’ back to Chris. Did it dawn on you that you sounded like a bit of an arse? I never really liked Chris De Burgh, but I’d much rather read letters like his than articles like yours!

    Comment by Christy
    10.
    September 10, 2009
    10:45 am

    Please please please ask Chris de Burgh to review a gig! Something completely out of his comfort zone (I’m thinking Death Metal…).

    Comment by Dhbh
    11.
    September 10, 2009
    10:51 am

    Christy @ 9 - I was just correcting a “find and replace” error which I didn’t spot until the piece went live. Sorry to inconvenience you.

    Comment by Jim Carroll
    12.
    September 10, 2009
    11:02 am

    This is pretty funny. And, Chris’s letter is very nicely writen- maybe he should be writing for the times. Peter could review a gig and then Chris could critique the review- I’d read that!

    Comment by Tom
    13.
    September 10, 2009
    11:25 am

    An American singer-songwriter called me (amongst other things) a ’starf***er’ on his blog because I’d given him a bad review and Rilo Kiley a good review. I contacted him through his MySpace to explain my thoughts in more detail and he turned out to be a nice enough guy. No apology though!

    Comment by RH
    14.
    September 10, 2009
    11:27 am

    RH - I’m sure that experience is far more common than many would expect. When an artist calls out a reviewer for what he or she has written, they don’t usually expect a response. But when they get a response, they do tend to call off the hounds. I will be v interested to see if CdB now responds and arranges to meet Peter for a “chat”.

    Comment by Jim Carroll
    15.
    September 10, 2009
    11:31 am

    I will be v interested to see if CdB now responds and arranges to meet Peter for a “chat”

    Yeah, maybe it was a heat of the moment challenge - y’know, maybe he was high on emotion?

    Comment by Joe
    16.
    September 10, 2009
    11:35 am

    Joe - OTR readers’ knowledge of CdB lyrics is very telling.

    Sure, he has to meet Peter. If he did not, he “would lack the courage, like a dog that snarls and barks from a distance yet cowers and runs away at the first sight of reaction”, to quote himself.

    Comment by Jim Carroll
    17.
    September 10, 2009
    11:46 am

    hey Jim - someone was looking for the list of judges for the Mercury the other day. found it here at the bottom of the page:

    http://www.nme.com/blog/index.php?blog=10&p=7086&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1#more7086

    Comment by daniel harrison
    18.
    September 10, 2009
    11:49 am

    daniel - thanks for that. Very good blog post too. I’ve copied this over to the Speech Debelle post.

    Comment by Jim Carroll
    19.
    September 10, 2009
    11:54 am

    Mr Crawley should be careful, he’s messing with a man with mystical powers, remember when he healed Marcus Babbel’s mysterious illness:

    “De Burgh closed his eyes, stroked Babbel’s paralysed legs, and the player said he could actually feel some warmth in his limbs…”

    Comment by Ivor
    20.
    September 10, 2009
    12:18 pm

    I’m no chris de burgh fan but the reviewer, in my opinion, went totally overboard in his personal criticisms. Fine if you don’t like a guy’s music but that review is just stilly (at best)

    Comment by jim comic
    21.
    September 10, 2009
    12:21 pm

    awww man the “creepy crawley” kiss off just stinks of toil and effort. In fact it makes me cry a little for the man on the inside. Reminds me of when Alan Partridge rang up his ex-wife to read out top gear reviews comparing his car to her new fella’s. Excruciating stuff.

    Comment by Darragh
    22.
    September 10, 2009
    12:39 pm

    I’m slightly biased as Peter Crawley has said nice things about my music before, but I genuinely think he’s a very good writer and consistently one of the most articulate contributors to John Kelly’s RTE review TV show.

    CdeB’s reaction reminds me of something once said of Thomas Hardy’s oversensitivity to bad reviews, that “he would feel a pea of criticism under seven matresses of praise.”

    Comment by Mumblin' Deaf Ro
    23.
    September 10, 2009
    12:58 pm

    This is going to be a Titanic struggle, my money’s on De Burgh.

    Comment by Kevin
    24.
    September 10, 2009
    1:11 pm

    I know this is completely diverting from the fun of the day on OTR but legally should that e-mail have been published? I know no ones going to do anything about it but if I privately e-mailed someone with a dispute on an issue I’d be alarmed to see it printed. Then again, did CdeB intendd it to be published, it almost seemed like he was writing for an audience!

    Comment by Stone Throwing Youths
    25.
    September 10, 2009
    1:15 pm

    How funny! This has cheered me up no end!

    Thank you. Its kinda like watching a match where all the goals scored are own-goals!

    (Banters like this however have ended in the best of friendships)

    Comment by Finola
    26.
    September 10, 2009
    1:37 pm

    Knowing only three de Burgh songs (the replies above reminded me of two I’d forgotten - thanks) and one Crawley review, I feel I don’t have much of an allegiance to one side or the other in this debate.

    In terms of an opinion, Mr Crawley is perfectly entitled to one, and to have it published if he can, but his review is a classic hatchet piece. To twist your own analogy Jim, he’s gone straight for the man and ignored the ball altogether.

    I would question the motivation of the editor responsible for publishing the piece. It seems to serve no purpose other than to potentially cause a storm in a tea cup (success!).

    On the other hand, when I read Mr de Burgh’s letter, and admittedly I’m reading between the lines here, I got the impression the whole thing was a bit tongue in cheek, mirroring Crawley’s hatchet piece as best it could, but not taking it seriously at all.

    If I had to score this brouhaha as a bout, it’d have to go to de Burgh on points. Not a knockout, but a win.

    Finally, in Mr Crawley’s response, as reported by Hotpress, he manages to avoid the question entirely of whether or not it is a good review or not and continues to lambaste de Burgh himself. Sore loser it seems…

    Comment by Philth
    27.
    September 10, 2009
    1:59 pm

    does anyone know chris’ email address?

    Comment by kevin
    28.
    September 10, 2009
    1:59 pm

    Stone Throwing Youth - it appears that CdB mailed this to many journalists aside from Peter Crawley.

    Comment by Jim Carroll
    29.
    September 10, 2009
    2:03 pm

    @15 - Comment of the day. Just snorted coffee up my nose in laughter. On the not inconsiderable downside, however, I now can’t get High on Emotion out of my head. You bastard.

    Comment by Ciaran
    30.
    September 10, 2009
    2:15 pm

    What I find interesting is that presumably this was a private email, and why (if indeed he did) did Peter Crawley make it public? I don’t know.

    Jim, I’m sure you’ve had your fair share of irritable post-review emails. Is it right to put them out in public or indeed then talk publicly about the whole thing once it’s out in the public domain?

    One point I thought DeBurgh had was on sending a (mainly) theatre critic to the show and not one of the paper’s many music critics. Although I’m sure this is not the case, it kind of perhaps opens the IT to accusations of not taking the subject matter seriously (hard as it may be I accept to take DeB serious but you know what I mean. A fair whack to all, etc)

    Comment by Phil C
    31.
    September 10, 2009
    2:20 pm

    He must have a template for these - have seen a similar email going around that he sent to a reviewer in another Irish publication that included the final paragraph: “And what of your future plans? Is the extent of your ambition going
    to stop at writing for a weekly TV Mag in a country that has the
    population of Greater Manchester, or are you, like so many others in
    your profession, about to write a novel/movie
    script/play/musical/short book of deeply-felt love-poems? If so, I
    would be delighted to attend the Premiere/Book launch/reading, just
    let me know…I wish you all the success in the future that you
    deserve, and I feel you really should get away more, it is a
    thrilling, challenging, exciting,scary world out there!” Either he’s having a nervous breakdown, or having lots of fun….

    Comment by hoyden
    32.
    September 10, 2009
    2:23 pm

    I never thought anyone could out-twink the twink.

