pitchfork is dumb (#34985859340293849494 in a series.)

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Donald
Oh my God, what just happened at P-Fork
Mon Apr 1 07:08:25 2002
63.167.209.146

I'm not going to spew any elitist bullshit, but Alanis Morrissette, Kylie Minogue? Oh my fucking God. I'll stay for a little while to see if P-Fork still serves my needs, but with today's front page, I'm not counting on it. I understand the career move, but I just don't think it's going to serve me any more.

jess, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (13 years ago) Permalink

stu Re: Oh my God, what just happened at P-Fork Mon Apr 1 07:41:08 2002 65.92.243.96

I wonder if it's going to serve anyone's needs. I don't think a web- only publication can attract readers interested in Alanis Morissette and Kylie Minogue. To my knowledge, no one actually hunts down information about such artists. People just hear about it on tv and that's it. Let's give Pitchfork a few months, until the corporate contributors pull the plug.

Mitch Lastnamewithheld, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (13 years ago) Permalink

I am very disappointed. Could they have made it any more obvious? COME ON, PEOPLE.

David Raposa, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (13 years ago) Permalink

I don't think a web- only publication can attract readers interested in Alanis Morissette and Kylie Minogue.

QUOTE OF THE YEAR.

jess, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (13 years ago) Permalink

What makes me think that things will be back to normal by tomorrow? ;)

Sean Carruthers, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (13 years ago) Permalink

I don't know Sean... it would be April 2nd, which would make it one day after...

Andy K, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (13 years ago) Permalink

You scalawags, you make me laff. Perhaps.

Ned Raggett, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (13 years ago) Permalink

Speaking of which, HEY NED! My Bloody Valentine are finally releasing their new album!

Sean Carruthers, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (13 years ago) Permalink

We thought about that as one of the news items.

Dare, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (13 years ago) Permalink

"i for one will not be returning to this site if you're seriously going to be reviewing alanis. like i can't read that shit everywhere and anywhere? the reason i had pitchfork as my home page was because i could actually find out about the shit i care about. i'm glad you can pay your rent now, it's too bad that you sold out your millions of readers for britney fans in body glitter to do it."

Dare, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (13 years ago) Permalink

pitchfork as your homepage, classic or dud?

the first thing i thought (after, well, this is no all cure all the time) was that i wished they really had "sold out" (what the fuck, is this 93?), because maybe it would mean LESS GODDAMN PROG.

jess, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (13 years ago) Permalink

he's calling you out, leone. FITE!

Todd Burns, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (13 years ago) Permalink

I think I'd rather read about Alanis and Kylie than most of the stuff they normally review.

Sean, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (13 years ago) Permalink

Their funniest joke came months ago.

Nicole, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (13 years ago) Permalink

I don't know what all you fools are talking about... I only WISH all of it were true.

Well, the Albini thing practically is...

mr. sparkle, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (13 years ago) Permalink

We thought about that as one of the news items.

Makes sense, really.

Ned Raggett, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (13 years ago) Permalink

I don't know what all you fools are talking about... I only WISH all of it were true.

Well, the Albini thing practically is... huh???

Brock K., Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (13 years ago) Permalink

LESS GODDAMN PROG

So, does that mean we'll write about the next Radiohead album, or not?

dleone, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (13 years ago) Permalink

And that Flaming Lips thing actually is true. I think.

powertonevolume, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (13 years ago) Permalink

Hein? Is the joke that Pitchfork reviewed some pop musik?? Even their KYLIE review was as dull as www.defra.gov.uk/farm/sustain/default.htm ARRRGHHHHHHHHH!! Then again Pitchfork = dull is a big shocker along the lines of Nelson in COLUMN!!!!!! shocker.

Sarah, Tuesday, 2 April 2002 00:00 (13 years ago) Permalink

'On' column? 'HAS' column?! I can see him from my bladdy window but does that help my BRANE I think NICHT.

Sarah, Tuesday, 2 April 2002 00:00 (13 years ago) Permalink

Dom, how much of the Kylie review was farce? "The song exudes a catchiness that belies its inherent simplicity, so reassuring during an era when chart acts sound increasingly baroque and producers race to see who can ape electronic music trends first" sounds at least semi-serious.

