P2K: The Top 200 Albums of the 2000s: 20-1

Everyone is so busy accusing people of getting upset that Pitchfork didn't pick the albums they wanted, but when you really look, these people who are supposedly upset about the list don't actually exist. Its just a thread full of people telling people who aren't there to stop being upset over a silly list.

Kevin I did but for unknown reasons i totally fucked up the ordering of my ballot and it came in at number 12 when it should have been around number 7.

how many women voted in this btw

lol at lex for pitying those whose aesthetic doesn't mirror his own.

If their staff lists are anything to go by, a similar proportion of women as actualled turned up on the list. Funny, that.

Stankonia, easy. Completely blew my mind and it still sounds great, give or take a couple of ho-hum tracks. Discovery, Supreme Clientele, Person Pitch and Jay-Z still get regular spins from me, and all still sound magnificent. Been a long time since I listened to the Avalanches, but I loved it at the time. Perhaps I should dig it out again. I listened to Is This It? and White Blood Cells a LOT when they came out. Easy to hate on them, but they're cracking good records, if not masterpieces. Likewise YHF. Yes it's overrated, but it has some very good songs and sustains itself over the album.
Funeral I loved at the time, now it sounds pretty overwrought and clumsy, although it's still a million times better than the rubbish follow up.
I've not heard much by Spoon. Whatever I have head by them has completely passed me by. Find the pfork love for them pretty inexplicable.
It's a slightly dull and predictable list, but I can't really get mad over it. The only entry that makes me go NOOOOOO!!! is Sigur fucking Ros. They're the post-rock Enya.

Eh, the Venn diagram of Lex's and my taste don't really have a huge amount of overlap, and I still blame his comments on ILX for tricking me into listening to that Paris Hilton album, but I totally get the pity and contempt. There's a weird undercurrent here of stolid "serious" music, which is a pretty large part of why I've bailed on indie over the last decade. It's become the most resolutely boring genre, in part (I think) because the indie kids have grown up and assumed positions of middling power. While I'd say that it's reinventing notions of propriety and maturity, it's still propitious and mature, and those aren't always virtues that I think should be privileged. Looking at that top 20, there's hardly an anti-social or difficult or weird album on it.

I think that has to do with indie (if you'll grant me the self-aware genre conceit) finally realizing and grasping for canonical status, but in large part doing so by aping the perceived values of other works canonized by Rolling Stone (and Mojo and Uncut, etc.). It under-appreciates the weirdness of yesterday, and over-sells its own innovation and strangeness. I remember friends talking about their minds being blown by MPP, and it was like, really?

How would a collection of people come to the consensus that an anti-social record is one of the 20 best albums of the decade? Is it just me or does that seem willfully contradictory? Likewise, wouldn't the majority of people voting need to be weird in the same way for a weird album to do well, and how difficult is a difficult album if a decent number of people understand and like it?

I don't think this list is pointing out anything different from what lists like it have pointed out for decades, except maybe that indie kids now think it's okay to listen to hip-hop.

(or maybe indie kids have more black friends, ha)

Couple things re: the representation of women in the RYM and PFork lists.

1st: apples and oranges. RYL voting body is self-selected and democratic. Whoever wants to vote can vote. So the fact that the results skew this way or that isn't necessarily a problem. It may be depressing to see yet another male-dominated list, but there's no reason to take it as a slight.

PFork list is a very different matter. The voting body isn't self-selected, but rather hand-picked, and to the extent that it reflects their regular writing staff, it's probably overwhelmingly male. Of 30 reviews published since last Monday, for instance, only two appear to have been written by women: Amy Granzin on Port O'Brien and Rebecca Raber on Islands. Dusted Magazine, another similar site, skews much the same way: of the 33 "Recent Reviews" they list, only three seem to be by women (those by Josie Donelley and Jennifer Kelly). Since it was mentioned elsewhere in this thread, it looks like all 15 reviews on Uncut's main Music page were written by men.

This is a problem, and it may help explain why these canon-forging lists tend to be so male-dominated. A massively male-dominated critical culture writes about the things that interest them, and surprise! It turns out that most of the things they most respect are made by other men. I'm half surprised that indie-crit culture, so hand-wringingly progressive/PC in word, should be so retrograde in deed. But only half surprised. I mean, I'm sure it's all but impossible to find smart women who'd even be interested in writing about pop music...

