So, my review of the Joanna Newsom concert at BAM has generated a lot of traffic, and two interesting comments by a couple of readers. So let me respond to them here while also offering further thoughts on Ms. Newsom’s work.

To Kat, let me say first that there is no such thing as an objective review, at least, not in any pure sense. Every critic brings his or her own prejudices to the table. That’s what makes good criticism good: A point of view. I will further say that a review that is all positive is no more objective than a review that is all negative. Which would seem to make my review, being both positive and negative, a better candidate for consideration as an objective review than either of the other possibilities.

Furthermore, critics are self-conscious by nature. As a critic, you must be self conscious because you not only have to be acutely aware of your reactions to a work of art, but you must then be able to decipher why you are having those reactions; to figure out how the piece of art is working on you. This requires a very specific kind of self-consciousness, but one that does not negate objectivity. On the contrary, a critic objectifies his/her automatic and subjective reactions to art, whereas a normal person will simply have a reaction and leave it at that.

I am glad you enjoyed what humor there was in my piece, although, to be sure, my review was quite serious. That is, I considered the work with the same critical rigor and in-depth thought process that I do all work that I review. Humor is one method among many to convey information, and Ms. Newsom’s schtick lends itself well to comic riffing, but I hope you can tell that I treated her work fairly and with as much detailed analysis as I would give anything else.

To Shani, I appreciate the length of your response. Online media can accommodate breadth, so go for the gold.

Yes, the sound at BAM was strange. Jon Pareles of The New York Times was simply wrong to rave about the orchestra when is was so muddled and cramped. (Kat: that was clearly an example of a critic not being objective and instead riding on his admiration of the recorded album, the memory of which he seemed not to be able to suspend long enough to hear that the live performance didn’t match; which is odd, considering he did notice–and timed–that the live performances were slower than their recorded counterparts.)

But even the recorded orchestrations, I found, were not all that amazing and frequently obscured Ms. Newsom’s meticulous harp configurations. When she plays solo is when she is at her most remarkable. And while I agree that she is a musician of obvious and formidable talent, I think the other popular musicians I have mentioned (Ani, Tori, Kate, Bjork) are of equal skill and vision, if not often more.

After the concert, I went and listened to the first track of the studio recording of “Ys,” the song “Emily,” and now have not been able to get a certain passage out of my head. It’s the famous one where she vamps on the difference between the meteor, the meteorite and the meteoroid.

What is especially satisfying is the refrain-like series of progressions, which first appear with the lyrics, “And, Emily, I saw you last night by the river,” is the amazing way the chords meander between chromatic and modal relationships. It requires a special sensitivity to and knowledge of harmonic progressions, and, aside from the technicalities, sounds gorgeous.

But, as my attention wanders throughout the day, this passage suddenly pops into my mind, in exactly the same place–the “meteorite” place–and continues the phrase through to completion, and then, if it doesn’t go away after that, simply repeats back to the beginning of that phrase.

I chalk this up to the intrinsic cyclicality of Newsom’s writing. It’s not that it’s necessarily bad writing, but the music cycles over and over, defying the narrative desire to be taken to another place. This also relates to the equation I made in my review between Newsom’s songs and old photographs. The photograph’s histories are implied, but you’re still looking at one still image. Likewise, the songs from “Ys”, though they tell a progressive story through their lyrics, in terms of the music, they create less of an epic narration than they do a scrap book.

Again, these are just additional observations.

Thank you, Shani, for recognizing that I chose to write in-depth about the concert, or “substance,” as you put it. That is always the goal: Tto consider everything with the same attention. And if differences of opinion should be unearthed from all the scrutiny, then we are probably the better for it.