Mitch Lastnamewithheld, Tuesday, 2 April 2002 00:00 (13 years ago) Permalink

that is because kylie is, like sophie ellis bextor, going for a retro- mancuso/levan vibe, with all the classicism inherent in such an endeavour.

gareth, Tuesday, 2 April 2002 00:00 (13 years ago) Permalink

Actually, I did try to write about that record in the same way I would have for anything else at Pitchfork. I thought the gag would be better if people really thought we were changing styles, and Spin may be full of ads, but at least the reviews aren't jokes! As far as I know, anyway. Dullness wasn't intentional though.

dleone, Tuesday, 2 April 2002 00:00 (13 years ago) Permalink

best e-mail address ever, eh starbar?

dudley, Tuesday, 2 April 2002 00:00 (13 years ago) Permalink

Dead right sir. Power shandies all round to the geezer behind it eh?

Sarah, Wednesday, 3 April 2002 00:00 (13 years ago) Permalink

From: DWilliams@EQRWORLD.com Subject: NO, Just Admit You Like It Up There

You have completed your learning of life's lessons. Now, you suck ass just like all the other bores before you. Kylie, Alanis? Whatever, bitch. I am sure you already have the defense mechanisms in place so, this will mean nothing but, another exercise in...oh, who cares. Looking elsewhere for reality...or maybe I can pretend to be a rubber worm like pitchwhore.com...here big fishie, look, I rounded 'em up for you in a arrel. A whole demographic!

Not Funny

Dare, Thursday, 4 April 2002 00:00 (13 years ago) Permalink

5 years pass...

Y'know sometimes they really are asking for it:

"White Williams issues a debut album layered with impeccable influences-- including Roxy Music, Beck, and T. Rex-- and a sense of calculated disaffection."

Well shit SIGN ME UP.

lukas, Thursday, 1 November 2007 18:57 (7 years ago) Permalink

Yeah, that was a bit of a repellant blurb if I ever saw one.

Z S, Thursday, 1 November 2007 19:01 (7 years ago) Permalink

Wait, are you saying that doesn't seem accurate?

nabisco, Thursday, 1 November 2007 19:10 (7 years ago) Permalink

I read 'White' as 'While' and thought "The Saul Williams album sounds like that?"

Ned Raggett, Thursday, 1 November 2007 19:11 (7 years ago) Permalink

it's more that they used that as their _hook_

x-post

lukas, Thursday, 1 November 2007 19:20 (7 years ago) Permalink

The front blurbs are always stripped/condensed summary descriptions from the review inside -- in this case

His songs are thin and languorous, with impeccable influences and the sort of calculated disaffection that comes from an MFA in design and a good weed connection.

nabisco, Thursday, 1 November 2007 19:46 (7 years ago) Permalink

omg that is horrorshow

The blurb >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the article quote

HI DERE, Thursday, 1 November 2007 20:18 (7 years ago) Permalink

I assume that's an article quote; nabisco, if you just made that up then SHAME ON YOU.

HI DERE, Thursday, 1 November 2007 20:22 (7 years ago) Permalink

why would a critic ever try to guess where a song comes from?

Mr. Que, Thursday, 1 November 2007 20:23 (7 years ago) Permalink

I'm more bothered by beck as impeccable influence

dmr, Thursday, 1 November 2007 20:24 (7 years ago) Permalink

Wait, are you saying that doesn't seem accurate?

The description of "a sense of calculated disaffection", a combination of words that makes me imagine the shittiest band of all time, followed by "recommended" was repellant for me. I guess I like my disaffection to be natural, not carefully planned, so I would never recommend something like that.

Then again, I've never heard it so what do I know and so on.

Z S, Thursday, 1 November 2007 20:29 (7 years ago) Permalink

b-but someone at pfork said "hm, how can we get people to read this review? I know! we'll mention the artist's impeccable influences and calculated disaffection! that'll reel 'em in!"

RIP satire etc

lukas, Thursday, 1 November 2007 20:34 (7 years ago) Permalink

they could have collaged+mis-used _anything_ from the article, and they collaged+mis-used that

lukas, Thursday, 1 November 2007 20:35 (7 years ago) Permalink

The White Williams album reminds me much more of late 10cc and Bread than of Roxy Music. That bit was like the classic "Let's over-hip our influences" review.

I eat cannibals, Thursday, 1 November 2007 20:54 (7 years ago) Permalink

The description of "a sense of calculated disaffection", a combination of words that makes me imagine the shittiest band of all time, followed by "recommended" was repellant for me.

See, this sounds like the blurb WORKED for you -- i.e., efficiently let you know you would probably not like this act.