I can only really compare it with Plan B - a magazine that actively recruited female writers and actively covered musicians of both genders. Thing is, the magazine didn't *have* a list-oriented culture, never used ratings. The end of year round-ups (which I participated in a couple of times) deliberately used non-rating non-list type ways of getting at your favourite music of the year - asking for moments or events or songs rather than albums or gigs or the like.

It was such a different way of *thinking* about music - but one that seemed a lot more inclusive. Both to the artists covered and the writers writing about them (and it showed in the demographics of the people that *read* - or at least subscribed to the thing.)

What was the distinction between an event and a gig?

I don't understand the question. An event could be anything.

Going to a gig. Hearing your favourite song on the dancefloor. Going to a party and hearing music you'd never dreamed of. A happening. An art party. A listening party. Anything.

A massively male-dominated critical culture writes about the things that interest them, and surprise! It turns out that most of the things they most respect are made by other men

i can see why this might be the case, but i'm vaguely disappointed that so few of these cultural commentators seem to lack the self-awareness to attempt to rectify it. also, i don't think it follows that "dudes like music made by dudes"; it smacks of the "black british music doesn't do well because the black population of britain is so heterogeneous and comparatively small in comparison to eg the USA" argument that i encounter so often. i don't think you have to be black to appreciate "urban" music, nor female to appreciate female artists. i am neither! and my favourite artists are almost all black women.

i don't think you have to be black to appreciate "urban" music, nor female to appreciate female artists. i am neither! and my favourite artists are almost all black women.

This ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

It's like... women seem perfectly able to listen to and rate *male* artists and get something out of the experience. Are men somehow too stupid or narrow-minded to do likewise? Isn't that a bit of a negative thing to assume about your gender?

I don't understand the question. An event could be anything.

Going to a gig. Hearing your favourite song on the dancefloor. Going to a party and hearing music you'd never dreamed of. A happening. An art party. A listening party. Anything.

The way you wrote that was a little confusing because it seemed like going to gigs was something that was explicitly excluded, yet they asked you to name your favorite events and it seemed like your favorite gig would fit very nicely into that category.

I still kind of don't see how that's non-listy but that's just me being obstinate. :-)

Couple thoughts on yr Plan B reminiscence: It's a shame that the only music publications that seem to have a gender-diverse writing pool are those that make a point of it. Plays into that "male = normal, female = different" paradigm that feminists often (rightly) gripe about.

Also, while the Plan B approach might be more inclusive, it might also help explain why "the canon" (a list made of lists) is so male-dominated.

also, most of the ringtone rap crew on ilx are gay or bi! i don't think the assumption stereotypes is a constructive path to go down.

Dan - because it wasn't a list, it was "pick one of each" of these really open-ended categories.

It's a shame that the only music publications that seem to have a gender-diverse writing pool are those that make a point of it.

I really don't understand WHY this seems to be the case. It just seems so counter-intuitive.

I suppose it goes to that classic gender-divide thing of "men volunteer to do things actively, women wait to be asked" - why bother actively going around recruiting and asking women to write, when you have a pool of thousands of young male blogger just panting to do something.

i don't think you have to be black to appreciate "urban" music, nor female to appreciate female artists

but it HELPS, generally, is the point

It's like... women seem perfectly able to listen to and rate *male* artists and get something out of the experience. Are men somehow too stupid or narrow-minded to do likewise? Isn't that a bit of a negative thing to assume about your gender?

― Masonic Boom

Honestly, I think the politicization of taste is horrible. The more we worry about what our taste "should" be, the less well we know ourselves and the less authentic our tastes become. This is a bad thing no matter how you slice it. If most men do, in fact, tend to prefer music made by men (and I don't think this should be taken as a given), I don't think this is necessarily a problem. In fact, it makes a kind of simple sense.

No, the problem, the only problem, is the construction and maintenance of a critical culture that is composed almost entirely of male voices.

well, no, it doesn't. as kate says, women are rarely unable to appreciate male artists. i know very few people whose taste doesn't cross gender/race lines. why on earth should it help?? it's an unhelpful and inaccurate line of thinking.

and critics should be ESPECIALLY aware of it, too.

xp

I think it's important to avoid generalizations about men being too stupid to appreciate music made by women for a lot of reasons, but one is that this seems to depend on the genre. Like in country and R&B female artists are totally canonical both now and in the past. So this seems to have a lot to do with genre, and specifically indie.

and jazz? and metal? and funk? and techno?

