teach, those who cant teach, criticize.

I've never liked rock critics - because they analyze rock. They break it down, they pick at it and ask how, in the postmodern world, we can view this song from a feminist Marxist perspective.

Like art critics, movie critics, wine critics, its bullshit. Its someone trying to explain why they were Lit majors, instead of getting a real degree.

This guy doesnt like Bruce...because he's not the guy in his songs. Because its an act. On a stage.

Should Warren Zevon have been a headless mercenary or lycanthrope in order to have been true to his music? Is Rush insinsere because they're not from the year 2112? Bowey might have acted like he was from Mars, but he's not Major Tom.

I dont care about The Boss. I like the The River, and Jungle Land, and that one about being stuck in a car when he wants to go to the beach. His new one is catchy, Radio Nowhere, I think its called.

Thats where the critics fail - its never about the act, its about the music. If you're a fan, something about the music resonates - I have no, absolutly no connection with the protagonist in The River. I got married at 30, I didnt knock some chick up in highschool. I dont work in a factory - I'm strictly white collar. I sit in front of a computer waiting for it to finish thinking.

So what. Its a good song. That doesnt change simply because the man behind it is pretending to be this 'murican guy. Whats next, you gonna complain that not a single member of KISS has ever actually conjured Satan? That we know of.

Bruce makes Jersey sound poetic. I'm sorry, but thats goddamn genius.

I agree with this, except for some reason I do find movie critics to be usefull, and I often agree with them. Same for the Oscars, I find Oscar nominated movies to be of quality, yet the Grammy's are completely useless, based on sales and hype.

"i h8 critics"--God, what a cliche.

Other than the fact that this guy is getting paid to give his opinion on Springsteen--and that he has an editor to supply him with apostrophes for his contractions--how is what you wrote any different from the article? You had an opinion, you expressed it. There are plenty of rock critics that have chosen to focus on "the music" when reviewing bands or their albums.

I think it's your last sentence that nears genius, sir, or at least profound accuracy. Yes, authenticity is subjective and in the eye of the beholder, but I assert (as does this critic) that when Jerseyite Bruce (the master poet laureate of new 70-s rock and roll) ventured out to write about Oklahoma or South Texas or even Nebraska, his stuff lagged in credibility. I love your mention of Warren Zevon--who is from Southern California I think. Then there's Lou Reed--who must not have done as much heroin as we figured, cause he sure seems healthy now, living out in Long Island. and David Bowie: don't you have the feeling that he never really never was bisexual, but only liked girls in 'that way.' BUT, why is it that Zevon's blues tunes--like Steve Earles', like Lou Reed's, just ring truer than Bruce's? I do give Bruce a lot of credit--circa 1980, he influenced a lot of people and made them a lot better; Tom Petty made "Southern Accents" and John Cougar Mellancamp found himself, but by the end of the 1980's, these two (and others such as Steve Earle) had all become better than Bruce. MUCH better.

"Then there's Lou Reed--who must not have done as much heroin as we figured, cause he sure seems healthy now, living out in Long Island"

Funny thing, when I clicked 'respond' Virgin Radio started playing Lou Reed's "Dirty Boulevard". I think there is some validity to the idea of street cred - the person that a lot of punk rockers respected was Wendy O Williams - because she really was an anarchist. She pretty much was the essential idea of punk, she wasnt talk, she was action.

For someone who isnt in that particular scene, for instance Lou Reed's heroin scene, its hard to judge the credibility of the songs. I have no idea if "Waiting For My Man" is an accurate description of the drug scene in New York in the 1970's. In my not-nearly-as-misspent-as-I'd-­have-liked youth I did see a heroin deal, but that was early 90s New York, and I kept well back. All I remember was the gloom of St. Marks Place and a lot of nervous looking people. I do know the mentality of that age, because I've gotten into arguments with people who were young adults at that time - who are a lot more casual and accepting of drugs than I am. So, sure, I can accept that Reed was on target.

So for a lot of what I listen to, its not a matter of credibility, its a matter of skill. How good is the song? How fun? Does it get across what its trying to do? Does it rock?
One of the best songs of the 'classic' rock era was Rainbow's "All Night Long". Dreadful lyrics, dreadful, possibly the worst full song lyrics in rock:

"You're mind is dirty but your hands are clean
You're short of class but your legs are long
I can't stand to spend another night on my own
Hey girl would you like some wine?
What's your name are you by yourself?
Are you the one, what's your sign, can I take you home?"

But the song is fun! Its got that driving, triumphant sound that rock had in the 70's, you wince, but you have a good time - you know, like the Ramones. The Jersey of Jungle Land and Born to Run, well, I dont expect those places to really exist. They're stories, they evoke a feeling of place that might not actually be true - but you go there, and you feel the restless drive of youth trapped in a nowhere town, you feel the sadness of the Rat's own dream gunning him down, whatever'n the hell that means. Just like you feel the desperation of the American Girl of Petty's, for one desperate moment he crept back in her memory.

I wonder how credible any of our musicians are - garage band to stadiiums, from street rapper to Rolls Royce - how can anyone stay true? How can the Jersey boy relate when he's in a tax bracket no blue collar Jersy-ite would ever see?

"One likes to believe in the freedom of music
But glittering prizes and endless compromises shatter the illusion of integrity"
-Rush

I don't think it's a stretch to say that Nebraska is a classic album on par with, or superior to anything that Petty or John Cougar has written. When it was released Cougar was writing Hurts So Good..

If you don't know "Greetings from Asbury Park" or "The Wild and the Innocent" or Nebraska, you should really check them out. As well as "Darkness" and the less-heard Born to Run tracks.

Surely Bruce had to go search for his version of "America" a bit-he wasn't a train-hopping balladeer, but is Dylan any more than he is?

You couldn't be a legitimate cowhand from Freehold, NJ but is a artist who takes on the world of those of different experience any less than one who just reflects his own?

Is Clapton less a bluesman for his birth in England?

Clapton? I guess this is the point where I have to admit that I don't really have a high opinion of the "blues." To me, that music's legitimacy pretty much was centered around those whose direct family had memory of slavery. A LOT has happened since then. It's now okay for black folk to be ANGRY--see hip-hop, etc. Blues is a fossil. An albatros. A cultural "blast from the past" if you will. An affection when placed in a contemporary mirror. The blues in 2007 can't truly mean anything to anyone. Not really.

Yes, I played "Nebraska" at the time, but in retrospect, I highly over-rated it. How many really good songs are on it? I once compared it to the Beach Boys "Wild Honey" LP--as an accomplishment based on an "experiment" where an artist(s) successfully negotiates a completely foreign terrain. BUT, the Boys didn't make this "Soul" LP a roadmap for their future fakiness. Bruce sorta DID.

Bob Dylan has made SO many more good records (and CD's) than has Bruce.