pitchfork is dumb (#34985859340293849494 in a series.)

i mean i dont expect more than a passing reference but it seems to say... something... about... something. i dunno.

tbh Mark I wouldn't have even heard about the coup myself were it not for ____.

Ugh sorry I meant s1ocki

me neither! but i'm not writing a long article about malian music either...

haha i didnt even notice.

I can't think of any easy way to comment on a two-week old coup within a review that mentions Jake Shears and TVOTR guest spots.

i dunno, it just seems to say something about how little context we get with our global supermarket of pop music, fwiw

its also somewhat possible that the review was written before the coup began

so what, it was published today

yeah, it's a bit weird. but no more than that.

i think the drop-down for coup announcements is in the "news" tab.

so what, it was published today

uh, good observation. i mean, you expect pitchfork to go back and have their pop music review tweaked to incorporate current world events?

yes, if i was the editor, i would prob do that so as to not seem completely clueless

people don't say irl in person!
― bnw, Friday, March 23, 2012 1:26 PM (4 days ago) Bookmark

I say i.r.l. IRL but I also kinda suck.

lol u guys

uh, good observation. i mean, you expect pitchfork to go back and have their pop music review tweaked to incorporate current world events?

this is what's known as par for the course in most professional publications

^^^

yeah, it's a bit weird. but no more than that.

― Fozzy Osbourne (contenderizer), Tuesday, March 27, 2012 12:17 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

lol well since you've rendered judgement

what if ... it IS a bit more than that? :O

there is utterly no reason to pick contenderizer's post out of that whole exchange other than your weird thing w/ contenderizer

it's sort of reassuring, though

hi, deej

this is what's known as par for the course in most professional publications

I completely agree! I'm just saying that I find it a little weird to start expecting this out of Pitchfork, of all places.

there is utterly no reason to pick contenderizer's post out of that whole exchange other than your weird thing w/ contenderizer

― Austerity Bronies (some dude), Tuesday, March 27, 2012 1:53 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

i think its funny how hes constantly reassuring ppl that nothing is actually problematic or racist or offensive or sexist or etc. etc. -- seems like hes doing a lot of minimizing all the time

dude, if you ever bothered to think for a moment about anything you read/type, you'd realize that i spend a fuck of a lot of time on ILX calling out shit as racist, sexist, homophobic, etc. way more so than most posters. you've just decided to make a big psycho issue out of this because i don't always agree with you.

I love how dick-waving on ILX essentially amounts to who can call the most people racist

shit, frogs, i'm not even proud of the fact. it's like a tic with me. posted a big sexism bitch on the rolling stones poll thread yesterday, then sort of wished i hadn't, funcrusher.

lol oops

Might be a bit off topic but I have wondered if members of Tinariwen and Terakaft might be involved in the fighting in Mali.

i have not

xpost

I've thought about that too. I don't really know exactly how closely connected they are to the guerillas, but I've gotte the impression it's pretty close. Wouldn't be too surprising if they are involved I guss...

And Contenderizer: Thanks for sharing that important piece of information..

hey, twice in one thread! go ilx.

I have no problem with your comment upthread, really. I kinda agree, with you actually. You could have corroborated your point, but no biggie.. But badg asked an interesting question, and you kinda took a shit at it, which is not so cool.

That's all really.. If you think it's funny that people are puzzled by your contrubutions then ok, I guess..

Disregard the comma after "agree"..

ah, i was just kidding - and serious, too! idea had seriously never occurred to me. tone i was shooting for was more "lighthearted nonsense" than "shitting on", but things get weird on the inernet #58 billion...

There's no thread for Cokemachinegloe sadly, so I'll post in here. Linked their review of the Julia Holter album to a mate on Twitter...having seen that my twitter bio states that I'm a retail assistant, which I am, the review had this to say to us: "I guess we should let the "retail assistants" of the world decide what's good, eh? True authority speaking there." followed by, "We'll work on dumbing down our reviews a little for our blue collar readers...."

Oh dear.

*reviewer

Let's all continue with our lives, then.

.having seen that my twitter bio states that I'm a retail assistant, which I am, the review had this to say to us: "I guess we should let the "retail assistants" of the world decide what's good, eh? True authority speaking there." followed by, "We'll work on dumbing down our reviews a little for our blue collar readers...."

just...wow. what a dick.

do you have a link?

https://twitter.com/#!/BrentAbles

I do realise, btw, that my first response to him is a tad immature...

oh nm i found it. unbelievable. m8 u write for a blog, 1) on no account can u front like ur better than a "retail assistant" 2) be goddamn grateful u have readers at all.

i was gonna tweet this but i would feel a bit mean calling out a critic w/78 followers ;_;

xp it's not even as if you @ed him in the first place

"keep up the hobby xxx" made me lol

well, if it's any consolation, that review is almost entirely vacuous, though exceedingly well upholstered. most risible bit:

Holter’s vacuous constructions are left bare to naturally solidify in the tentative advance of dawn, and with the light comes a clouds-parting revelation of latent songwriting talent and preternatural concepts concerning variances in sound and texture.

uh-yeah!

cokemachineglow is the worst

oh LOLLLLLL at that bit contenderizer quoted, amazing

The superiority complex of wannabe highbrows who can't even craft readable prose is reliably repulsive.

This is ekstasis, literally “being outside oneself,” as it was first defined by the ancient Greeks and again by their great student Martin Heidegger (who also called it transcendence): as always already concerned and involved with a world that is “other” and cast beyond ourselves into a past that is no longer and a future that is not yet, we step out of the stasis proper to natural beings and enter into the distinctive play of presence and absence that is proper to human existence. “We go outside,” as Holter more succinctly puts it.

lol

You don’t give yourself over to Ekstasis so much as inexorably lose yourself within its glistening contours and fleeting visions of potentially misremembered moments of interpersonal, emotional, and spiritual enlightenment. Forget about “finding yourself”; everything, it seems, is all around us, yet each grasp at concrete experience inevitably yields a recession into the shadows from whence these feelings came. But then we remember, as if awakening from a dream: this is not ekstasis, this is ecstasy. This is not the shackle of an ontological reality, but euphoric possibility perpetually drawing us on toward its horizon, like a lost memory that lives on as desire. With Julia Holter, with this profound and inexhaustibly gorgeous album, we can transcend our own transcendence and find the greatest bliss in the joyful renunciation of what makes us us. And all we have to do is go outside.

I have no idea who they think their audience is

Puts P4k's flaws into perspective - Mark Richardson's Holter review is far from dumbed down but it actually flows and makes the record sound appealing.