Dan - because it wasn't a list, it was "pick one of each" of these really open-ended categories.

This is where me being obstinate comes into play because that is still a list to me, only instead of being "20 best [x]" list it's an "[x] questions" list. I understand that you see it differently, though.

i'm vaguely disappointed that so few of these cultural commentators seem to lack the self-awareness to attempt to rectify it.

What would you like them to do? Vote for/rep for stuff they don't actually like, but feel they should?

Your taste, Lex, isn't a model for the universe. No one's is or should be. And it isn't helpful to go around preening about how wonderfully diverse your own tastes are. People like what they like. The more honest we are about it, the better. Even if that means we have to admit our biases.

Maybe the difference is between an ordered list [bad] and an unordered list [ok]?

What would you like them to do? Vote for/rep for stuff they don't actually like, but feel they should?

― Granny Dainger

^^^^ This. We need to broaden the pool, not try to shame people into lying about what they like.

Also got to take into account that it might not just be the writers who are the problem- i.e. hip-hop is rarely made by women, so naturally less women making rap music will make the lists. In fact, this imbalance is most probably true of most genres although not to the extent in which men dominate hip-hop.

Why are there less female lead guitarists? Or are there thousands of them we just don't know about because of the big bad pitchfork critics not liking ladies?

My friend, I don't "politicise" my tastes. I listen to what I like. Some of what I like is male, some of it is female. I have noticed a slight aesthetic tendency towards female vocalists because I simply prefer the sound of female voices.

But it's like, the moment you try to address this vast imbalance of how men can't seem to listen to women (and in some cases, as Kerr pointed out about metallers that fight against "girly" music) - you're accused of "politicising" things.

I mean, maybe this requires a vast change in the way that female musicians are marketed, a change in the way that men view women, fullstop (as one of my bandmates commented on straight male audience members - "it's like they're so busy figuring out whether they want to shag us they haven't got around to noticing what we sound like").

The mostly male voice of the media is FAR FROM the only problem, and it's massively oversimplifying the matter to say that it is.

Maybe the difference is between an ordered list [bad] and an unordered list [ok]?

Well no, it's a different type of list but it's still ordered; you just don't get to see what came in 2 through 20 for the various questions. Even an "unordered" list still has some order to it, otherwise you'd just write down everything you did for the time period being covered. Whenever you pick your favorite anything, you're making a ranking.

Why are there less female lead guitarists?

Generally speaking, women are smaller than men.

yeah, by "ordered" I meant "linearly ordered" as in "these are 20 picks, ordered from best to worst" whereas an unordered list doesn't indicate what's better than what. But your point, I see, is that by selecting anything as worthy of mention, it's being declared better than what wasn't selected. That makes sense.

women are rarely unable to appreciate male artists

neither are men in my personal experience (men i've met and spoken to about music over the last 20 years). but this is a really unhelpful generalisation either way.

the generalisation that people are MORE LIKELY to like music made by people they can relate to may be unhelpful too but it seems more of a 'truth', again, in my personal experience.

re: a hoy hoy

That's the other side of the coin, and a fair rebuttal. Some genres such a boy's club that worrying about critical gender bias is beside the point (metal, f'rinstance). But that isn't true of music in general, or of pop. It isn't even true of indie. In this case, the canon seems narrower than the genre. At least a little narrower.

Dan, it's the difference between "your favourite" (i.e. subjective) and "the best" - which is the way that these "best of" top 10 lists are posed with this illusion of "objectivity" which clearly does not exist the moment you look at them on a slightly more than casual level.

And please, let's not get into the "oh, but there are just *less* female X..." because that, like everything, is a point of who is doing the counting. I was on a messageboard where someone tried to say that there were so few female superstar DJs because "women don't DJ." The irony being, that, seeing how I was a member of a mostly-female DJ collective, I personally knew at least a dozen female DJs, while, before signing up for that forum, I had known maybe 3 male DJs?

i don't think race or gender is much of a factor in my being able to "relate" to an artist.

i don't think men are unable to appreciate female artists at all, which again brings up the question of why there's this huge gender imbalance. maybe the kind of man who ends up writing for an indie webzine is unable to appreciate female artists?

xps

and yeah certain genres are largely gender-coded. hip-hop masculine; r&b feminine; pop feminine, metal masculine. which has a lot to do w/which genres get "critical approval", too.