    Comment by James D
    33.
    September 10, 2009
    2:26 pm

    Will Pat Kenny now come to the defence of Chris? Why bother reviewing CdB anyway? Everyone knows what its going to entail. Next the Times will be reviewing Mick Flahavins or Declan Nerdy?

    Comment by Feathers McGraw
    34.
    September 10, 2009
    2:26 pm

    This just makes me love Chris even more, in fact, I think I can now finally find it in myself to forgive him for Lady In Red and everything that came after.

    Comment by sarah
    35.
    September 10, 2009
    2:31 pm

    In fairness it seems there’s antagonism on both sides here, with both men “playing the man” so to speak. And Deburgh’s letter is brilliant but he had to go and ruin it with that stupid PS!

    Comment by barryb
    36.
    September 10, 2009
    2:51 pm

    2nd paragraph: “How you must have felt isolated as the audience rose to their feet as one, singing, dancing and shouting out for more”.

    Just makes me want sing Patricia The Stripper which, by the way, is the sleaziest song of all time. Ugh. Took off her drawers? Wash your mouth out Chris.

    Anyway, Chris’s letter is alright, the review’s kinda rubbish and relies on the same ol’ same ol’ stereotypical business. I’ll only be further interested in this if it leads to a debate on Nightly News with Vincent Browne with Eamonn Dunphy as the third panel member.

    Comment by Ali
    37.
    September 10, 2009
    3:26 pm

    Phil C @ 30 - see my comment @ 28.

    Certainly, every reviewer receives these emails and, speaking for myself, I always reply to the person and give my side of the story. As I said to RH @ 14 above, the irked artist normally then gets back to you and a civil discourse ensues. I would never raise this in a public domain without the express permission of the artist - or unless the artist made his/her displeasure known.

    I’ve never been involved in a back and forth which went public like this but, as I pointed out above, it appears that CdB seems to have sent his missive to a number of music journalists (I mean, how else did Hot Press get it?).

    As for sending a threatre critic to review a music gig, Peter has also written widely about music for the paper and would be more than able to review a CdB show.

    Really looking fwd to the two of them meeting up and discussing this. I think there’s probably a TV show and a spin-off DVD in this.

    Comment by Jim Carroll
    38.
    September 10, 2009
    3:44 pm

    I know this is completely diverting from the fun of the day on OTR but legally should that e-mail have been published?

    My understanding is that yes, it’s perfectly fine. An e-mail is basically covered in the same way that a letter is insofar as once it arrives it becomes the possession of the person receiving it and they are free to do with it as they will, burn it, read it, use it to put a voodoo curse on the sender, even publish it, all fine.

    Those sigs you often see at the bottom of e-mails sent from people who work for government agencies or large businesses with stuff about private and confidential information and not publicising the details of the mail are for the most part a load of toss (at least where it applies to the regular Joe Punter who has not earlier entered into a confidentiality agreement with the sender) because it is impossible to agree to those terms prior to receipt of the e-mail as those terms are part of the e-mail you’re receiving they’re basically there to put the heat on to people who don’t know better.

    It’s like when some shit kicker from down the country gets into a dispute with a neighbour and threatens them with a solicitor’s letter when the person has in fact done nothing wrong and a letter from a solicitor has no more standing or weight then if he’d got the local undertaker, butcher or fella who fills cars with petrol (often the same guy) to write one.

    Comment by Ian
    39.
    September 10, 2009
    5:26 pm

    Wow, Chris is really bitter. At least he has ‘a very positive attitude towards life’.

    Comment by Karen
    40.
    September 10, 2009
    6:55 pm

    Monsieur de Burgh kinda won, didn’t he. Its a bit easy to say that 80s music (particularly Irish 80s, particularly CdB is very cheesy)

    But Peter Crawley deserves some level of moral victory for the line ‘certain toes will never uncurl after this experience’

    Comment by Finola
    41.
    September 10, 2009
    8:49 pm

    Is Peter Crawley very young? All reviews of Chris De Burgh should include at least one reference to Sun City.

    Comment by Shane
    42.
    September 10, 2009
    10:24 pm

    I read the review on the day it was published and I saw it as a huge lump of Liveline bait. David Denby’s article on Snark in the Guardian review was still in my mind and it’s a fine piece of snarkiness. I’ll be pretty surprised if Crawley’s allowed across the threshold of the Gaiety in future. Then again it does sort of fall into the No such thing as bad publicity except for your obituary category. Twink’s been a previous target, what next, he reviews a Daniel O’Donnell gig? Big Tom? Or has he done those already?

    Comment by Major Alfonso
    43.
    September 10, 2009
    10:33 pm

    This spat is hilarious, pure gold. I don’t think I have ever read one of Crawley’s reviews (I don’t think I have ever read a theatre review, full-stop) but he’s always been one of the more intelligent and incisive contributors on The View. I actually don’t think his excellent review of CdB is all that bad - yes, he describes CdB as ’small’ and makes a comment about his mullet of 30 years standing, the ‘cheesy synths’ and ‘MOR mulch’ but it’s hardly a ‘personal attack’ as CdB describes it. Crawley’s piece is extremely tame compared to some reviews I’ve read before. CdB’s email retort is funny and eloquently written but a little undignified from a 60 year veteran of music biz. He really should know better. I do like some of CdB’s lines though: from the strangely poetic ‘riffling through the garbage bins of despair’ to the downright bizarre - ‘judging knife sharpening competitions in Sligo’. (???) Brilliant stuff, long may it run.

    Comment by Quint
    44.
    September 11, 2009
    8:46 am

    Wow what he wrote in the letter if he put that feeling in his lyrics My God he could be a rock star

    Comment by Gerald Horgan
    45.
    September 11, 2009
    8:53 am

    God forbid if anybody said anything about his famous daughter . I was lucky enough I was at Springsteen when she visited Paudi O Se’s pub in Ventry Dingle (or so I was told) . I dont want the wrath of De Burgh after me

    The guy has an ego!!!! Mover over Jesus I am saying my prayers to Chris in the future
    “how you must have cringed at every call of “Chris, we love you”, how you must have felt isolated as the audience rose to their feet as one, singing, dancing and shouting out for more;”

    Comment by Gerald Horgan
    46.
    September 11, 2009
    9:42 am

    So, can we call Peter Crawley “Creepy Crawley” from now on?

    Comment by Colette
    47.
    September 11, 2009
    10:00 am

    God know what I would have wrote if I went to one of the concerts. This from Eamon Sweeney of the Irish Independent. I dont find it amusing but rather sad

    “And the between-song chatter is baffling — but highly amusing. I’m really not sure why, but he mentions Biffo. De Burgh won’t say what it stands for as his mother is in attendance. “Beautiful, Intelligent, Female from Offaly,” someone retorts, quick as light. This surreal juxtaposition of our much- maligned leader and one of our most-ridiculed singers is one of the most bewildering exchanges I’ve heard at any concert.”

    Comment by Gerald Horgan
    48.
    September 11, 2009
    1:27 pm

    I don’t think there’s any defending Chris DeBurgh, artistically. Maybe a hundred people might enjoy his music, maybe a thousand, maybe ten million. It doesn’t matter. He’s awful.

    For a critic then, it’s really only a question of the extent to which you dance around the issue. You can either (a) make life easy for yourself and duck your critical responsibilities entirely (CdB played X number of songs to X number of people and a good time was had by all)… then maybe lace the review with a little bit of innuendo towards the end, just so you can at look yourself in the mirror the next day.

    Or (b) you can say what you actually think.

    Fair play to Peter for choosing the latter. I think he’s a really good writer and a cool guy, and I think “an anonymous person said this about you behind your back” is a pretty lame comeback to fling back at him.