I agree, though, it looks kind of weird to have such a neutral-to-disparaging summary blurb on a recommended album.

nabisco, Thursday, 1 November 2007 22:04 (7 years ago) Permalink

I like how they gave the new Babyshambles, which is actually tuneful and a good all around album, a 4.0, but gave the first one, which is dreadful and hard to listen to / bloated, a 7.3,

Yeah, it was definitely TWICE as good as the new one. Fuckin' morons.

Erock Zombie, Friday, 2 November 2007 18:30 (7 years ago) Permalink

ugh, "impeccable influences" is really repulsive.

Hurting 2, Friday, 2 November 2007 18:46 (7 years ago) Permalink

(xpost) was that a parody or are you really getting worked up about an internet score for babyshambles

dmr, Friday, 2 November 2007 18:47 (7 years ago) Permalink

He was worked up?

roxymuzak, Friday, 2 November 2007 18:49 (7 years ago) Permalink

wait, i thought the grading scale was logarithmic. like 5 is twice as good as 4. somebody email ryan schreiber to find out.

elan, Friday, 2 November 2007 19:14 (7 years ago) Permalink

shit, now i need to reevaluate all my purchases of the last five years.

elan, Friday, 2 November 2007 19:16 (7 years ago) Permalink

It's actually modelled after the Richter Scale, hence the superlative designations of various well-reviewed albums as either "Reccomended," "Best New Music," or "Whole Lotta Shakin' Goin' On."

Alex in Baltimore, Friday, 2 November 2007 19:24 (7 years ago) Permalink

in general there seems to be a problem now where writers proudly, and with swagger, refute anti-[whatever] "thinkpieces" that don't actually exist, or exist so far on the margins of discussion that orienting discussion around them is very limiting, and, imo, draining

J0rdan S., Friday, 3 July 2015 17:18 (4 weeks ago) Permalink

takes on takes on takes

lil dork (Whiney G. Weingarten), Friday, 3 July 2015 17:21 (4 weeks ago) Permalink

creating strawpeople is not a new thing. but it's not even that I don't think the thinkpieces exist (they might!), i just want names! though i guess i also get annoyed when people accuse the "internet" of something and then cite five rando-rubes on twitter.

da croupier, Friday, 3 July 2015 17:21 (4 weeks ago) Permalink

type "Rihanna" into google news, you don't even need to specify the video; this shit is not difficult to find nor to predict

for sale: baby shoes, never worn your ass (katherine), Friday, 3 July 2015 18:08 (4 weeks ago) Permalink

typed "rihanna" into google news, Who cares if Rihanna's BBHMM video is feminist or not? She's the one with the power was the top headline, had to click "explore in depth" to find more obviously opinionated headlines on the video. they were:

Rihanna's success is inspiring - but her new video is violently misogynist (New Statesman)

Rihanna's '#BBHMM' Video Is Brilliant, Terrifying, Complicated (HuffPo)

Rihanna's “Bitch Better Have My Money” Video Is Very Literal, Very Cinematic (Slate)

Stop Saying Rihanna's "Bitch Better Have My Money" Video Is Anti-Feminist (Papermag)

RIHANNA IS THE BAD BITCH WE NEED AND HER TARANTINO-STYLE REVENGE PORN FOR "BBHMM" PROVES IT (Noisey)

so yeah, i see a clearly critical one. but it's weird to ask people to look up the thinkpieces you're saying suck. if you're going to reference them, link to one! if they're easy to find, the person being paid to write about them can put in the effort.

da croupier, Friday, 3 July 2015 22:04 (4 weeks ago) Permalink

I mean I could have clicked them but then I would be part of the problem

for sale: baby shoes, never worn your ass (katherine), Friday, 3 July 2015 22:16 (4 weeks ago) Permalink

All you need to really do is check to see if the National Feminist Review Board has rubber-stamped their seal of approval.

AdamVania (Adam Bruneau), Friday, 3 July 2015 22:17 (4 weeks ago) Permalink

Safy's blurb in that piece was good

supreme problematics (D-40), Friday, 3 July 2015 23:32 (4 weeks ago) Permalink

xp katherine, I'm talking about the format not the video. When you have a video that's divisive elsewhere then why convene seven writers who all have the same opinion? Why not just have one review if there's not going to be any debate? And like da croupier says, at least link to the hostile reviews to give some context.

