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

aw, man, now i miss Movieline.

scott seward, Saturday, 30 May 2015 01:23 (1 month ago) Permalink

i used to make tape recordings of me reading Movieline interviews back in the 90's. i would play both parts. interviews with jason priestly and people like that. it was fun.

scott seward, Saturday, 30 May 2015 01:26 (1 month ago) Permalink

remember when skeet ulrich was on the law & order los angeles reboot

maura, Saturday, 30 May 2015 03:18 (1 month ago) Permalink

God 2015 sucks

Karl Malone, Saturday, 30 May 2015 04:12 (1 month ago) Permalink

...from the perspective of someone who doesn't write music reviews, i mean, and (evidently) doesn't write well in general. i guess now it's kind of expected to just acknowledge that it's easier and faster for people to just listen to a song and form their own opinion rather than read several paragraphs describing a song. to be annoyed by that is annoying to others. but i hate the direction that music journalism is going. 30 years ago had got g. marcus suggesting cool shit for you to listen to, now you get a link to a bandcamp and hopefully a few farting suggestions as to what it might sound like. however, i recognize that i also hate the direction that humanity is going and i'm totally ready to just move to the mountains and make moonshine and be even more irrelevant. *barf on self, barf on world, barf*

Karl Malone, Saturday, 30 May 2015 04:20 (1 month ago) Permalink

i used to make tape recordings of me reading Movieline interviews back in the 90's. i would play both parts. interviews with jason priestly and people like that. it was fun.

― scott seward, Saturday, 30 May 2015 01:26 (3 hours ago) Permalink

Lol

puff puff post (uh oh I'm having a fantasy), Saturday, 30 May 2015 05:06 (1 month ago) Permalink

30 years ago G. Marcus could kick a ball in the street

puff puff post (uh oh I'm having a fantasy), Saturday, 30 May 2015 05:08 (1 month ago) Permalink

you need to upload those tapes scott

like a giraffe of nah (forksclovetofu), Saturday, 30 May 2015 15:29 (1 month ago) Permalink

my embarrassing "living in the middle of nowhere so what're you gonna do for the next three hours" hobby was using a pin to outline photographs in tv guide and then shining a light through the back to ILLUMINATE THE STARS

like a giraffe of nah (forksclovetofu), Saturday, 30 May 2015 15:30 (1 month ago) Permalink

At last this thread is where it should be.

The burrito of ennui (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Saturday, 30 May 2015 15:32 (1 month ago) Permalink

best mime rock review ever!

scott seward, Thursday, 4 June 2015 19:41 (1 month ago) Permalink

3 weeks pass...

you just KNOW this person wanted to hate this place but they ended up liking it and got to hear a great captain beefheart song they'd never heard so they end up having to make fun of doritos.

http://pitchfork.com/thepitch/820-i-went-to-james-murphys-new-wine-bar-and-all-i-got-was-more-confused-about-the-state-of-the-music-industry/

scott seward, Tuesday, 30 June 2015 19:18 (5 days ago) Permalink

also, that live LCD video freaked me out cuz i'd never seen that guy in area rock mode and the song is so weird! arena pomp city. i was trying to think of what it reminded me of and i drew a blank. like U2 mixed with some madchester band. plus, the video is totally shot like a commercial.

scott seward, Tuesday, 30 June 2015 19:20 (5 days ago) Permalink

that article is poorly written

adam, Tuesday, 30 June 2015 19:24 (5 days ago) Permalink

that article is poorly written

I think Hopper has been too busy with book tour and interviews to do any actual editing of Pitch submissions. Either that or she's a really bad editor.

the top man in the language department (誤訳侮辱), Tuesday, 30 June 2015 19:28 (5 days ago) Permalink

Sweet jesus, someone put the Pitch out of its misery. Did the writer and/or editor just forget that the article started with the same (terrible) gag it finishes on?

Position Position, Tuesday, 30 June 2015 19:43 (5 days ago) Permalink

i was trying to think of what it reminded me of and i drew a blank. like U2 mixed with some madchester band.

Ha, I love "All My Friends", but it does how a very strong "Where The Streets Have No Name" vibe, doesn't it?

too young for seapunk (Moodles), Tuesday, 30 June 2015 19:46 (5 days ago) Permalink

does *have

too young for seapunk (Moodles), Tuesday, 30 June 2015 19:46 (5 days ago) Permalink

all my friends and that music video gross me out so much

marcos, Tuesday, 30 June 2015 19:52 (5 days ago) Permalink

also this made me lol

As music fans, we've become inured to corporate sponsorship—most of all at festivals, as captive audiences, and on the web. It’s hard not to see the benefits when you see what Red Bull makes possible, like DFA’s recent 12th anniversary party.

marcos, Tuesday, 30 June 2015 19:58 (5 days ago) Permalink

let us all celebrate what red bull makes possible: dfa's 12th anniversary party

thank you red bull

marcos, Tuesday, 30 June 2015 19:58 (5 days ago) Permalink

no names, folks, this ain’t TMZ

sure it ain't

Wimmels, Tuesday, 30 June 2015 20:00 (5 days ago) Permalink

The New Yorker review of the restaurant also had a lede based around "All My Friends," which is really the hackiest thing to do in this context.