    Comment by Eoin Butler
    49.
    September 11, 2009
    1:49 pm

    Eoin - I think what’s really interesting about this is the amount of people going “I dont like CdB but fair play to him for kicking the reviewer’s fat ass” (I’m paraphrasing, of course).

    People don’t like reviewers and critics but rarely come out as openly as CdB with their dislike and loathing for the profession - or, more to the pont, with the profession when it fails to paint them in the most glowing, positive light possible. Instead, they’ll mutter into their pints and wait for someone else to do the shouting. And, even the shouting is as ridiculour as that which CdB has engaged in, they’ll happily join in.

    The schadenfreude is only mighty

    Comment by Jim Carroll
    50.
    September 11, 2009
    2:11 pm

    @ Eoin
    “Or (b) you can say what you actually think.”

    That’s fine and it works both ways. The reviewer says what he like about the artist (after all, it’s only “an opinion”, albeit one published in a national newspaper), but the artist also has to have right to say whatever he wants about the reviewer, and not be regarded as a raving lunatic just because it breaks some unwritten journalistic protocol.

    I don’t think Chris was any more barmy with his rant than the reviewer was barmy by reviewing a concert that clearly wasn’t to his taste in the first place.

    Comment by lutin
    51.
    September 11, 2009
    2:30 pm

    Fair play to Chris any fool can be a critic and most fools are

    Comment by Mick
    52.
    September 11, 2009
    2:45 pm

    Jim - I suspect the contempt for critics you’re talking about there is felt mainly by performers and/or industry people. If so, that’s the natural order of things. It would be unhealthy if it were otherwise.

    Having said that, it’s a glaring contradiction not to like CdB’s music, but also not to respect a critic’s right to give him a bad review… But that’s another story.

    Lutin - absolutely, but CdB’s comeback undignified and clearly written in anger. The kind of email most of us would save to draft, look at again in the morning and think… nah.

    Comment by Eoin Butler
    53.
    September 11, 2009
    2:45 pm

    “The schadenfreude is only mighty”

    Have to agree. The amount of people who suddenly turn out to be fans of the odious Chris De Burgh because he rudely reacts to a negative review is quite staggering. Are they all sensitive singer-songwriters too?

    Wonder will De Burgh have the actual balls to sit down and debate this politely and openly with Peter Crawley or is he just good for flinging insults and abuse by way of electronic messages? I think we all know the answer to that one.

    Comment by Eddie
    54.
    September 11, 2009
    2:58 pm

    I think chris had a point but he went too far. You should not wish destitution on anyone and I think some of his fans (I was one but back in the 1980s) will raise an eyebrow and wonder if this is the “real” Chris.
    The reviwer was over the top.Its obvious he dislikes Chris and his music intensely.
    De Burgh’s music is mawkish but some people like that and rather than send a reviewer who loathes this type of music,why not send someone who can make a stab at putting themselves into shoes of the mawkish loving. Crawley aint that man and showed some limitation. He didnt have to be glowing but some attempt at balance?

    Comment by Barry
    55.
    September 11, 2009
    3:08 pm

    Previous to this piece of great entertainment I had never heard of Mr. Crawley or read one of his reviews. Now I’ve done both.
    I’m sure that wasn’t Chris’ intention when he fired off his response.
    The word ‘backfire’ springs to mind.

    P.S. I think on the whole artists tend to treat reviews like horoscopes. You dismiss the bad ones and believe the good ones.

    Comment by EJ
    56.
    September 11, 2009
    3:13 pm

    Has CdB ever been to Sligo ?. Don’t even bother coming Chris, you wouldn’t sell out a telephone box up here in the North West !.

    Comment by RK, Sligo
    57.
    September 11, 2009
    3:17 pm

    Chris the knife Sharping competition is on next weekend, so id stay away from the weessst for a while if i was you, as the knife’s may be sharpened for thee!

    Comment by TheHappyMonkey
    58.
    September 11, 2009
    3:39 pm

    IT Towers must still be in the midst of silly season and struggling for content.
    I mean did this whole little debacle really need nearly a whole broadsheet page in today’s paper? In the Arts section no less? Is there not a feature/ arts topic more worthy? And as it’s a letter to the editor, should it not fall on the letters page.

    I know this is under Deirdre Falvey’s remit but I do enjoy the Times’ arts section. Bad call.

    Comment by Phil C
    59.
    September 11, 2009
    3:44 pm

    The IT reviewer has missed the point. This year I have been at non-festival concerts by luminaries such as Steely Dan, Leonard Cohen and Lily Allen. The first 2 sang mostly songs from their ‘heydays’ - there are 20 year olds now who consider Lily Allen to be old hat! Audiences at Steely Dan, Leonard Cohen and Chris de Burgh concerts expect to hear songs they know and remember. Once beyond ‘youth’ few of us ‘learn’ new songs. Chart songs are bought by early teens - up to the early 90’s people well into their 20’s did it. Hardly any artist is ‘creative’ beyond 10-15 years - I bought U2’s Boy, October & The Joshua Tree but NLOTH is not for me. What about dead ‘poets’ - how many care or ever consider without prompt whether or not O’Leary is in the Grave! The IT reviewer needs to cop on!

    Comment by Stephen, Dublin
    60.
    September 11, 2009
    4:09 pm

    I don’t have much interest in either side of this dispute. But I do have an interest in the standard of reviewing in the Irish Times. I can’t see how Peter Crawley’s piece could be classed as a music review. It seemed to be more an opinion piece on the audacity of the CdeB to continue to perform for his audience, as well as put-down of the same audience.Its tone was snide and supercillious. Surely the Irish Times should have more respect for its readership.

    Comment by Phil
    61.
    September 11, 2009
    4:22 pm

    Went back and read Peter’s piece. It is actually a really gentle slagging, and a brilliant piece of writing. I can’t believe this harmless, funny, well-observed little piece is at the centre of all this.
    It even comes with its own gracious little get-out clause: ‘…any embarrassment we feel says more about us than him.’
    Does C de B really have so little self-knowledge? So little sense of his own — not even his own ridiculousness, but his own Chris de Burghiness? The man needs a hobby. I suggest building little schooners inside jug bottles.

    Comment by Kim V
    62.
    September 11, 2009
    5:17 pm

    i believe the the 2 of them are booked for the late late tongiht

    Comment by gerry
    63.
    September 11, 2009
    5:50 pm

    Ah Chris Deburgh, what can one say about Chris that hasn’t been said before. Chris you are one of the biggest twats currently residing on these shores….no, I’m sure thats been done before….Chris your muzak is the worst kind of aural torture imaginable….definitely done before…..trim your eyebrows….his poor wife has exhausted herself with that one to no avail.
    I could go on but its all been said before, people don’t like this man (excluding his fans but that leaves everybody else)
    1. Because noone with any taste in music could possibly endure the utter drivel he produces
    2. Those clothes, his eyebrows, that hair…he looks like he walked off the set of Life on Mars and not in a good way.
    3. And now we all know what your really like after reading your rather pathetic letter to Mr. Crawley, the fact he felt the need to write to a critic to complain about him doing his job shows how insecure he is, surely reviews are just part of the deal if you put work out there, good or bad you have to take it on the chin, which unfortunately in Chris’ case must hurt a lot.

    Finally I want to comment on the content of the letter. I am related to a journalist who writes a critical piece for a well known magazine. Not so long ago he recieved by email a letter of complaint by a Mr. Chris Deburgh regarding his unhappiness with a review my relative wrote about him. I have a copy of this email and I can tell you that the content of it is almost identical to the one sent to Mr. Crawley. The same infantile tone, the same attempt to belittle the journalist in question, the same gargantuan chip on his shoulder which comes across in every sentence.