A swarm of antipathy (Re-Make/Re-Model), Saturday, 4 July 2015 10:28 (4 weeks ago) Permalink

what's with the blackface-style language some of the writers are using to talk about this?

sarahell, Sunday, 5 July 2015 04:20 (4 weeks ago) Permalink

that's just how they roll.

that video is stupid. in my internet opinion. that song got pretty old for me too once i heard it like 3 times though.

scott seward, Sunday, 5 July 2015 06:28 (4 weeks ago) Permalink

what's with the blackface-style language some of the writers are using to talk about this?

― sarahell, Sunday, July 5, 2015 12:20 AM (2 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

is there a godwin's law for this

for sale: baby shoes, never worn your ass (katherine), Sunday, 5 July 2015 06:33 (4 weeks ago) Permalink

Meaghan Garvey: There’s a very simple A$AP Yams tweet that’s stuck with me for years.

♛ LIL UNIT ♛ (thomp), Sunday, 5 July 2015 06:44 (4 weeks ago) Permalink

the tweet is 'Never vocalise the vision.' it's from august 2013

♛ LIL UNIT ♛ (thomp), Sunday, 5 July 2015 06:44 (4 weeks ago) Permalink

isnt there like one white writer in the entire group

supreme problematics (D-40), Sunday, 5 July 2015 06:57 (4 weeks ago) Permalink

not to cape for played out slang useage in music journalism or anything but uhh

supreme problematics (D-40), Sunday, 5 July 2015 06:58 (4 weeks ago) Permalink

feel like the thing i quoted is p dumb regardless of ethnicity

idk i don't really have a handle on what pitchfork is 'like' anymore

♛ LIL UNIT ♛ (thomp), Sunday, 5 July 2015 12:04 (4 weeks ago) Permalink

neither does pitchfork

j., Sunday, 5 July 2015 14:35 (4 weeks ago) Permalink

that pitchfork roundtable on rihanna makes me feel really uncomfortable somehow. like it doubles down on the pure celebration of violence and thinks that because of who is doing this that it has some extended political significance. reminds me of the unmitigated celebrations of gangsta rap in the early 90s. as a reaction to the scolds it makes sense, but it feel like it doesn't really think through what's going on. like the politics of endorsing the video seem a lot more shallow and less realized than the video itself.

got bent (mild cheezed off vibes) (s.clover), Monday, 6 July 2015 01:58 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

there was also a roundtable for the song itself that had some of the same participants and same overall super positive tone, although there was at least one dissenter:
http://pitchfork.com/thepitch/715-bitch-better-have-my-roundtable-rihannas-bbhmm/

some dude, Monday, 6 July 2015 02:07 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

oh right. "Newports, not just blunts" -- how could i forget

got bent (mild cheezed off vibes) (s.clover), Monday, 6 July 2015 02:33 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

it doesn't think through as much as it could because all of the participants had less than 24 hours to churn their opinions out

lex pretend, Monday, 6 July 2015 06:20 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

I was gonna say the elephant in the room was that the roundtables that made it to this thread (they've done others) were the ones that dealt with race, but given that someone's dropped blackface into the discussion I don't think that is really applicable anymore

for sale: baby shoes, never worn your ass (katherine), Monday, 6 July 2015 11:45 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

No I'm not having that. It might be about race but it caught my eye because everybody agrees as loudly as possible. Maybe that's the norm for P4k round tables, idk, but if it is then they should rethink the whole format.

A swarm of antipathy (Re-Make/Re-Model), Monday, 6 July 2015 15:21 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

Can mods just change the name of this thread to "I@n C0hen is dumb?"

There's more care and nuance put into the drum filtering on "Let It Happen" than most bands manage in an entire career of recording

Right, because you know

Parker is...somehow the best and most underrated rock bassist of the 21st century, and it’s not even close on either front

srsly?

Wimmels, Monday, 13 July 2015 13:38 (2 weeks ago) Permalink

I feel like for some people audible bass playing = good bass playing.

29 facepalms, Monday, 13 July 2015 13:56 (2 weeks ago) Permalink

otm

too young for seapunk (Moodles), Monday, 13 July 2015 13:58 (2 weeks ago) Permalink

what is "drum filtering"

Joan Crawford Loves Chachi, Monday, 13 July 2015 14:03 (2 weeks ago) Permalink

It's when you use the snare strainer to make coffee.

Josh in Chicago, Monday, 13 July 2015 14:05 (2 weeks ago) Permalink

example (crüt), Monday, 13 July 2015 14:05 (2 weeks ago) Permalink

I feel like for some people audible bass playing = good bass playing.

