Theoretically, it is a meditation on what loving different sides of musical rivalries says about ourselves, but a rather large section of it dissolves (devolves?) into memories about liking one side, and then growing up and realizing the other side is great too, and seeing both sides of the issue. Which is fine, but it makes it more of a maturity journal than a piece of rock criticism or psychological astuteness. However, I'm a music-loving guy of approximately the same age who probably had similar numbers of CDs and read NME, and so there wasn't a lot of unknown history here for me to bite into. If one is unfamiliar with that aspect of things, it may be more interesting for that person for those reasons.

The one killer insight that I'm not sure Hyden intended to present this way, is that all the cool kids love Lennon and Richards, but it is (the perennially less-cool) Macca and Jagger who deserve much of the credit for their bands, and that the intra-band dynamics of the Stones and Beatles is where the most interesting psychological insights about listeners are. ( )

A more off-the-cuff Chuck Klosterman with an amazing record collection, Steven Hyden captures the meaning of deep fandom - of loving a band and hating their rival and how that is important, on a significant level that it normally wouldn't be. His writing is incredibly fun; the chapter on Pink Floyd sucked me in and I'm indifferent to that band. A worthwhile read that satisfied my music criticism itch. ( )

Oasis sucks.

Okay. I've been a big blur fan for years. AGES. Decades? I was (scarily) obsessed with Damon Albarn. I ordered one of those cakes with his picture on it and I ate it. I ate the whole thing. I took pictures and it was pathetic and amazing, all at once. I can draw Damon Albarn's face from memory. I traveled to London to see blur's reunion performances. I saw Gorillaz and The Good, the Bad, and the Queen. Twice. For one gig I drove from Coachella to San Francisco (about what? 350 miles?). There was another time I dragged my mom and my best friend to Las Vegas to see them. We were 5 five away and I still have the shirt I wore that Damon poured water on. I've seen Graham Coxon perform his solo stuff where I basically held his mic for him. Jesus, I studied abroad at Goldsmiths. Christ, I wanted to be a keyboardist in a band and tour England and play in London and holy shit I did that! When I met Damon Albarn he kissed me, OMG. On the lips even.

I... am a BIG fan. My cousin sent me a picture of this book because the Blur vs. Oasis made her think of me, so of course I had to borrow this from the library and read it. It begins with him placing himself firmly in the Oasis fan camp. I was like, okay. This dude's a dudebro with Dad opinions. And yup! Never once did that falter. Whole book of Dad opinions and being self-conscious about being a dudebro because it didn't fit his... self-image? of being uh, real? i guess? And how coming to a more mature understanding about authenticity is ah, the Meaning of Life. Anyway, it was fun to argue with him in my head (and I basically argued with him in my head about everything). And he made me put on some old blur for the first time in a long while and it was so good I cried.

Update: ugh, Oasis: http://www.nme.com/photos/liam-gallagher-s-30-funniest-insults-1412859 how can you possibly... ( )

This book's title is tongue-in-cheek. If you take its claim seriously, then the point of the book passed you by,

Hyden knows that his book can no more explain the "meaning of life" than anyone can definitely settle the eternal Beatles vs Stones debate*, and that's the point. Through shrewd analysis of well-known (and lesser-known) pop music rivalries, he reveals prejudices, values, and viewpoints embedded in our musical preferences: it's never just a purely musical preference.

His writing style may seem meandering, and all chapters include digressions that do not (at first) relate to the chapter's pairing (Nirvana vs Pearl Jam, Taylor Swift vs Kanye West, Biggie vs Tupac, and more). These asides serve to demonstrate how popular music is deeply embedded in popular culture in ways that are not immediately obvious. He is self-deprecating about his own blind spots, which makes it easier for the reader to examine their own.

The book's dry wit is extremely engaging and often belies series subject matter-- in much the same way our arguments about Artist X vs Artist Y deflect from what values and beliefs we ourselves are defending. Hyden is an unabashed music geek, and, through the writing of this book, demonstrates that it's possible to cling to your particular fandom while also admitting that unswerving loyalty to a particular artist may tell us things about ourselves that we don't always acknowledge.

Recommended for: Gen-Xers/90s music lovers who have frequently been asked to change the subject when they start to defend or excoriate a particular artist.

*Stones, obviously. ( )

Midwestern music journalist Steven Hyden uses his analyses of famous rock music rivalries (Michael Jackson vs. Prince; the Beatles vs. the Stones to name just two examples) as pretexts for discussing his own anxieties about his teenage years, male-female relationships, male bonding, etc. As with other memoirs in disguise, how much you enjoy this book will depend on how much you enjoy spending time with the author. For my part, I found this digressive book rather annoying, but I can see where readers whose life circumstances mirror the author's (in other words, other forty-ish male pop culture obsessives) might like it. ( )