    Why can’t this man enjoy his fans (God knows he’s lucky to have them) and just be thankful for the success he has had. He will never, ever, ever be cool or musically credible, It’s bad enough he makes a public spectacle of himself when he walks out onstage, does he have to do it in the papers as well

    Comment by dave
    64.
    September 11, 2009
    5:54 pm

    dave - could you ask your relative to get in touch if he/she wishes to share this with the general public? I think that would be hugely enlightening in terms of this particular storm in an espresso cup - I think people’s thoughts on taking sides with CdB might change if they realise he has form in getting pissy about negative reviews.

    Comment by Jim Carroll
    65.
    September 11, 2009
    5:59 pm

    The genius who wrote that C de B would not sell out a telephone box in the North West has obviously never attended any of his fantastic sell out shows in Bundoran over the last 2 years.
    Personally I think it is all a bit pathetic. If C de B doesn’t float your boat, fair enough. Get over it. But comments such as those in that misguiding review are just small minded and quite disappointing for a man (mouse) of the pen.
    I can vouch for how it feels to be blown away by C de B on stage, along with a string of other men and women. He is just magic. And the words of his songs have carried more than one person I know through very trying times. I wonder if the reviewer will ever be able to say that about anything he has ever written?

    Proud C de B fan
    Christina O’Rourke

    Comment by COR
    66.
    September 11, 2009
    7:09 pm

    Surely Mr Crawley (code name Creepy) would be better off working for one of our tabloid papers if he’s going to lower himself to character assasinations. I note he didn’t think to canvas the opinion of anyone who had paid to be entertained last monday.
    According to the Gaiety nobody requested their money back as a result of either disappointment or ‘toe curling’ injuries.
    I understood that a reviewer was supposed to include an objective view point on proceedings. Stop the spitefulness Mr Crawley and just do your job.

    Comment by Aideen McCann
    67.
    September 11, 2009
    7:09 pm

    Crawley gives the impression that the whole thing is beneath him, totally disregarding the energy of the audience, he finds only what will support his sneering attitude.

    His resentment is insistant but it’s more a reflection of his own state of mind than that of the performer and audience members.

    I’m not a Chris de Burgh fan but anyone that can effect people positively with music deserves respect.

    People that strive only to find the negative have nothing of worth to offer.

    Comment by oscas
    68.
    September 11, 2009
    7:12 pm

    I’m getting a feeling that a lot of actors and directors are coming out of the woodwork to get their revenge on Peter Crawley for past negative reviews. Either that or there are more Chris DeBurgh fans out there than anyone knew about.

    Comment by WB Yeats
    69.
    September 11, 2009
    7:24 pm

    I dont like Chris De Burgh’s music and from what I know of him I don’t like Chris De Burgh. I also dont like Peter Crawley, but Chris was dead right to send that letter. Crawley may aswel have gone to a Daniel O’Donnell concert and complained about a strange camp nordy country singer caught in the past. Those doting old grannies get what they pay for when they go to see Daniel. As do Chris de Burghs audience when they go to see Chris.
    Crawley just took a cheap opportunity to write a personal rant about Chris De Burgh during what should have been a review of a concert.
    At this stage Chris De Burgh has a hugely successful career all over the world and has done for years, with current top ten hits in far away places like Iraq and India.
    So to come home to a small country like this, sell out 3 nights to adoring fans and have one little bollix write that review deserves a response.This “prodding the bear” bullshit that Jim writes is smug. Its normal to respond to things like this.

    For me, De Burgh’s reply was like when David Brent told his bully to “fuck off” in the last episode of “The Office”.
    It was well deserved and Chris De Burgh went up in my estimations since reading the letter.

    Luke

    Comment by Luke O'Reilly
    70.
    September 11, 2009
    7:26 pm

    “People that strive only to find the negative have nothing of worth to offer”

    What a narrow minded comment, opinions by thier very nature offer pros and cons. Personally I must admit that Mr. Deburgh makes my flesh crawl but I do recognize a persons right to enjoy his music (allegedly) but I reserve the right to find the man totally odious in almost every regard as a public figure, he may very well be a perfectly nice man in his private life but I have seen the evidence now to confirm for me that he conducts himself like an emotionally injured child in his professional life

    Comment by dave
    71.
    September 11, 2009
    7:46 pm

    So Crawley is a prejudiced hack who likes to provoke dogs and CDB is a sensitive “artiste” with a large ego and a weird fan-base. How fascinating. Truly am I astonished at this turn of events. Hopefully it will reveal much that we didn’t know already about bitter jealous journos and past-their-prime stuck-in-the-past rock stars. This clearly is an area that promises fresh, exciting analysis and … etc.

    Comment by Laughing Man
    72.
    September 11, 2009
    8:11 pm

    ‘weird fan base’ ? How very adult of you

    Comment by COR
    73.
    September 11, 2009
    8:19 pm

    Peter Crawley’s review was not really of Chris de Burgh’s show but of his place within Crawley’s notions of cultural acceptability and ‘cool’, as many reviews unfortunately are. There’s very little to be achieved in airing an opinion of C de B which will be shared by many of the people reading it, other than to gloat and feel culturally superior - something which i notice you, Jim, and many of your readers, joined in with fairly quickly, thus proving my point. Surely this blog should be about discussion of ideas to do with MUSIC rather than peoples’ opinions of other people, normally more successful than themselves? If people are paid to cast judgement over the work of artists who have no place in their world-view, then the resulting critique will be predictable and dull. Now why not put up a post about the Beatles’ remasters - the real music story of the week - or are they not cool enough for ‘On The Record’ either?

    Comment by s
    74.
    September 11, 2009
    8:40 pm

    Fair play to Chris. Barren spinsters in the maternity ward, the lot of them!

    Comment by Dom
    75.
    September 11, 2009
    8:45 pm

    Surely this blog should be about discussion of ideas to do with MUSIC rather than peoples’ opinions of other people, normally more successful than themselves?

    s - as a regular reader, you should know that this blog is about everything and anything including music, media, hurling, TV, food, Silvio Ganley, economics, bikes and anything else which catches my attention. Today, it happens to be this storm in an espresso cup.

    Now why not put up a post about the Beatles’ remasters - the real music story of the week - or are they not cool enough for ‘On The Record’ either?

    I think you’ll find that most On The Record readers are probably huge Beatles fans. I just don’t see the point in writing about something which has been covered to the point of tedium elsewhere. Then again, maybe that’s just me being “ccol”. And who said this C d B story was about music anyway?

    Anyway, please, let’s stay on topic. C d B v PC.

    Comment by Jim Carroll
    76.
    September 11, 2009
    8:46 pm

    In fairness, the riposte was far better than the review :) Don’t like your music but well done anyway.

    Comment by Aine Hipwell
    77.
    September 11, 2009
    8:59 pm

    Fantastic response from Chis. Frankly I love to see the likes of these reviewers who spew bile and in fairness are always music snobs out of synch with the public and the entertainment value from artists such as Chris de Burgh. There are a few exceptions, Paolo on food for example, who don’t need to be so caustic. I enjoyed Chris back in the late seventies and though he wouldn’t be in my current catalogue
    I dont doubt he can entertain …but as the saying almost goes , those that can do, those that can’t review!!!

    Comment by John Ryan
    78.
    September 11, 2009
    9:03 pm

    Pretty vacuous, condecending review by Crawley that added nothing and perhaps is a bit beneath the Irish Times. Chris really put him in his place- nicely done. (as somenoe else said though, let himelf down with the PS.) unclear why IT decided to print it.

    Comment by Jonathan
    79.
    September 11, 2009
    9:09 pm

    ‘And who said this C d B story was about music anyway?’