― 29 facepalms, Monday, July 13, 2015 1:56 PM (8 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

^^^^^

Wimmels, Monday, 13 July 2015 14:06 (2 weeks ago) Permalink

crut I lol'd really hard, ty

Joan Crawford Loves Chachi, Monday, 13 July 2015 14:09 (2 weeks ago) Permalink

Currents could be called a "transitional album," but what Parker seems to realize is that all albums should be so named, because life is transitional.

AdamVania (Adam Bruneau), Monday, 13 July 2015 15:39 (2 weeks ago) Permalink

jesus christ

insufficiently familiar with xgau's work to comment intelligently (BradNelson), Monday, 13 July 2015 15:47 (2 weeks ago) Permalink

Noted Marxist-Leninist mouthpiece the FT on implications for the Eurozone: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e38a452e-26f2-11e5-bd83-71cb60e8f08c.html#axzz3fm5E3Q9P

Keith Moom (Neil S), Monday, 13 July 2015 15:48 (2 weeks ago) Permalink

lol rong thread sorry guys

Keith Moom (Neil S), Monday, 13 July 2015 15:49 (2 weeks ago) Permalink

not really

The burrito of ennui (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Monday, 13 July 2015 15:50 (2 weeks ago) Permalink

Forknancial Times

like a giraffe of nah (forksclovetofu), Monday, 13 July 2015 17:44 (2 weeks ago) Permalink

what is "drum filtering"

he's just talking about the dj-esque part of the single where there's a low pass filter on the drums.

ian cohen also responsible for this infamously terrible review:
http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/17136-mumps-etc/

lil urbane (Jordan), Monday, 13 July 2015 18:03 (2 weeks ago) Permalink

Page Not Found (404)

nose, Monday, 13 July 2015 18:09 (2 weeks ago) Permalink

they're on the festival bill

The burrito of ennui (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Monday, 13 July 2015 18:10 (2 weeks ago) Permalink

copy and paste the url. ilx doesn't put the final "/" in the link and so it doesn't work

Rave Van Donk (jim in glasgow), Monday, 13 July 2015 18:11 (2 weeks ago) Permalink

I don't really care about IC as a writer but he reviews so much nu-emo/pop-punk stuff that is reviving sounds I didn't care much about the first time around that I basically skip anything with his byline.

Immediate Follower (NA), Monday, 13 July 2015 19:24 (2 weeks ago) Permalink

It's a huge bummer that he got assigned to review the Tenement album, which didn't really say anything beyond "It's a double-LP; therefore, it's too long." Couldn't they have gotten literally anyone else?

billstevejim, Monday, 13 July 2015 19:42 (2 weeks ago) Permalink

oh yeah just like when he reviewed the new mew record and mostly used it as an opportunity to make thousand-year-old prog jokes about rick wakeman's king arthur

insufficiently familiar with xgau's work to comment intelligently (BradNelson), Monday, 13 July 2015 19:52 (2 weeks ago) Permalink

IC is the most Pitchfork-y of Pitchfork writers though, a true objectivist, will always mention the album's relatability, hook count, and cross-reference with other Pitchfork-approved records positively. Music to him is something to affirm his own privileged position, not to challenge it. As long as he writes there regularly that site will never be a positive force for anything

got a long list of ilxors (fgti), Monday, 13 July 2015 22:21 (2 weeks ago) Permalink

Every site needs one of those, like David Fricke at RS. Or Anthony DeCurtis in his heyday.

The burrito of ennui (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Monday, 13 July 2015 22:55 (2 weeks ago) Permalink

i would like to suggest: nah

insufficiently familiar with xgau's work to comment intelligently (BradNelson), Monday, 13 July 2015 23:05 (2 weeks ago) Permalink

speaking of pitchfork writers, this looks pretty cool:

"Rural Violence", curated by Brandon Stosuy, features the work of the artists Matthew Barney, Cindy Daignault, Lionel Maunz, and Prurient (with John Sharian). It is a meditation on the bucolic as sinister and the quiet violence of the pastoral, along with the various rituals attached to both natural and personal cycles.

"Rural Violence" opens on August 8, 2015, in the Family Chapel of the 150-year old Woodside Church in Troy, NY. Opening is 7pm. Performance is 8pm.

There will be a second movement on September 19, 2015.

scott seward, Monday, 13 July 2015 23:28 (2 weeks ago) Permalink

prurient in a church in troy. that's pretty damn poetic.

scott seward, Monday, 13 July 2015 23:29 (2 weeks ago) Permalink


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.