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

i DO think its part of pitchforks "job"--really any critics "job"--in some sense to "shape readers tastes"... but with a big institution like p'fork...that progress is necessarily slow, thanks to inertia both on the editorial side and on the consumer side. despite the kind of boho readers deej is talking about...i believe that pforks big audience is pretty conservative in their tastes, and its not easy to convince people other wise...

― max

There's a tone in several posts on this thread that suggests that Pitchfork's basic indie-centricity is somehow not okay. That both the site and its audience need steering toward a bigger, better, more broadly appreciating musical world. And I just don't agree. I think PFork is succesful (and, more to the point, useful -- really and truly useful to their audience) largely because it honestly shares an indie-centric POV with that audience. This is not something that either PFork or its audience has had to force. It's a natural connection based on shared interests that has forged a happy community.

In other words, the "conservative" quality max identifies in the PFork indie sensibility is a strength, not a weakness. Just as The Source's honest (and arguably conservative) interest in hip-hop is its strength. I don't think that Pitchfork needs to improve itself by reaching far beyond indie any more than The Source needs to improve itself by reaching far beyond hip-hoip. To the extent that both the site and the audience are happy exploring a world outside the confines of Radiohead/AnCo/Arcade Fire/Grizzly Bear, that's fantastic. But I don't think they necessarily "should" do this, or that one is in any way fighting the good fight in agitating against their core sensibility -- even with all its conservatism, myopia and bias.

On a more general level, I disagree with the basic idea that it's a critic's job to open mind, broaden horizons, etc. I think it's a critic's job to share ideas and information in response to other ideas and information. The evangelical stuff is fine if that's what you get off on, but it isn't the essence of crit.

if you ever want to be depressed about music fans read the stereogum comments anytime rap gets brought up

"hip-hoip". Fucking hell...

scott is pretty much always otm.

Similarly, Bat for Lashes, Fever Ray, St. Vincent, Dirty Projectors, and other female (or partly female) artists will do well on our year-end list

let's pretend all the possible Lady Gaga jokes have been made and move on

In other words, the "conservative" quality max identifies in the PFork indie sensibility is a strength, not a weakness. Just as The Source's honest (and arguably conservative) interest in hip-hop is its strength.

Kate's argument, and one that I agree with, is that even within these restrictions there is room to cover more female artists. Where (I think?) we diverge is whether there is a responsibility to cover more female artists; I am firmly in the "it would be nice" camp and I believe Kate (understandably) has a stronger "they really should" stance.

i wish scott would post more on ilx besides just face-palming on pfork threads

he's got a lot of work on

I don't think that Pitchfork needs to improve itself by reaching far beyond indie any more than The Source needs to improve itself by reaching far beyond hip-hop.

Just FYI cos I mostly think you're talking sense in here but this is a pretty similar argument to one Geir has made probably several dozen times on ILM

Equal representation makes sense if there are equal numbers of both gender making music. I'm not convinced that there are.

Self fulfilling and self reinforcing if you ask me.

If you look at who studied music at a school level, equal numbers, maybe even slanted towards more females (certainly in the music programmes at the schools I attended.)

And yet as you progress from school to garage/bedroom bands to toilet venues to signed to indie-attention-sized well knowness - yes the proportion of female to male may get smaller. But not THAT much smaller to account for 3 out of 20 percentages.

But this goes back to my old arguments above about being the "first girl in the room" - that the less females see other females BEING DEPICTED as doing something, the less likely they are to attempt it.

And it goes to the WAY that women are signed or not signed (remember my old band's experiences of major label no.1 saying "oh, we'd sign you tomorrow but we've already got a girl band") and selected - and even treated the first time you're 15 and walk into a musical instrument shop - and let's not even get into the way that femaleness is treated like a genre or even a sub-genre that you have to be a weird specialist to want to pay attention to.

Yes, in an ideal world, I would like to see 50% coverage for female artists. AND I would like to see 50% of the artists getting signed, pushed, promoted, at every step of the game being female as well. But in a music world where women are ignored at best (unless they're HOTT in which case they will be viewed as a Beauty first, and their talent as some kind of weird talking-dog level of freakness) and routinely discouraged at every step of the way... that makes me an idealist and a dreamer I guess.

x-posts galore

I want to hear K8's major-label courted band. Who were they?