    At the risk of this degenerating into a slanging match i might point out that your blog is linked to from the main page of the IT as ‘music news and views’… Now i’ll restate my point, which is that the problem with Peter’s review was that it wasn’t actually about the music but the cultural standing of CdB, or his discomfort with de Burgh’s lack of kudos. Let’s, as you say, keep it on message…

    Comment by s
    80.
    September 11, 2009
    9:34 pm

    s @ 79 - as you graciously say, let’s keep it on message. I prefer the description you will find at the bottom of this page but there is more than enough to go around with the topic to hand without getting into what this blog is or is not supposed to be.

    Comment by Jim Carroll
    81.
    September 11, 2009
    9:42 pm

    Chris’ remark about Joe Breen knowing very little about music was very insulting. Obviously, Chris has been waiting for years to get that comment out of his system. I have always placed great faith in Joe’s reviews of CD’s, and I have bought many CD’s based on his recommendations, and have been rarely disappointed.

    Comment by PAUL SODEN
    82.
    September 11, 2009
    9:43 pm

    This blog has always been about staying home and watching The Late Late and rifling through the garbage bins of despair.

    Oh hang on, that was Shane Hegarty’s blog..

    Comment by Liz
    83.
    September 11, 2009
    9:54 pm

    Complete pre-meditated character assassination, as a fan of C De B for over 20 years (and Im only 31) he has inspired & comforted many fans aswell as providing fabulous entertainment at every gig I have ever attended, some with many year gaps! I feel the reviewer may as well have written his review from the nearest pub & can confirm that anyone present that night wanted to be there & would be there again tonight! If as a reviewer you attend a gig that is shite & the fans in the stiles, bar & toilets confirm this then slate him. This did not happen here. Creepy Crawley has definately been mowed over by the Spanish Train & better keep running!

    Comment by Grainne O'Rourke
    84.
    September 11, 2009
    10:07 pm

    A) What actually is the purpose of concert reviews? The gig is finished.
    B) I’ve read very little of what Peter Crawley has written. In general, caustic criticism is fine with me. But come on, de Burgh is as soft a target as a huge marshmallow painted with target rings.
    C) de Burgh’s letter is really very funny, but I’d like to know who his ghostwriter is.

    Comment by Seán
    85.
    September 11, 2009
    10:45 pm

    At the end of the day its whatever floats your boat musically and CdB has as much right to respond to a poor review as the next performer. The reviewer has the same right to sell his papers but it read like a poor attempt to go for an easy target using tired old clichés, hope he head butts you in the kneecaps if you do meet up btw.

    Comment by Kevin J
    86.
    September 11, 2009
    11:14 pm

    A lot of people posting here seem to be laboring under the illusion that a critic should be a cheerleader.

    It’s Peter Crawley’s job to give his considered opinion. He’s not required to ask the audience what they think or base his review on the reaction of the person in the seat beside him.

    All criticism is subjective but it takes a particularly thin skin to respond the way Chris De Burgh has. The request to meet with Peter is bizarre - what does he think will come of it?

    Comment by bobjones
    87.
    September 12, 2009
    1:06 am

    “Reviewers and critics will chuckle loudly that, yep, Peter got him good and proper. A response like that to a review is always priceless”

    Oh those critics & reviewers! I’d say it’ll be some laugh on Mount Smug tonight.

    Comment by Freedom Sandwich
    88.
    September 12, 2009
    1:21 am

    I agree with Kim V that the review was a gentle enough critique. As she pointed out, it even comes with its own gracious little get-out clause:

    “In short, it’s easy to snigger at de Burgh. But while he certainly gives us some reason - “I often wonder where religion came from,” goes one introduction, as though he is considering starting one - any embarrassment we feel says more about us than him.”

    Here Peter Crawley anticipates a gut reaction, namely the sniggering by music fans that don’t like De Burgh’s music. But by flagging it up, he shows awareness of his complicity within this camp. We know what Peter thinks early on. Unable to, unwilling to, or choosing not to, participate in the “love Chris De Burgh” vibe around him, Peter intimates a strange feeling of embarrassment. Clearly there were other feelings too. Disdain? Disgust? Dislike? But isn’t he entitled to these feelings? Aren’t we all? It can be a lonely thing attending a gig that everyone else is enjoying and you aren’t. So what are your options? Say nothing? Say it is great? Or tell it how it is?

    To be fair to Peter Crawley, nowhere in the review do I get a sense that the bulk of the audience wasn’t having a great time. And this perceived omission seems to be the impetus behind Chris de Burgh’s personal attack. This attack comes across as pretty vainglorious, overblown and childish… but behind this, I get a sense that he was hurt.

    Why is Chris so hurt? Perhaps if he re-reads between the lines, as I think the review invites us to, he might notice a begrudging mark of respect:

    “Certain toes will never uncurl after this experience, but it is almost admirable how unaltered de Burgh has remained by the flow of time. You may have grown out of seeking epic significance in the portentous verses of Spanish Train, you may greet Patricia The Stripper with the same mortification as a faded photo of yourself. This is because you’ve changed. Chris de Burgh has not.”

    A lot is said here. And okay the delivery is pretty backhanded. But isn’t Peter Crawley saying that musically, what Chris De Burgh has to offer, hasn’t changed? That those who love him still love him. That those for whom, ‘certain toes will never uncurl’, still feel the toe curl. What is more, by referring to the mortification of “faded photographs of ourselves”, Peter Crawley doffs his hat to the fact that Chris de Burgh has endured. We love those photos. We hate those photos. But love Chris or hate Chris (and by that I mean the persona and the music), he remains on the scene.

    Personally, the review tells me two things. One: the majority of people were fans and enjoyed it. Two: Peter didn’t enjoy it. But for me, having an angle is what makes Peter’s review worth reading. Surely the balance Chris de Burgh is craving would signal the death knell to criticism. Working in the performing arts, I get good, bad and indifferent reviews. But to take your reviewer on in a personal fashion because you don’t like what he said simply gives us artists a bad name. Chris de Burgh says he got a “rapturous welcome” amid cries of “Chris we love you”. I believe him. But does he also want to write his own reviews?

    I hope not. Cause for what its worth, I value creepy crawlies. They don’t just decorate our ceilings. They help define the room.

    Comment by Patricia The Stripper
    89.
    September 12, 2009
    7:45 am

    i have fond memories of dancing with me Mum to Chris De Burgh making Xmas cakes . so he’ll always have a place in my heart on that score .

    I heard an old interview with him on Ian Dempsey , I actually thought for ages it was a Gift Grub, it kinda drifted in and out of being funny. only when he started lapping on about his daughter did i know it was really him. There’s definitely a bit of the David Brent about him allright.

    lastly , line of the year no question ….” riffling through the garbage bins of despair ”

    still got me chuckling :)

    Comment by tayor
    90.
    September 12, 2009
    8:03 am

    As one who knows little of either the singer or the reviewer, I’d guess that the reviewer touched a sore point of the singer; the singer knows, in his inner soul, that something of what the reviewer said is true. Perhaps the singer should accept that, though he has an appreciative and lucrative audience, his work, like that of 99% of all of us ordinary and unknown people, is not high art. And for Mr de Burgh, like other successful rock musicians or authors of best selling chic lit and thrillers, the compensation for producing merely popular or sentimental art is the occasion of whenever, between gigs, he glances at his bank statement.

    Comment by Sean O'Loinsigh
    91.
    September 12, 2009
    10:33 am

    You’d have thought that CdB would have a thicker skin at this point of his career. He should have been the bigger man. Would it have been so hard to ignore the review?

    The review was bad. It didn’t really function as a review of a concert should. There’s no real point going to a Metallica concert and then complaining about moshing and noise and there’s no point going to a CdB concert and complaining about the cringe-factor. Don’t tell your audience what they already know, and if you’re going to do that, then make sure you do it in a way that’s damn entertaining. Crawley failed to entertain and he failed to inform. It reads as though he just wrote down a bunch of phrases he associates with De Burgh and then put them into sentences. It shouldn’t have been published.

