City Paper is not for tourists
I think folks in general usually consider people who are employed as critics to be miserable pricks, most likely rightfully so. Your paper, which I more enjoy than loathe, does itself, and its critic employees, no service by using its City Lights section as fodder for complaining about what is happening on a certain day.
Believe me, I like hatred and antagonism as much as the next person sickened at the vanilla incursion and Clarendonization that befalls our fair city. However, I also understand that your process is probably something like, “We need to pick something for each day. Does anyone know anything that is going on for each day? It doesn’t matter if it is a good thing, as long as there are words on paper.” That is asinine.
The picks for Sept. 30 and Oct. 6 were basically just examples of the fact that you had absolutely nothing to use, so you used complaining instead. I think it is fine to say Matthew Houck, whoever that is, is a Will Oldham hack, and that the Terminal Lovers are not worth seeing (although that particular preview had some errors to it), but why not save it for another section?
It is as retarded for me to write an e-mail complaining about this as it is for you to have nothing to say about what is going on in the city and, instead, to employ people to write whatever they might about something that they just happen to know is happening that day. Either work harder, or make less picks. Just stop making your picks for the week things that someone already hates.