I don't think that Pitchfork needs to improve itself by reaching far beyond indie any more than The Source needs to improve itself by reaching far beyond hip-hoip.

one objection to this might be that "hip hop" is a fairly narrowly defined genre while "indie" is a pretty broad cultural category that can and does apply to any number of different genres of music

And yet as you progress from school to garage/bedroom bands to toilet venues to signed to indie-attention-sized well knowness - yes the proportion of female to male may get smaller. But not THAT much smaller to account for 3 out of 20 percentages.

ESPECIALLY considering that press attention (at least in the UK) is one of the big deciders of what lifts bands out of one level to the next.

I want to hear K8's major-label courted band. Who were they?

no you don't. We were shit. I would have been MUCH happier if they'd just said "we didn't sign you cause you were a bit shit" than pulling out the "we've got someone of your gender already".

But that's a taste thing, so whatever.

Is the point of a musical critic organ:

1) to expose you to music you may not have heard but might like?

2) to reinforce your self-congratulatory smugness at the brilliance of your taste?

3) to provide photographic evidence of the smashability of hott indie boys?

you decide.

― Masonic Boom

Unfair. The second two are condescending nonsense, and the first isn't the "real answer". I think it actually breaks down like this:

1) To serve the tastes/whims/interests of the staff, or

2) To serve the tastes/whims/interests of a readership.

Answer in most cases is probably both. And the more popular a critical source becomes, the more closely interwined these things become. I'm willing to bet that Pitchfork's editors have a reasonable sense of what their audience is (and isn't) interested in. And I don't think it's wrong of them to cater to that -- especially to the extent that they honestly share similar interests & tastes.

Think the difference between the Geir argument and mine hinges on "far beyond". Geir's more an "anywhere beyond" kind of guy.

Damn, I didn't mean to be condescending. I was being honest with No.3 coz I really just read dance news websites to get hott pics of Erol Alkan and Lindstrom and the Ed Banger boyz.

The gender imbalance you are seeing in rock music is approaching non-existent on the classical side of things until you start getting to conductors and writers. Which, yeah, empty comment, but the comment about music education made me think about who I knew who really got into music via the education route, and that led me to the musicians I know, the overwhelming number of which are classical musicians, many of whom play for major orchestras or sing regularly in all kinds of concerts and operas, and how many more women are represented there than in rock bands.

that last to DJ Mencap...

Kate, I think this is a good step in terms of addressing your broader concerns:

http://blogs.villagevoice.com/music/Images/girlsguide.jpg

holy shit, what the fuck is that

those are some great tips to be fair esp. naming your band

The gender imbalance you are seeing in rock music is approaching non-existent on the classical side of things until you start getting to conductors and writers. Which, yeah, empty comment, but the comment about music education made me think about who I knew who really got into music via the education route, and that led me to the musicians I know, the overwhelming number of which are classical musicians, many of whom play for major orchestras or sing regularly in all kinds of concerts and operas, and how many more women are represented there than in rock bands.

Yes! And the whole thing about the classical world - (sorry, have recently seen feminist slanted documentary about this so it was very much in mind) - is that the audition process for orchestras and the like is done blind. People are judged on their PLAYING alone - judges do not see or even know the names of the people they are auditioning. When judged purely on skill and talent, men and women are in totally equal representation.

Which makes me KNOW that there is something else going on as to why the rock and indie and dance worlds are so unevenly divided.

xxp It's a new book that Jessica Hopper wrote that ... well, you can read the cover yourself. It's gotten a lot of good reviews so far.

K8, how do you feel about the metal world, which is generally VERY accepting to women, but more-often-than-not tempers it with "and she's hot too"

Can someone pay me to write The Blacks' Guide To Rocking? Tips will include:

- choosing a name that fools ppl into thinking you're white
- shopping at thrift stores for stage outfits
- being "funky" instead of funky
- fetishizing your color while simultaneously downplaying it to make your target audience feel enlightened for listening to you without scaring them
- afro styling tips

Outside of my brief experience of writing for Terrorizer, I don't have enough experience of the metal world to comment.

Masonic, mostly it's that in rock, indie and dance, pure technical musicianship is not the only relevant yardstick. No one here is arguing that "women can't play."

hi dere please include a feisty foreword by saul williams

There will be an approving blurb from Vernon Reid on the cover.

being "funky" instead of funky

can we start a thread on this--not sure i know the "difference" between these two "terms"

Masonic, mostly it's that in rock, indie and dance, pure technical musicianship is not the only relevant yardstick. No one here is arguing that "women can't play."

hahaha you are dangerously close to saying that one of the relevant factors that makes one a rock, indie or dance musician is having a penis

That's funny, because in my decades of playing in rock bands, I heard the old "women can't play" chestnut more times than I can count.