    Comment by Niall
    92.
    September 12, 2009
    11:37 am

    Creepy Crawley’s opening paragraph which describes flashing lights, crescendo of sound and audience anticipation could be the the build-up to any major act coming on stage.
    In this case Chris de Burgh comes out of the “spaceship”.
    I am both a U2 fan and a Chris de Burgh fan.
    I wonder if BONO had emerged from the spaceship would the writer have described him as “a small man”? I doubt it very much. He wouldn’t have the balls. And for that matter, would his employer even consider printing it? Go for the easy option Crawley.
    You must be a big man yourself. I challenge you to a three round, 2 minute boxing match in aid of the charity of your choice.

    Comment by C Farrell
    93.
    September 12, 2009
    12:28 pm

    Personally I think everything one needs to know about Ireland’s yellow pack Elton John is encapsulated on the album cover of Chris’s Best Moves album which features an image of CdB staring adoringly (if not in a slighly suggestive way) at…..wait for it……..himself. A legend in his own mind.

    Comment by Eamonn
    94.
    September 12, 2009
    12:35 pm

    “I challenge you to a three round, 2 minute boxing match in aid of the charity of your choice.”

    Comment by C Farrell

    Jim, this seems to confirm your point earlier that your blog is about sport as much as it is about music - or, at least, that’s what your readers think. In that case, perhaps you should get the header about ‘music news and views’ changed and i for one won’t bother coming to it looking for music analysis. Having every channel of media communication in Ireland degenerate to the tone of the Tubridy Show is just another indication of how little intelligent debate there is in this godforsaken country. De Burgh’s ‘review’ of Crawley was, albeit personally motivated and a touch too bitter, a serious attempt at redressing an injustice consistently perpetrated by Irish cultural journalism: croneyism. Crawley couldn’t lose face or risk not entertaining his similarly begrudging readership by writing an objective review of the show (despite his pathetic media-studies influenced attempts at defining objectivity in his subsequent response), and yet he could also not risk writing an objective review of, say, Loose Canon’s inept production of ‘Anatomy of a Seagull’ last week, presumably as he has to go drinking with his theatre mates, but not with C de B - unless he takes up the invite.

    No objectivity = no worthwhile criticism. It might be a great laugh for the unexpectedly boorish ‘On The Record’ readership and editor, but it fails to make anyone the wiser about anything. Similarly, if a blog is supposed to be about music but ends up being about sport, or, as you say, ‘a storm in an espresso cup’, then it does its subject a disservice. Again, you’re catering to the blood-baying masses. Why bother? Most of them can’t read properly anyway.

    Comment by s
    95.
    September 12, 2009
    1:38 pm

    Nice one Chris. When a reviewer gets personal of course you take action. Peter Crawley is full of his own importance. This kind of response was always on the cards, Crawley is consumed by the sound of his own voice – his contributions to The View are long-winded affairs – layers of references referencing references - utterly unintelligible without footnotes.

    Comment by Belinda
    96.
    September 12, 2009
    2:20 pm

    Chris De Burgh didnt write to the Irish Times to complain about a “review” of his concert. He did so to complain about a snide and prejudiced ego trip by a small man masquerading as a reviewer. You dont have to like De Burghs music or the man himself , to feel good about the way he deconstructed this alleged reviewer and showed him up for what he is. A nothing.!!

    Comment by Johnny Gleeson
    97.
    September 12, 2009
    2:27 pm

    Mr C Farrell - Peter Crawley is actually small himself! I have seen him on a number of occasions.

    Comment by PAUL SODEN
    98.
    September 12, 2009
    2:45 pm

    s @ 94 - I think the majority of the comments above since the email was printed in the paper yesterday would show that, yes, unfortunately, this has turned into a bit of a blood sport.

    But, leaving the obvious sniffiness both you and I have about this kind of thing (both of us being dignified, gentile, sophisticated, erudite folks), you have to admit this is as much good fun as the return of Declan “I won’t be back” Ganley.

    Release the hounds!

    Comment by Jim Carroll
    99.
    September 12, 2009
    2:59 pm

    This is providing far more entertainment for me that the Chris DeBurgh show I was forced to sit through with my friends a few weeks ago. Bravo Mr Creepy-Crawley! You have rattled the silly little man’s cage good and proper.

    Comment by Patricia The Stripper's Ma
    100.
    September 12, 2009
    3:54 pm

    What a bloody bad show by CdB. One should never make one’s true feelings known in such a cavalier and uncouth fashion when one can always challenge the blaggards to a duel at dawn. A very poor show from an old Marlborough College boy like my good self.

    Love the blog, James. Please be aware that it always raises a, quote unquote, chuckle in the club around cocktail time when me and the chaps gather to discuss the hefty affairs of state. What say you about the return of the bould Silvio?

    Comment by The Hon Harold de Burgh
    101.
    September 12, 2009
    4:17 pm

    God almighty this is just going to run and run!The review was funny, and in my truly humble opinion, audacious and well written.CdB’s response is pathetic and petulant and publicly illustrates what a smug pompous arse he is and always has been.Look, his fans love him and will continue to do so;I, like Peter Crawley cannot imagine why but that’s neither here nor there.But producing the type of dire music he does and behaving like this will scarcely win him any new ones.The people who claim to have no interest in either side but reckon CdB ‘wins’ in this instance are off their heads. Terrific craic though and I imagine the sniffy commentators with their hackles raised will continue to come back here regularly and check what else is being said.A huge ‘talking point’ victory for the IT and this blog.Great stuff!

    Comment by pryceen
    102.
    September 12, 2009
    4:55 pm

    I cringed when I read the lazy and predictable review, just like CdD’s show I expect.
    Both of these dinosaurs should be put out of their misery.

    Comment by graham
    103.
    September 12, 2009
    5:20 pm

    The Hon Harold @ 100 - I always knew that being described as “reputable” in the Daily Mail would provide this blog with a better class of readers.

    Comment by Jim Carroll
    104.
    September 12, 2009
    6:11 pm

    I’ve just spent the last hour re-reading the review, the email and these comments and there are a number of things that strike me.

    A) Far too many people fail to realise that reviewing music is 100% subjective; any music that you can’t be subjective about, isn’t worth listening to.

    B) To the people who are asking why Peter bothered reviewing the ‘gig’; eh, it’s his job I would imagine. As a (sometime) reviewer myself, I’ve gone to gigs that I wouldn’t have chosen to had I the choice, unfortunately I have bills to pay.

    C) It would appear that some Chris De Burgh fansite has linked to this what the number of Pro-CdeB comments of late.

    D) That’s an hour of my life I’m not getting back, there better be a round two of this!

    Comment by Steve
    105.
    September 12, 2009
    6:14 pm

    Steve:

    (a) Fans - and not just CdB fans - never see it this way

    (b) exactly - reviewers have to eat y’all

    (c) there’s a link to this blog from the page containing the letter on the Irish Times’ site hence all the newbies

    (d) oh, trust me, this is just starting…..

    Comment by Jim Carroll
    106.
    September 12, 2009
    6:34 pm

    Re Round Two: why don’t Chris and Peter take to the road, like Neil Hannon and Duke Special did, their gigs culminating in duels at dawn. They could book venues, earn monies, and appear in a John Kelly “The Veiw” special.

    Comment by PAUL SODEN
    107.
    September 12, 2009
    7:11 pm

    Never seen a Chris Deburgh concert, can take or leave his music, but that review was as amateurish as any I’ve ever read. Just spiteful and deliberately mean. Rot.

    Comment by Ian
    108.
    September 12, 2009
    7:15 pm

    Since my family come from Sligo even though I am now a transplanted Brit, I can hardly be unbiased here.
    But
    Whilst I hate Chris deB`s music, I hate talentless hacks grubbing up their paycheck through dissing others personally even more.
    And +1 on Chris`s response being a slightly inept attempt at mocking Mr. Crawley`s tour de farce.
    Both missed the mark but Crawley gets paid to hit it.