Immediate Follower (NA), Tuesday, 30 June 2015 20:31 (5 days ago) Permalink

Losing my edge? The food here was so bad I was losing my lunch.

da croupier, Tuesday, 30 June 2015 20:32 (5 days ago) Permalink

the sound of silverware

doug ellin (Lamp), Tuesday, 30 June 2015 20:33 (5 days ago) Permalink

like a fine wine, james murphy is aging and kinda cool and hairy

1992 ball boy (Karl Malone), Tuesday, 30 June 2015 20:38 (5 days ago) Permalink

I was there when James Murphy opened a wine bar etc etc

Wimmels, Tuesday, 30 June 2015 20:51 (5 days ago) Permalink

Maybe Daft Punk will play there tee hee

Is It Any Wonder I'm Not the (President Keyes), Tuesday, 30 June 2015 21:03 (5 days ago) Permalink

lol

Οὖτις, Tuesday, 30 June 2015 21:17 (5 days ago) Permalink

that article is poorly written

I think Hopper has been too busy with book tour and interviews to do any actual editing of Pitch submissions. Either that or she's a really bad editor.

I'm actually curious why the editing at The Pitch is so lax, particularly since I admire Hopper's writing so much. I'm not the first one to mention it, but even the pieces that have good ideas in them give off an incredibly strong "young writer's first draft" vibe.

intheblanks, Tuesday, 30 June 2015 21:29 (5 days ago) Permalink

What's the point of a round table when the consensus is suffocating?

http://pitchfork.com/thepitch/827-a-rihanna-bitch-better-have-my-money-video-roundtable/

A swarm of antipathy (Re-Make/Re-Model), Friday, 3 July 2015 08:09 (2 days ago) Permalink

it doesn't really seem like a round table discussion though, more like a singles jukebox style "everyone does a blurb" and you get whatever consensus or disagreement rolls in

they're all otm anyway

lex pretend, Friday, 3 July 2015 08:59 (2 days ago) Permalink

fuck everything having to be turned around within 24 hours though, sometimes i feel like that's the worst aspect of music writing 2k15. even the best pieces i've read this year (about new albums, songs, videos etc), i know they'd have been so much better even a week later

lex pretend, Friday, 3 July 2015 09:01 (2 days ago) Permalink

The Avalanches' Darren Seltmann Has Left the Group
They're now a two piece
By Jeremy Gordon on June 29, 2015 at 1:41 p.m. EDT

Back in February 2014, Seltmann's wife, singer-songwriter Sally Seltmann, told Melbourne's Herald Sun that he'd left the Avalanches. The news was confirmed by the band's label, Modular, who said: "Yep, Darren hasn't been in the band for a while

let no-one live rent free in your butt (sic), Friday, 3 July 2015 09:12 (2 days ago) Permalink

nb: said confirmation is also from February 2014

let no-one live rent free in your butt (sic), Friday, 3 July 2015 09:15 (2 days ago) Permalink

What's the point of a round table when the consensus is suffocating?

The point is to establish the suffocating consensus.

the top man in the language department (誤訳侮辱), Friday, 3 July 2015 12:13 (2 days ago) Permalink

^ a+

sean gramophone, Friday, 3 July 2015 13:52 (2 days ago) Permalink

no idea what internet you are on where the consensus about this video is "suffocating"

for sale: baby shoes, never worn your ass (katherine), Friday, 3 July 2015 15:21 (2 days ago) Permalink

he didn't say the internet, he said a specific roundtable piece and provided a link.

the piece may be a corrective to various thinkpieces that went unnamed in the roundtable, and "suffocating" is a bit much, but it is fairly monotone in terms of opinion for a "roundtable" of 8 writers

da croupier, Friday, 3 July 2015 17:02 (2 days ago) Permalink

7, rather

da croupier, Friday, 3 July 2015 17:02 (2 days 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 (2 days ago) Permalink

takes on takes on takes

lil dork (Whiney G. Weingarten), Friday, 3 July 2015 17:21 (2 days 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 (2 days 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 (2 days 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 (2 days 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 (2 days 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 (2 days ago) Permalink

Safy's blurb in that piece was good

supreme problematics (D-40), Friday, 3 July 2015 23:32 (2 days 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 (Yesterday) 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 minutes ago) Permalink


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