I don't think being able to appreciate something will automatically make it your favorite thing; a lot of it is going to depend on what music imprinted on you at a watershed moment and, given the demographic skew and the power structure of Western civilization, that means that for many of the people who end up contributing to a "best of" list, many of the entries will feature men, most of whom will be white.

I think this changes across the board when the bars to access drop; the trick is identifying and getting rid of the bars, something that we've made remarkable progress on but likely will not see the full fruits of in our lifetime.

also ;_; that everyone is ignoring my "less"/"fewer" grammar joke

My friend, I don't "politicise" my tastes...

But it's like, the moment you try to address this vast imbalance of how men can't seem to listen to women [...] you're accused of "politicising" things.

I mean, maybe this requires a vast change in the way that female musicians are marketed, a change in the way that men view women...

The mostly male voice of the media is FAR FROM the only problem, and it's massively oversimplifying the matter to say that it is.

― Masonic Boom

I agree with all that, except that I think you're talking about a huge, complicated social issue that can't really be satisfactorily addressed. Maybe in an incremental, long-term sense, but even then, only indirectly, as the net result of a thousand sub-steps. That's why I think it's more useful to focus on simple, practical issues like the fact that music publications refuse to hire women as writers.

And I think you are both politicizing and faulting male taste, as you perceive it, an approach that seems counterproductive to me.

the fact that music publications refuse to hire women as writers

actively refuse?

(and in some cases, as Kerr pointed out about metallers that fight against "girly" music

I should point out that 'girly metal' isnt usually metal thats made by girls, its the metal made to appeal to teenage/pre-teen girls.

and jeff

I think gender imbalance in genre should be taken into account though if 'how many critics are male or female' can also play a part. Not saying 'women don't DJ', I'm saying there is an imbalance that also needs to be addressed.

It doesn't relate to this list but hip-hop is finally starting to show a bit more balance in the jerkin movement than it has done for decades. And not in a 'all female rappers have to be like lil kim and wave around their fanny' kind of way either. Once it stops being kids learning their trade with the odd single to producing albums, I think women in hip-hop - or at least in the jerkin part of the list - may start to show up as more than just 'token female rapper who hangs around with more imposing male rapper'. They are more likely to get written about if they actually doing things and making their own sound.

(Of course, getting more attention/critical respect is not the same as getting enough attention/critical respect.)

xpost.

actively refuse?

― blueski

Well, in effect refuse. TBH, the active/passive question ceases to matter when the end result is so glaringly obvious.

I haven't read the x-posts since the Lex... but

I think, also, when looking back on things, for whatever reason, there is gender distortion.

It's like, when you read contemporary accounts of new music, there's an equal balance. Which seems to disappear with perspective and difference. Like, maybe female artists are viewed as more "pop" and therefore by nature more ephemeral.

I'm thinking of genres like Punk, where Debbie Harry and Patti Smith got as much attention AT THE TIME as the Ramones and Television - or in the UK, Siouxsie and the Slits and X-Ray Spex being players, but looking back retrospectively, it's all the Sex Pistols and the Clash.

I bitch about this in the Nu-Gaze scene - that original era shoegaze was very gender equal - boy-girl acts like MBV and Lush were the people defining the genre. And yet, the retrofetishists all seem to be boys in leather jackets.

But perhaps that's it, that the tendency to assign music into genre and cling to retrofetishist scenes and look back upon the past like a historian is more a male tendency - or at least a rockist tendency, while simply taking things at the moment is the poppist (and therefore perceived as feminine?) one? That it's the men who do the looking back, so they pick what they want to remember.

And then bring into play the different ways that age is treated with regards to gender, when original bands reform...

there's just so many things coming into interplay. It's never simple.

I think that history is viewed through the lens of the cultural default, and in all of the genres you listed it is very easy to revert back to the cultural default (ie, white men).

music publications refuse to hire women as writers.

This just isn't true. When I was writing for CTCL/Plan B, there were quite a few publications that tried to recruit me on those grounds.

In my case, it was that I didn't want to write for those publications. It was't as fun or as interesting as Plan B - or their deadlines and wordcounts or "you can never use the first person" or the insistence on using ratings made me just not WANT to write for them.