    Comment by Ivan T. Terrible
    109.
    September 12, 2009
    10:45 pm

    Who’d have thought Chris was a The The fan?

    All my books lay on the table -
    - waitin’ to unfold.
    I sit & stare at my reflection
    - where the darkness dulls my bones.
    My head fills like a junk shop -
    - in desperate need of repair.
    The path of least resistance leads to the
    …………garbage heap of despair.

    (Thanks to http://www.wordmagazine.co.uk/content/the-artist-bites-back)

    Comment by Hugh Linehan
    110.
    September 13, 2009
    1:18 am

    They are as bad as each other. One chilish rant followed by another. Although in Chris DeBurgh’s defence he was goaded into it by a pretty churlish, thinly veiled personal attack by the reviewer.

    Comment by Fintan
    111.
    September 13, 2009
    10:19 am

    God knows what Chris thinks about this article
    http://www.anorak.co.uk/celebrities/2009/09/broadsheets/2007/12/red-alert-an-iranian-plot-to-kill-chris-de-burgh/
    Red Alert: An Iranian Plot To Kill Chris De Burgh
    : An Iranian Plot To Kill Chris De Burgh IF the Iranians really are serious about pushing Israel into the sea, they should erect a huge Tannoy, aim it at Tel Aviv and play Chris de Burgh songs at full throat 24 hours a day.

    Admittedly, the slight risk is that Israelis will react violently and seek to destroy the instrument of their potential doom, just as they may block up their ears and make a swim for Cyprus.

    The Israelis may go further and seek to assassinate Chris de Burgh, in which case we urge anyone who has ever uttered the phrase “Tonight, Matthew, I’m going to be Chris de Burgh” to make themselves known to President Ahmadinejad post haste.

    Interesting then to see Mr de Burgh scheduled to become the first westerner to play Iran in 30 years. Early next year, Chris and Iranian support act Arian will play shows in Tehran.

    In the land that has recently banned rock music, as the Independent reports, Chris de Burgh is permitted to play.

    Chris – yes, Chris – and Arian have collaborated on a tune called A Melody for Peace. This is the same Chris de Burgh who once fronted Jeffrey Archer’s The Simple Truth campaign (filed under ‘beyond parody’) and raised money for Kurdish refugees through a concert.

    The Indy is mindful of the power of music and how it can even change a nation. In 1985, Wham! played China and a million locals blow dried their hair and reached for the bleach. Then David Hasselhoff reunited Germany by singing on the Berlin Wall. The Israelites had Joshua’s trumpets to bring down the walls; the Germans had a man who wears swimming trunks to work.

    It all leaves us wondering if Chris de Burgh can bring about a cultural revolution in Iran and what the resulting country will look like.

    In our vision, post de Burgh Iran will be full of people rhyming “dance” with “romance” and going about saying how lovely they look.

    Of course it might all be ruse, a plot. British historian Michael Mann researched Jospeh Stalin and noted: “Stalin saw John Wayne as a gigantic propaganda symbol against the Soviets. He was much more subtle than the atomic bomb but Stalin saw him as no less deadly.” Stalin wantd Wayne dead.

    Might the Iranians view Chris de Burgh in a similar light, as the epitome of Western decadence? Do they wish to kill him? In which case we urge restraint, and remind them that though popular de Burgh is not as big as Noel Edmonds, Anthea Turner or Lulu

    Comment by Gerald Horgan
    112.
    September 13, 2009
    12:12 pm

    “Far too many people fail to realise that reviewing music is 100% subjective”

    I dont think there is a single sentient human being alive who doesnt realise that. But it’s always good to be reminded that journalists/music writers will hide behind the most anodyne clichés to avoid admitting that most of them really dont know what they are doing or why they are doing it.

    Comment by Yoko Boner
    113.
    September 13, 2009
    3:04 pm

    @112, if what you say is true, why are so many people suggesting Peter was not being ‘objective’ in his review or are you intimating that Chris de B fans aren’t sentinant human beings?

    Comment by Steve
    114.
    September 13, 2009
    5:13 pm

    Jim. I am in Italy on hols. Has Peter or Chris given TV or radio interviews about this? Do you know when round 2 will occur? Thanks.

    Comment by PAUL SODEN
    115.
    September 13, 2009
    10:00 pm

    My Wife and I both attended the final show and really enjoyed the night. Chris if you are reading this, please do play again.

    Comment by Matt
    116.
    September 14, 2009
    12:09 am

    115 comments jeez you wouldn’t get that many if Israel bombed Tehran just goes to show what actually turns on the allegedly intellectual Irish Times reader is pretty much the same as what turns on the Tits n’ Bums rag-readers. Bitta shcandal an muckraking an celebs having hissyfits. He still hasn’t told me whether he’ll play Crusader when he’s next in Iran. First time I asked (via a text msg to Tubridy) he just giggled and agreed with Ryan that it was a cheeky question to ask. I didn’t need that information. Knew it was already wouldn’t have asked if it wasn’t cheeky. Tch. I’m a listener Ryan not a good idea to call us listeners cheeky. We do after all pay your hideously inflated wages. Buying our Benecol as we do. I just want to know whether Chris’ll be singling all them great lines about Saladin snoring and stinking and whoring and drinking (well either him or his army not clear the way the lyric’s setup) in Tehran. Would he still feel the love? Hmmm. Anyway. I like anyone who can write a good lyric and deliver a song with something approaching reasonable sincerity. Must be the misspent youth I was cawing Whiskey in the Jar (the one with Molly in it) down whatever boozer was infesting at the time. You don’t actually have to be able to sing to earn me admiration just have good lines I mean I like Shane McGowan too and nobody could accuse him of being a good singer anyway Chris you should bear in mind Mr Behan’s line about critics bein like eunuchs in a harem they know how it’s done ‘cos they seen it done just can’t feckin do it themselves. Hope the fit of pique was enjoyable bet the minute you’d hit send you wish you hadn’t the dogs bark but the caravans pass on by mate as they say in Iran. Ah go on tell us tell us will U play Crusader there? You’d get about squazillion brownie points from us that likes a birra cheek. You might now, however, live long enuf to enjoy them. Tho’ Mr Rushdie seems to be doing ok Allahu akhabar.

    Comment by Kynos
    117.
    September 14, 2009
    12:17 am

    Never liked the stuff he wrote from Lady in Red on tho. There was the cringe-inducing Blonde Hair Blue Jeans or something. Think he lost the ballad-mojo then must have been summat bothering his mind all the really good stuff was on Spanish Train Crusader and Ferryman mind I was about 19 at the time must transfer a few my old vinyls to the iPod and listen again as I recall there was a certain integrity to his older stuff that evapped with that Blonde Hair Blue Jeans nonsense and Lady in Red sorry just two many exes of mine thought it was the thing to put on at every romantic occasion just got clean Ladyinredded out.

    Comment by Kynos
    118.
    September 14, 2009
    3:10 am

    Is it true that rosanna’s favourite film is “Don’t tell mom the babbysitters dead”?

    Comment by stephen
    119.
    September 14, 2009
    4:32 am

    Good on ya Chris. He deserved it! I’m reading this in Phoenix, Arizona and think I’ll come home for the mill !!

    Comment by Tina Williamson
    120.
    September 14, 2009
    9:46 am

    I have a hedgehog in my back garden. I call him Christy because he looks like Chris De Burgh. Does that help?

    Comment by conor mcmahon
    121.
    September 14, 2009
    10:46 am

    Always enjoyed poking fun at Chris. Not a big fan of his music, but have a soft spot for that track you hear at Christmas time!

