Welcome back to The Deep Dive. Today, we're focusing
on someone really interesting, Ben Ratliff. He's
an American journalist, a critic, and his work
gives us, well, a kind of map for understanding
how we listen, especially now in this. you know,
chaotic digital age. Yeah, that's a great way
to put it. We're looking beyond just what he
wrote about to how his whole career sort of led
him to think about the the architecture of listening
itself. That framing is spot on because, you
know, Ratliff, he's got decades of really foundational
work, especially at the New York Times. Right.
But maybe his biggest contribution, the thing
we really want to trace today is this. philosophical
shift he made. How he went from being like the
authority on the jazz canon to analyzing, even
criticizing, how we consume music digitally.
He basically gives us a way to handle all this
information overload. Okay, let's unpack that
journey then because we're talking about someone
who spent, what, 20 years? A full two decades,
yeah. At the Times covering jazz and pop. That
kind of adaptability, well, it seems pretty rare.
What sort of background set someone up for that?
To be both, you know, a historian of a specific
genre and almost a prophet of global pop. Well,
his biography, it suggests this kind of natural
cultural flexibility. He was born in 68 New York
City. Okay. But the interesting bit is, English
mother, American father, and he grew up between
London and Rockland County, New York. Ah, okay.
So diverse settings. Exactly. That early exposure
to, you know, different cultural vibes probably
helped him move easily between the, let's say,
the structure of jazz history and the sheer dynamism
of pop music worldwide. And academically, he's
solid. Got his BA from Columbia in 1990. So the
foundation's there. But the New York Times job,
that's really where he becomes central, isn't
it? 1996 to 2016. That 20 -year stretch, I mean,
that covers everything. The internet explosion,
the CD dying out, streaming being born. Totally.
And think about the tension he was navigating
there. On one hand, he's defining the jazz canon
or genre rooted in performance and recordings.
Right, physical things. Physical things. And
on the other, he's grappling with MP3s, which
felt so ephemeral then, and eventually Spotify
playlists. He wasn't just writing. He was living
through this huge technological shift. And he
hosted the Popcast too? Yeah, the Times Popcast
from 2012 to 2016. So he was right in the middle
of the conversation about taste, trends, algorithms,
all of it. And the fact that his early work got
recognized pretty quickly, what does that tell
us? It just confirms his authority, really. In
2005, he got the Helen Dance Robert Palmer Award
from the Jazz Journalists Association for excellence
in writing. That award, it sort of marks the
peak of his career as, let's say, pure genre
critic. Ah, right before the shift. Exactly,
right before his focus started moving towards
this cultural methodology. It's a fascinating
pivot point. And now he teaches this stuff, right?
He's taking that analysis into the classroom.
Yeah, it makes perfect sense if you think about
it. Teaching is kind of the natural next step
for his later work. He teaches cultural criticism
at NYU's Gallatin School. So his career shows
this cycle. Critic defines the art, then the
critic defines the method of consuming it, and
then the educator teaches others how to use that
method. That tees up his books perfectly. Looking
at his five major publications, you can really
see that evolution you mentioned, from genre
expert to almost philosophical inquiry. Yeah,
definitely. And to make it easier for you listening,
we can group them maybe into, say, three main
themes, starting with those definitive jazz studies.
OK, let's start there. The canon. What were his
big contributions to jazz history? His early
stuff was really about providing structure. First,
the New York Times essential library. Jazz, that
was 2002. Oh, greatest hits list. Sort of, yeah.
A critic's guide to the 100 most important recordings,
Ratliff defining the landmarks. Then in 2008,
he did the jazzier conversations over music.
That shifted things a bit, using interviews with
musicians to try and get inside the creative
process. that focus on process, on sound. Yeah,
that does seem to hint at where he'd go later.
And then the big biography that really cemented
his reputation. Right. That's theme two. Critical
biography. His 2007 book, Coltrane. The story
of a sound. It wasn't just the history. It was
this really deep dive into Coltrane's sound,
his legacy. And it got serious recognition. Oh,
yeah. It was a finalist for the National Book
Critics Circle Award that really showed he had
the depth. the analytical skill to take on a
giant like Coltrane. OK. So established jazz
authority defines the canon, writes a landmark
biography, and then he starts looking critically
at the digital age that was, in a way, making
that old idea of a canon feel different. Less
fix. Exactly. Which brings us to the third theme,
the big philosophical evolution. The migration.