And in my recent experiences and adventures in dance music culture, the old meme of "women can't play" certainly seemed to be alive and well and fully functioning.

And yet... even if "no one is arguing this..." - what on earth IS this ineffable quality that those 17 bands have if it's NOT 2 balls and a cock?

x-post Dan that is sig-worthy if we had sigs here! ha ha ha.

""funky""

one objection to this might be that "hip hop" is a fairly narrowly defined genre while "indie" is a pretty broad cultural category that can and does apply to any number of different genres of music

― max

Yeah, but hip-hop isn't necessarily defined so conservatively (it's maybe worth wondering we're so ready to accept that it should be). And while indie can be as broad or as narrow as you want it to be, that doesn't mean it lacks a core aesthetic. I just don't think there's anything wrong with that core aesthetic.

I was glibly going to say that the real reason there's a gender imbalance in rock culture is because it fucks up the groupie situation but I wonder if there's a kernel of truth in there, ha.

you are dangerously close to saying that one of the relevant factors that makes one a rock, indie or dance musician is having a penis

― HI DERE

That's funny, because in my decades of playing in rock bands, I heard the old "women can't play" chestnut more times than I can count.

And in my recent experiences and adventures in dance music culture, the old meme of "women can't play" certainly seemed to be alive and well and fully functioning.

― Masonic Boom

Yr forgetting that we're basically on the same side. I only said that no one's pushing the bullshit "women can't play" line here.

I'd argue that in 99% of dance music, the gender of the person making it genuinely is irrelevant because the records are so functional and faceless. Weirdly there actually are a lot of female producers and DJs in minimal/techno in particular, and also lots of occasions where people aren't even aware the producer in question is female.

(Kate before you mention your experiences on the Erol forum I'd argue that's a special case because Erol and his fans are so focussed on testosterone-led rock bosh). - xpost too late

I was glibly going to say that the real reason there's a gender imbalance in rock culture is because it fucks up the groupie situation but I wonder if there's a kernel of truth in there, ha.

HA HA HA, not really. More like that's why there are less female music critics. When guys wanna hang around and obsessively stalk their idols they have to fabricate this whole fantasy of being a tastemaking music writer dude with a fanzine - while girls just cut to the chase of what the fanboys would really LIKE to be doing.

But that's the plot to another thread, and I think it's called Almost Famous.

I didn't post the Hopper book cover as a joke, btw. I really do think that the existence of books like that, and the Rock 'n' Roll Camp for Girls, encourage more girls to start bands and teach them how to work the system, which is one step toward leveling the playing field.

I'd argue that in 99% of dance music, the gender of the person making it genuinely is irrelevant because the records are so functional and faceless.

― Matt DC

This might be true in clubs, on a day-to-day basis, but in terms of how larger audiences consume dance music product, it does seem that being a guy is, again, an enormous professional asset.

In clubs on a day-to-day basis IS how larger audiences consume dance music product, WAY more than actually buy the records.

has anyone actually voted in this poll?

jaymc otm re: that book and girls rock camp

what poll??

i voted for ghostface

i haven't voted actually who am I to talk

(Kate before you mention your experiences on the Erol forum I'd argue that's a special case because Erol and his fans are so focussed on testosterone-led rock bosh).

Alright, Erol and I have already torn each other new arseholes over this on his forum, but... I honestly don't think that he really is. I think he has got *big* playing a certain kind of music (the testosterone bosh) that attracts a certain kind of arsehole.

I know for a fact that he actually owns and LOVES like... Huggy Bear records. Ironically, it was *him* that turned me onto Warpaint and the first conversation we ever had was about how amazing Delia Derbyshire was. But he doesn't get paid thousands of pounds to fly around the world playing obscure riot grrrl records, he gets paid to go and play that awful Rapey Nanorobot shit.

Why am I defending Erol anyway, he hates my guts. I just want to draw a distinction as to the difference between an artist and their fanbase.

In clubs on a day-to-day basis IS how larger audiences consume dance music product, WAY more than actually buy the records.

― Matt DC

Good point. Maybe the imbalance I'm talking about has more to do with identity marketing than with deep-down music appreciation -- to the extent that you can separate the two. I mean, I hope that's the case.