    Fair play. I think Chris’s email, if a little sensitive in tone at times was well said. I’ve more respect for the guy now.

    Rock on.

    Comment by Rod Morris
    122.
    September 14, 2009
    12:16 pm

    @121 - I think you might be thinking of Chris Rea there.

    On first reading I thought this was all funny, funny stuff. But that comment about an OTR reader relative receiving an almost carbon copy of CdB’s letter just stinks of grumpy old man.

    Jim, Did you hear back from that reader and possibly seeing the other letter?

    Somebody also mentioned CdB on Today FM recently. Funnily enough, on that day he spoke at length about how he has never read his own reviews in order to keep a positive outlook on life.

    Enjoyed that read Jim, passed Monday morning nicely.

    Comment by Kev
    123.
    September 14, 2009
    1:27 pm

    When I first read it I thought, ah yeah fair play to you Chris for sticking one back to the Irish cynics, but on reflection, it was knee jerk and silly. Hundreds of thousands do like you and that’s great…there are loads of cheesy people on the planet there’s no shame in it. But just own up to being cheesy and get on with enjoying it. There’s room for all of us and we should be allowed express an opinion of your style without such foot stamping, your letter screamed of “I AM cool, ok?”.

    I am sorry Chris but even your rebuttle was embarrasingly cheesy and cringy. Sorry but you’ll have to face it Chris. You’re profitting from it, why not just make like The Hoff and go with the cheesiness, it’ll bring you more inner peace.

    I don’t hate you, I just like people to admit what they are. There’s room for all of us without any of us having to like everyone…there’s a lesson in there somewhere….

    Comment by Barnaby
    124.
    September 14, 2009
    2:08 pm

    Only had the pleasure of reading review, reply and blog this lunchtime….what a hoot!! Review a bit OTT but CdB is such a plonker….it’s hard to have any sympathy. I wonder if we could persuade the great man to go on Twitter?? His daily musings would keep the nation entertained through the dark days ahead.

    M

    Comment by Mehaul
    125.
    September 14, 2009
    2:57 pm

    I don’t know Peter Crawley at all but I am always fond of reading his theatre reviews. If you were to paint a picture of the man from reading his work in The IT, you would deem him to be a man of decent enough taste and judgement. So why on Earth did he request (or was he sent off by a sub editor) to cover a Chris De Burgh show, especially when he is in fact a theatre critic? Being a man of taste, he could obviously not help himself and had to tear De Burgh a new one. Rest assured, if I had to sit through a hobbit lashing out “Don’t Pay The Ferryman” and “Patricia The Stripper”, I don’t think I could have given anything but a negative review.

    Comment by The Ratburger
    126.
    September 14, 2009
    3:27 pm

    No, No , No… this is wrong !!! The last we heard about him was he was bedding his nanny while the wife had a broken neck. Could this be a canny publicity stunt, to flog his awful latest CD of insipid cover versions. When it comes to dignity in his personal, musical and public affairs our mawkish balladeer is severely lacking . A bad review is par for the course and the personal attack shows that our little Argentinian amigo needs to cop on.The adoration of a few grannies in the Gaiety isn’t really what it takes (”Chris, we love you”…please spare us). A few dignity lessons urgently, a quick eyebrow trim and early retirement please.

    Comment by Crimson Head
    127.
    September 14, 2009
    5:19 pm

    This is what I commented when someone posted the link on FB to Hot Press last Thurs, having already read Peter’s review.

    What? Really? Did he really write that?? Oh I hope he did and that Peter takes him up on his offer to meet him. That would be BRILLIANT.

    And, they should invite Bill Bailey to dinner for his tuppence ha’penny too: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UFR1NY-Duwc
    AND http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXKfFq1CTqk

    And having caught up with the conversation here, I have to heartily agree with Patricia The Stripper @88. And while C de B was perfectly within his rights to respond (this is not the first of Peter’s review to provoke a response from a fan/artist), using the following claims to support one’s argument: “a leading Impresario has described you as ” puffed up with his own self-importance,” and a much loved and successful actress refers to you as “that loathsome little turd”, reduces the debate to the level of shit-slinging. Not cool. But, I still stand by my initial comment - can’t wait for round 2!

    Comment by JK
    128.
    September 15, 2009
    8:13 am

    115 comments jeez you wouldn’t get that many if Israel bombed Tehran -Kynos

    Or the Lisbon Treaty-Sad but true.
    Makes my Schwinegrippe sick leave more exciting in Germany,thanks Chris.
    My Ma used to tell me never trust a man whose eyebrows meet.

    Comment by eoghan
    129.
    September 15, 2009
    9:09 am

    Good man Chris De Burgh,

    Highly recommended reading for thoughts on the music critic’s profession , I refer all to The Journal Of Music, June/July 2009 edition, “He’s Just Not That Into You” by Bob Gilmore.

    Chris De Burgh will remain in the public mindset for a long time to come, for better or worse… Peter Crawley’s name and writings will fade into oblivion pretty quickly.

    Comment by Christy
    130.
    September 15, 2009
    10:12 am

    Wow, I never thought my post would be so prescient. We’ve had EXACTLY the reaction as outlined above depending on if you’re a reviewer, a fan or a singing and songwriting peer. Very, very funny to be proven right.

    Coming up next: the dog results from Shelbourne Park for Saturday.

    Comment by Jim Carroll
    131.
    September 15, 2009
    11:29 am

    When all is said and done a review is supposed to help you consider whether you would like to see the show.

    Thus it should be in context. This review was like a soccer man going to rugby match and compalining that they were handling the ball.

    So whoever Chris’ fan base were they were not given a worthwhile article.

    Mr. Crawley study Parkinson if you want to be a journalist one day.

    Comment by Rod Studley
    132.
    September 15, 2009
    12:59 pm

    OMFG! If Christy gets so upset by a simple review. Imagine how he felt when his wife found out he was shagging the au pair! AND from her hospital bed too.
    He must have been crippled with rage.

    Comment by Da ferryman
    133.
    September 15, 2009
    3:39 pm

    ah boy chris

    not a fan of his music by a long stretch, but chris has made people happy wirth his “mawkish balladeering”, sold millions of records, and sold out loads of gigs. showing that he has a talent (not sure which) and he adds to people’s lives

    crawley on the other hand
    , has not, maybe the gig review is dripping with an undercurrent of jealousy on the behalf of the writer that a man he percieves as being as ordinary or even less ordinary than him could touch people and have success in ways that the writer never thought possible.

    and shame on madame for letting such a piece to be published in the first place

    Comment by ian
    134.
    September 16, 2009
    1:22 pm

    It is only beaten by ZIP UP YOUR MICKEY because of an audible sound track.
    The hissing and accompanying vituperation is even more bilious .
    Who was the LADY IN RED anyway- the great little man’s house- maid ?, or home -coach ?; libido - trainer ?
    Never forget this great little man is father to the former MOST BEAUTIFUL WOMAN IN THE WORLD.. who also was a warbling hisser , so to speak.
    What I mean is that she did a little HISSING on her own.
    Anyone out there to put a sound track to this .. come on there’s almost an opera there .. an operetta any way..what with all the hisses , impresarios, warblers ect..hissing daughters , paen to house-maid ?
    Its the stuff of a Gilbert& Sullivan epic.
    Imagine Eamonn Morrissey in tights playing Chris ?
    I think I’m on to something really big here .. Forget about it ! I’ll write it myself .. After all they guy who wrote I KAENO !! ( epic 1 and 2 ) made a firtune , why shouldnt I.
    Would you be interested in investing Chris ?

    Comment by don mac namara
    135.
    September 16, 2009
    2:38 pm

    Snooze to Snore I can’t read this anymore……

    Comment by Mark

    Leave a comment


    • (will not be published)


Search On The Record

 
Close
E-mail It