Yeah, the critical migration. And it's perfectly
summed up in his 2016 book, Every Song Ever,
20 Ways to Listen in an Age of Musical Plenty,
that title. That's the key to understanding why
he's so relevant now. Right. Because he flips
the script entirely. He's not telling you what
records are important anymore. He's teaching
you how to even deal with the sheer amount of
music that's out there. The Age of Musical Plenty,
it sounds great, but you're saying there's a
catch. What's the paradox Ratliff sees? Well,
he basically argues that infinite choice, it
can lead to paralysis. If you can listen to literally
anything, you might end up not listening deeply
to anything, or you just let the algorithms decide
for you. Right, outsourcing tastes. Precisely.
So his book is a direct challenge to that reliance
on algorithms. It's like a manual for taking
back control for active, intentional listening.
Can you give us an example? Like, what's one
of these 20 ways he suggests? Okay, sure. One
method he talks about is listening for duration.
Think about it. In the streaming era, we're trained
by the skip button. Oh, yeah. 30 seconds, maybe
less. Right. If it doesn't grab you instantly,
you're gone. Ratless says, try deliberately listening
to things that are either really short, forcing
you to focus intensely, or really long, forcing
patience. The whole idea is to break that habit
of just wanting immediate gratification, that
fragmented attention span we all get. Yeah. That's
powerful. Because it's not just about music,
is it? It feels like a critique of how we consume,
well, everything online. It all moves so fast.
It absolutely is. Another one he explores is
listening for silence. We're so used to music
just filling space, right? Background noise.
But if you consciously listen for the gaps, the
rests, the moments where there isn't sound, it
totally changes how you perceive the sound itself.
He wants you to find the structure underneath
the tune. These aren't just like... clever tricks,
they're mental exercises. To make you an active
participant. Exactly, not just a passive receiver
of some playlist. And he's still exploring these
ideas, even connecting, listening to, like running.
Yeah, his upcoming book, Run the Song. Writing
about, run about listening. For 2025, it shows
he's still pushing these non -traditional connections.
looking for insight through rhythm, meditation,
physical activity, seeing how listening fits
into everything else we do. That breadth is pretty
remarkable. Let's look beyond his books for a
second. Where else did his voice show up? What
other platforms sort of amplified his ideas?
Oh, the range is huge. Which really shows his
ability to connect with different audiences.
You see him in really prestigious places like
the New York Review of Books, Granta, Lingofranca.
So high intellectual culture. Definitely, but
at the same time. He's also in Rolling Stone
and Spin. Exactly. And the village voice, Slate.
That versatility moving between classical jazz
analysis, high brow cultural critique, and mainstream
pop discussion. That's why he stays relevant
his ideas aren't just stuck in some academic
corner They get out into the wider culture and
we know this influence is ongoing because people
are still talking about his work engaging with
it in You know modern digital spaces it confirms.
He's still a key voice on modern consumption
That's kind of the ultimate test of relevance,
isn't it? He's the person people turn to when
they want to connect that critical thinking with
technology today Pitchfork interviewed him about
every song ever right so he's translating his
ideas for the music blog world. And maybe even
more telling, he was on a 538 podcast talking
about music algorithms. Wow, okay. So data journalists
are engaging with his critique now. Yeah, it
shows his work really bridges that gap between
the humanities, like music, and the math behind
the modern attention economy. So let's try and
sum up Ratliff's trajectory. He starts as this
essential jazz critic, spends two decades at
the Times meticulously building up the canon.
Mm, diligently. But his biggest impact, arguably,
is that later shift, redefining how we even engage
with music in this digital world, leading to
things like every song ever. And the core insight
for you. Listening to this is really that Ben
Ratliff's value isn't just the jazz he reviewed
or the history he wrote. It's the methodology
he developed. He gives us tools. Tools to be
a better listener. That are more active consumers
of culture, yeah. He teaches us how to sift through
all the noise and find meaning when we're just
saturated with information. Okay, so since Ratliff
is so focused on these critical listening methods,
let's leave you with a final thought based on
one of his ideas. He suggests listening for repetition
not just in music, but anywhere. Right. patterns.
So think about this. How often are the news feeds
or the social media algorithms you use just playing
you the same basic song, the same viewpoint over
and over again? What does that kind of mechanical
repetition tell you about how your own attention
is being structured? And maybe more importantly,
what's one critical choice you could make today
to consciously break that loop? Something to
mull over as you navigate your own age of, well,
informational plenty.